Slashdot Mirror


World's Largest Pyramid Discovered in Bosnia?

kieran writes "Archaeologists have apparently begun to unearth a massive pyramid which had been masquerading as a hill in the Bosnian town of Visoko. At an estimated 722ft in height, it is expected to be 1/3 taller than Egypt's Great Pyramid of Giza."

501 comments

  1. The news they don't want you to know: by TripMaster+Monkey · · Score: 2, Funny


    This 'pyramid' was actually discovered in October of last year, but all news was suppressed due to 'security concerns'...concerns that would appear to have merit, given Condoleezza Rice's bizzare change in appearance and behavior after she visited the site on a U.S. fact-finding mission.

    Dubya kree!

    --
    ____

    ~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey

    1. Re:The news they don't want you to know: by Foobar+of+Borg · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      And why in the name of Zeus's butthole are some mods going through and modding this whole thread off topic?

      You go to hell, mods! You go to hell and you die!

    2. Re:The news they don't want you to know: by Enrique1218 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Condoleezza Rice's bizzare change in appearance

      Oh really, did she get those teeth fixed? I can't believe a women so smart hasn't heard of braces! Mod me offtopic, see if I care. It needed to be said!!!

      --
      You don't have to be smart to use a Mac, you just have to be smart enough to buy one
    3. Re:The news they don't want you to know: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How in the world is a comment about a person having a gap between their front teeth and their decision as to whether or not have it cosmetically altered a racist comment?

    4. Re:The news they don't want you to know: by mnemonic_ · · Score: 1

      You must be new around here.

    5. Re:The news they don't want you to know: by pjt33 · · Score: 1

      Maybe she decided that the cost (in time, money and pain) wasn't worth the benefits (in appearance and ability to eat cucumber sandwiches).

    6. Re:The news they don't want you to know: by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha thank you for that :D

    7. Re:The news they don't want you to know: by bar-agent · · Score: 1

      I think it was the "cucumber" thing. Don't ask me why the poster thought cucumbers were racist. I always thought it was just fried chicken and watermelon. *shrug*

      --
      i'd hit it so hard, if you pulled me out you'd be the king of britain [bash.org]
    8. Re:The news they don't want you to know: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  2. Location via Google Maps by byteCoder · · Score: 5, Informative

    There's not much resolution from this satellite image, but here's the pyramid's location using Google maps.

    1. Re:Location via Google Maps by gardyloo · · Score: 5, Funny

      We could not calculate driving directions between Redmond, WA and 43.978000N 18.178000E

            Coincidence? I THINK NOT.

    2. Re:Location via Google Maps by TheSHAD0W · · Score: 1

      Check out the site in Google Earth; lots of references there.

    3. Re:Location via Google Maps by Itninja · · Score: 5, Funny

      Google Maps is awesome. I can hardly wait for 6-10 years to pass so I can see what they are doing today.

      --
      I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
    4. Re:Location via Google Maps by MOtisBeard · · Score: 5, Funny

      What nobody seems to have realized is that, not only does the Bosnian pyramid sit directly over the center of the Earth, but if you draw a straight line between it and the Great Pyramid of Cheops (aka Kufu) in Egypt, then extend that line in the same direction, it will bisect the Earth into two exactly equal hemispheres. Obviously proof of either unsuspected high technology in ancient times, or the intervention of some space-faring alien civilization.

    5. Re:Location via Google Maps by wiredlogic · · Score: 1

      Coincidence? I THINK NOT

      Well. Billg only needs to use his personal stargate to get to any pyramid on the planet so there's no need to drive.

      (eagerly awaiting CBGs rebuttal)

      --
      I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
    6. Re:Location via Google Maps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      straight line, not parralel !

    7. Re:Location via Google Maps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      *and the last one crosses the finish line*

    8. Re:Location via Google Maps by eightheadsofdoom · · Score: 1

      I think he meant "center" as in that metal thing about 6000 km below you... no the equator.

    9. Re:Location via Google Maps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I can hardly wait for 6-10 years to pass so I can see what they are doing today.

      You are a man. No one can tell you what to do.

      But you've really got to cut down on the barbituates.
    10. Re:Location via Google Maps by bhalo05 · · Score: 1

      Yep. Wake me up when aliens and predator start kicking each other's asses, please.

    11. Re:Location via Google Maps by kimvette · · Score: 1

      By that logic I am sitting directly over the exact center of the Earth at this moment. Hey, I'm always directly over the exact center. How about that!

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    12. Re:Location via Google Maps by LordOfTheNoobs · · Score: 2, Funny

      And a line between _any_ two objects on the earths surface will perfectly bisect the earth ( not accounting for the unsightly lateral buldge we pick up from all that obnoxious spinning ). The OPs' were obvious statements.

      I heard a great rushing of wind as I read through the responses to the OP. The rains must be coming...

      --
      They're there affecting their effect.
    13. Re:Location via Google Maps by jo7hs2 · · Score: 1

      Please, Google sometimes tells me it cannot calculate directions 1/2 of the time. 3/4 of the time when the directions are outside of the state.

    14. Re:Location via Google Maps by imsabbel · · Score: 2

      And if you mediate a few more hours over that statement, maybe you will get the joke in the OP.

      --
      HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
    15. Re:Location via Google Maps by AlecLyons · · Score: 1

      Yep. Wake me up when aliens and predator start kicking each other's asses, please.

      How ironic, I fell asleep last time I saw that happening.

    16. Re:Location via Google Maps by Dausha · · Score: 1

      That's very strange. I tried zooming in to get a better look. However, after a few levels, the interweb told me that they did not have the imagery, that there were some things that man was not meant to know, and that I have amazing pectorals.

      --
      What those who want activist courts fear is rule by the people.
    17. Re:Location via Google Maps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ahem..

      "Seeing as we are unfamiliar with sarcasm, I will close the register at this point"

    18. Re:Location via Google Maps by SlashSquatch · · Score: 1
      OMFG you're right.

      Great Pyramids that define great circles, what will those genius aliens come up with next?

      --
      Autonomous Retard -- Is your camp safe? UnsafeCamp.com
    19. Re:Location via Google Maps by Follier · · Score: 1

      What nobody seems to have realized...

      is when someone is joking, apparently.

    20. Re:Location via Google Maps by NDPTAL85 · · Score: 0

      I'm thinking the parent is a troll. Any point on a sphere is sitting directly above the center.

      --
      Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
    21. Re:Location via Google Maps by neomajic · · Score: 1

      LOL! You were watching the boot-leg version, weren't you?
      Originally, I did too. And fell right to sleep. I later found the AVP DVD @ Walmart's bargin bin...I found the actual DVD to be much clearer and betterer. :-)

    22. Re:Location via Google Maps by Jim_Callahan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That "whoosh" you heard was the sound of a pretty decent joke flying over your head at high speed.

      --
      ...it's really a sad day for America when we require a goddamn ACT OF CONGRESS to make our DVD players work properly. ~
    23. Re:Location via Google Maps by JesterKnot · · Score: 1

      For comparison: Giza pyramids in a similar scale. Now all Google has to do is get a 1 meter resolution of Visoko and I'm suuuure everyone will see the new pyramids.

      --
      This is this.
    24. Re:Location via Google Maps by zuluechopapa · · Score: 1

      um... does anyone else notice the weirdness off on the left side of the link above? if you turn it 90 degrees (move east side of the image to north), it almost looks like.. E(sigma)LICIVLX ...? or thereabouts. maybe? ok.. mod me to -5 paranoid.

      --
      even the magic 8 ball has an opinion on email clients: Outlook not so good.
    25. Re:Location via Google Maps by illuminatedwax · · Score: 1

      Yes, but where do the Rosecrucians fit into this Plan???

      --
      Did you ever notice that *nix doesn't even cover Linux?
    26. Re:Location via Google Maps by aquabat · · Score: 2, Funny

      This is ridiculous. It's obviously not a pyramid, but rather one corner of the timecube.

      --
      A republic cannot succeed till it contains a certain body of men imbued with the principles of justice and honour.
    27. Re:Location via Google Maps by binarysins · · Score: 1

      Found a picture on someone's Flickr thingy...that sure does look like a pyramid: http://www.flickr.com/photos/samwalker/123132855/

    28. Re:Location via Google Maps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What... The.... F$%K!!!!!

    29. Re:Location via Google Maps by Wolfger · · Score: 1

      OMG! That's freaky! My house is sitting directly over the center of the Earth too! And so is some other dude's house on the other side of the world! And if you draw a straight line between the two, and extend that line into a plane, it bisects the Earth into two (roughly) equal hemispheres! WTF?!?

    30. Re:Location via Google Maps by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      You're new around here, aren't you?

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    31. Re:Location via Google Maps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, the irony...

  3. Color me dubious. by Whiney+Mac+Fanboy · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'm a little dubious here - the lead of this project, Semir Osmanagic says (from abc) he sees astonishing similarities between the structures and Mexican pyramids dating back to about 200 AD, which also come in pairs, one believed to represent the Sun and the other the Moon.

    How can he know that with so little excavated? And his foundation has the rather fortean-timesish name of "Archaeological Park: Bosnian Pyramid of the Sun Foundation"

    There's a far better (and longer) article at the art newspaper.

    You can also the have a look at the photos of the hill (scroll down) in this bosnian forum (yup, looks like a pyramid).

    --
    There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
    1. Re:Color me dubious. by permaculture · · Score: 5, Informative

      Sorry fellas, he's just another nutjob:

      http://www.archaeology.org/online/features/osmanag ic/
      "Too bad that it is not a credible story at all. In fact, it is impossible. Who is the "archaeologist" who has taken the media for a ride? Why did the media not check the story more carefully? ARCHAEOLOGY will address these questions in depth in our next issue, July/August, but for now let's at least put the lie to the claims emanating from Visoko, the town 20 miles northwest of Sarajevo where the "Bosnian Pyramid of the Sun" is located."

      Read on about his wacky book, and it becomes clear the media's not doing their job. AGAIN!

      --
      Environmentalism is the new Victorianism. Everyone ties on a green corset and pretends we're virtuous.
    2. Re:Color me dubious. by stupidfoo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How can he know that with so little excavated?

      Seismic imaging

    3. Re:Color me dubious. by hattig · · Score: 1

      They're always 'nutjobs' until they turn out to be correct.

      Like that nutjob who said the Earth wasn't flat, and that it went around the Sun! Nutter! Or that loony who said that continents move over time, hell, we know the Earth is only 6000 years old, sheesh! Madman!

      (Yes, most nutjobs are nutjobs, only a small number of them aren't).

      Of course, sometimes it takes a loon to discover something like this. We won't find out for a while if he is right, but if the initial findings are correct and this turns out to be a pyramid, then human history will have been turned on its head. On the other hand the tunnels could be merely medieval remants from the city there, and so on, and this guy will have done a great job of funding his lifestyle for 5 years.

    4. Re:Color me dubious. by qwijibo · · Score: 5, Funny

      Given adequate funding, anyone could unearth a pyramid. They're everywhere, just covered with dirt and rocks. The biggest curiousity is how the rocks covering the pyramid bonded with the rocks that make up the pyramid. The bonds are so strong that unearthing the pyramid almost seems like you have to carve it out of the mountain. This phenomena can't currently be explained by archaeologists.

      While that archaeology web site makes some interesting arguments, they're completely ignoring the possibility that aliens constructed the pyramid. This theory, made popular by the film Alien Vs Predator, has not been discredited by serious researchers. They simply dismiss the theory without so much as communicating with the aliens to get their perspective. It's simply not fair that the crack pot viewpoint is completely disregarded by the so called legitimate research community. It's discrimination and it's wrong. =)

    5. Re:Color me dubious. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even nutjobs can find things. Even if they don't understand their purpose. The following article gives more information and indicates that something indeed has been found.

      http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory?id=1863 858&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312

    6. Re:Color me dubious. by TheViewFromTheGround · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Kind of amazing to realize how much skillful PR matters in getting media attention. Dude found a pointy hill and is calling it a pyramid, but he knows how to get reporters interested. It probably doesn't help that Americans love all that new-age Atlantis Secrets of the Pyramids BS.

      A question for whoever knows. I don't know anything about geology, but I do know physics. How probable is the formation of pointy hill from geological perspective? I wouldn't suspect they are a geologocial impossibility but would need a couple of fortuitous conditions to form instead of the usual rounded hill, like a radial mudslide at the top or a pointy rock formation beneath the soil near the top -- something that would change the typical pattern of erosion. I'd wager there are even technical terms for pointy hills and round hills.

      --
      Online citizen journalism from the inner city: The View From The Ground
    7. Re:Color me dubious. by Matimus · · Score: 4, Funny
      You forgot this choice quote:

      A couple of brief passages will convey the gist of Osmanagic's beliefs:

      Ordinary watchmakers repair our watches and put them into accordance with Earthly time. It is my theory that the Maya should be considered watchmakers of the cosmos whose mission it is to adjust the Earthly frequency and bring it into accordance with the vibrations of our Sun. Once the Earth begins to vibrate in harmony with the Sun, information will be able to travel in both directions without limitation. And then we will be able to understand why all ancient peoples worshipped the Sun and dedicated their rituals to this. The Sun is the source of all life on this planet and the source of all information and knowledge. ...And with a frequency in harmony, the Earth will, via the Sun, be connected with the center of our Galaxy. These facts become exceptionally important when we realize that we are rapidly approaching December 2012, a date which the Maya have marked as the time of arrival of the Galactic Energy Cluster which will enlighten us.

      --
      GENERATION 25: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social exper
    8. Re:Color me dubious. by Max+Threshold · · Score: 2, Interesting
      "In fact, it is impossible."

      Now there's a red flag if I ever saw one. Maybe there's more to this story than the archaeological establishment wants to acknowledge.

    9. Re:Color me dubious. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      This theory, made popular by the film Alien Vs Predator

      Turn in your geek card, you are hereby banned from slashdot. Everyone knows that the idea of pyramids being build by aliens as a starship docking platform was made popular by the original Stargate movie. AvP just stole the idea.

    10. Re:Color me dubious. by kfg · · Score: 1

      The following article gives more information and indicates that something indeed has been found.

      "Something" does not equal "722 foot tall pyramid."

      What makes this guy a nut job is that a)he has formulated his conclusions a priori and declared them as likely fact, b)his conclusions are nutty.

      Has he found "something"? Quite possibly, but if a tunnel in a hill equals pyramid than Europe is already known to be littered with them. Newgrange, for instance.

      KFG

    11. Re:Color me dubious. by terrymr · · Score: 1

      I love the way they label the guy a nutjob while declaring the idea of a pyramid there impossible. The writers haven't been there to look at the alleged pyramid, they just say it's impossible period. Either there is one there or not, if the guy uncovers it, then good for him, if not then he's only wasted his own time.

    12. Re:Color me dubious. by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > How probable is the formation of pointy hill from geological perspective?

      Considering it was probably formed by very large glaciers, quite probable. However, if it has four equal sides, it is considerably less probable (read: not very).

    13. Re:Color me dubious. by TrevorB · · Score: 1

      Oh why did I have to make a rational response when I could have simply modded this up... :)

    14. Re:Color me dubious. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I understand the point that you're making but in that movie it was the Predators that built the pyramids.

    15. Re:Color me dubious. by TheViewFromTheGround · · Score: 1

      Not that photographs are going to be that helpful, but the photos in the sarajevo-x thread posted in the comments somewhere showed a hill that looked more or less conical to me, with a broad sloping flat side that in the images they'd super-imposed an overlay of steps.

      --
      Online citizen journalism from the inner city: The View From The Ground
    16. Re:Color me dubious. by c_forq · · Score: 1

      Judging by the photos in this forum linked to in a previous post (about 1/3 the way down the page):
      http://sarajevo-x.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=20137& postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=piramida&start= 0
      I think it looks like it goes in the "not very" section. Looks very pyramid like to me.

      --
      Computers allow humans to make mistakes at the fastest speeds known, with the possible exception of tequila and handguns
    17. Re:Color me dubious. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The interesting part is that the guy, nutball though he is, is finding *something*.

      That is, there were almost certainly Roman and pre-Roman settlements built on the hill he is digging in, and maybe a medieval necropolis. What the "real" archeologists are worried about is that actual archeological treasures will be trampled in an attempt to find a pyramid that ain't there.

      I've also read a report that the hill might have been partially reshaped by human hands. But a step pyramid? Not likely.

    18. Re:Color me dubious. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While I don't have any idea if the guy is right about there being a pyramid or not, the article in archaeology does not prove anything for or against the pyramid. Based on the article, the guy sounds like a nutjob, but that doesn't prove anything about the "pyramid." The article says it is impossible so there is no point in investigating it. That kind of attitude is just ignorant. How many times has the established "facts" about what "primitive" peoples knew and did been proven wrong? Way too many times to count. Is there a pyramid? I don't know, but I doubt it. It seems unlikely. The problem is that unlikely is not the same thing as impossible. Until someone goes out there and checks, how are they going to know?

    19. Re:Color me dubious. by mynameisnotnick · · Score: 1

      >>How can he know that with so little excavated?

      Didn't you see Aliens Versus Predator?!?

      "My engineers tell me it's a pyramid"

      -gary

    20. Re:Color me dubious. by hesiod · · Score: 1

      I can't seem to find any pictures that aren't taken from the same angle as every other one (besides above). Sure the one side you can see looks pretty flat, but the opposite side appears to be embedded in another hill.

      Also, the whole thing appears to be titled to the left (from the common POV). I haven't seen any topological images that show four similar sides. I think it's just a mix of Point of View and imagination. Of course, I can't exactly take a quick trip to Bosnia to see for myself, so I have to rely on the extremely limited number of photos online.

      Not being able to read the slavic languages doesn't help either. I've seen pictures of two distinctly different hills, both of which seem to be passed off as the same place. However, one of the two appears to be shorter, with a flat/rounded top (the first image from your link). The commonly-seen pictures show a pointed tip. It's all quite confusing.

    21. Re:Color me dubious. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, the whole thing appears to be titled to the left (from the common POV).

      That's camoflage so that grave robbers think it's broken and won't come searching for treasure!

    22. Re:Color me dubious. by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > > they're completely ignoring the possibility that aliens constructed the pyramid
      > in that movie it was the Predators that built the pyramids


      Are the Predators not aliens?

    23. Re:Color me dubious. by dajak · · Score: 1

      Not aliens, but ancestors of the Serbians. Serbians constructed the pyramids, and the one they call the pyramid of the (Bosnian) dragon is actually called the "pyramid of the white double-headed eagle between two fleurs-de-lis", which is even today still found on the coat of arms of Serbia.

    24. Re:Color me dubious. by Your+Pal+Dave · · Score: 2, Funny

      Better watch out, those Galactic Energy Clusters are loaded with saturated fat!

    25. Re:Color me dubious. by dajak · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Close to my house (in the Netherlands) there is a small, perfectly conical, very steep, and pointy hill in the center of one of the major iron age sites of the country, in an otherwise nearly flat landscape. People used to believe it was manmade, but it turned out to be made by a glacier and simply used by those iron age people as a lookout or motte or something. If the iron age people had any influence on its shape, it is only by removing sand and stones.

      If Illyrian remains from 12,000 yrs ago are found on and in the hill, this should suggest to any sane person that it is a natural hill, with caves in it. It certainly can't be younger than 12,000 yrs old. Mr. Osmanagic finds evidence contradicting his theory and interprets it as evidence the 'pyramid' must be at least 12,000 yrs old.

      I am considering announcing that we have proof of extremely advanced stone age and iron age civilizations in the North Sea near the coast of the Netherlands that were able to drain polders we today can't. The proof is irrefutable: fishermen have been collecting artifacts from these ages in their nets for as long as we have written history. It is a mystery how they did this without even having mills and engines.

    26. Re:Color me dubious. by Vinnie_333 · · Score: 1

      Of course, far out theories can be fun. I think my favorite crackpot theory book was Richard Noone's "5/5/2000: Ice The Ultimate Disaster". It was pretty crazy. Some of the worst put together, misunderstood, crackpot, pseudo-science ever committed to paper. It was great fun until it got to the "dinosaurs were used as beasts of burden to built the pyramids" part. Then the shit got too deep for even me, and I throw it against the wall. But, at night I occasionally think about it and laugh. If you go to the Amazon page for it you'll find all kinds of people justifying the missed date for the end of the world.

      --

      "We shall party like the Greeks of old! You know the ones I mean." - HedonismBot
    27. Re:Color me dubious. by jafac · · Score: 2, Interesting

      He may be a nutjob.

      I certainly find the notion of commonality with Mesoamerican "pyramids" somewhat ridiculous - since the Mesoamerican "pyramids" were not really pyramids (both geometrically, and in the egyptian sense). The Mesoamerican structures were not used for burials. They were used as platforms for temples, and had a completely different method of construction and religious significance.

      I would think that this Bosnian "pyramid" (not geometrically a pyramid - the top is flat) more likely has more in common with the Egyptian/African pyramids (both in style, and religious significance) given the regional cultural influences.

      However, there are also "pyramids" in Greece, Spain, Italy, China, and the UK. The Greek pyramids were simply pyramid-shaped watch towers. In Italy, a Roman noble had one built as a tomb, inspired by Egyptian pyramids. In the UK and China, we're talking about a pyramid-shaped burial mound made of piled-up clay or dirt - again with a flat top.

      The significant things about this pyramid, are basically Osmanegic's claim of dating. He claims they're 12,000 years old. That's a little gutsy, considering that the area was likely under a glacier at the time, and there's no other evidence of any kind of advanced civilization anywhere near there. But when you go that far back in time, things get really sketchy, and evidence is mostly decayed or crumbled beyond any use.

      Okay, so let me be clear on this - I *do* consider Osmanegic to be a nut job. I *do* agree with some of the Bosnian archaeological community that he will very likely, in the process of unearthing his pyramid, destroy a lot of good medieval archaeological sites (there was a Crusades-era fortress built on the top of this hill). However, I accept that the evidence he's presented so far, on the shape of the hill, the presence of tunnels, and the unearthing of stone blocks, that this very well could be a real pyramid. I just really doubt that it's as old as he's saying it is. Older than the Egyptian pyramids? Could be. The Greek pyramid is about 100 years older. (though MUCH smaller). So we know that the Egyptians didn't invent the geometric shape (whoo-tee doo). But the size coupled with the date, is pretty significant.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    28. Re:Color me dubious. by brian0918 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Reminds me of an MST3K: the scene is a bunch of fake-looking asteroids floating in space... "HONEY BUNCHES OF DEATH!"

    29. Re:Color me dubious. by Follier · · Score: 1

      Thank you, Permaculture, for that link. It really made my day. I especially liked the part about how the descendents of the Mayans (Chiapas): "This isolated community showed a surprising similarity to the Basque and Berber peoples (most probable descendants of the natives of Atlantis)."

      I can't wait to go home and tell my Algerian Berber roommate that she's actually part Atlantean!!!!! I did wonder why she was always levitating and shooting beams from her eyes. I just thought it was a cultural thing.

    30. Re:Color me dubious. by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      I believe the chocolate-pecan ones are called "Galactic Turtles".

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    31. Re:Color me dubious. by willtsmith · · Score: 1

      The fact that the giza plateau complex is built in the image of the constellation Osiris (Orion) leads some to believe that these Pyramids had a more "celestial" purpose than housing the dead. Some find it more likely that they are more like apartments for the gods.

      --
      -------- -------- Support Wesley Clark for president!!!
    32. Re:Color me dubious. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pointed hills with steep slopes can be carved by glaciers, and they are not extremely uncommon. Such a feature is called a matterhorn. However, the article indicates that the structure was anthropogenic, not geologic.

    33. Re:Color me dubious. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those of us in the crackpot pseudo-archaology field like to refer to them not as "apartments" but rather as "cosmic condos." Thank you for playing "I don't know how to pull my head out of my ass!"

    34. Re:Color me dubious. by techno-vampire · · Score: 1

      Even if it turns out that it is, in fact, a pyramid, there's no reason to think it's related to the ones in Egypt. If you want to build a large structure using only neolithic or Copper Age tech a pyramid is about your only real choice. You don't have the materials or the tools to build large hollow structures or ones that will remain standing for centuries without repair. Yes, the Romans and Carthaginians built six and seven story apartment buildings, but where are they today? That's why you see pyramids in Mexico and Central America, and why the ziggaruts were roughly pyramidal in shape.

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    35. Re:Color me dubious. by PakProtector · · Score: 1

      Uh, the Pyramids are housing for the Gods. The Pharoahs were considered Gods Incarnate.

      --

      Edward@Tomato - /home/Edward/ man woman
      man: no entry for woman in the manual.
      "Qua!?"

    36. Re:Color me dubious. by maggot+the+shrew · · Score: 1

      Considering that we've found the dead in every unplundered pyramid we've excavated it's pretty safe to say that the writing on the walls in the pyramids stating that they are tombs are not lying to us.

      It's more likely that the arrangements of the pyramids were for a reason to support their function as a tomb than that all archeologists are wrong and the Egyptians were lying to us.

    37. Re:Color me dubious. by permaculture · · Score: 1

      Wow, there are some stone faced and sharp pointed pyramids in the UK after all:

      http://www.epnet.org/midbase/sites-britain.php

      --
      Environmentalism is the new Victorianism. Everyone ties on a green corset and pretends we're virtuous.
    38. Re:Color me dubious. by Talla · · Score: 1

      Now there's a red flag if I ever saw one. Maybe there's more to this story than the archaeological establishment wants to acknowledge.

      Or maybe they just know more than you about archaeology and the history of the location.

    39. Re:Color me dubious. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whatever in the end this guy and the guy refuteing him will both likly be proven wrong in most of what they consider fact.

    40. Re:Color me dubious. by EnderGT · · Score: 1
      Amen. Any time an academic says the word impossible, they're simply setting themselves up to get egg on their face. Doesn't mean this guy's not a nut-job - and he probably is - but to declare something impossible is a stupid move. The correct move would be to investigate all the claims and validate all the research. Examine the facts: There's several piles of rocks with suspiciously geometric sides. There apparently a tunnel of some sort under at least one of these piles of rocks. Several of the rocks that have been dug up appear to be quite geometrically regular (straight edges, right angles). The positioning and sizing of the piles of rock are somewhat of a stretch, but could be significant.

      Does this mean that there's 12,000 year-old pyramids? Maybe not. But to say "it's impossible" that there are pyramids there? That makes the magazine look more like a hack than he does.

    41. Re:Color me dubious. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    42. Re:Color me dubious. by jafac · · Score: 1

      I think that most serious archaeologists consider (Egyptian) pyramids to be "really fancy burial mounds".

      The fact that they line up with the stars, and lasted 5300 years so far, and were really really big in some cases, and have a lot of complex religious mythological significance, is an aspect of the fanciness.

      Doesn't change my original point that Mesoamerican pyramids were built for a completely different purpose, and only of superficially similar design. One of the telling differences is that in the Americas, there's something like a half-dozen of these stuctures. In Egypt, there's over 100. In Nubia (south of Egypt, present-day Sudan) there's something like 220. Smaller, built later, but still; fancy burial mounds.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    43. Re:Color me dubious. by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      Does she have webbed toes?

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
  4. Wrong facts! by dada21 · · Score: 4, Funny

    The world's largest pyramid is soon to be discovered. I believe the link to this pyramid is here.

    Whoops.

    1. Re:Wrong facts! by Golias · · Score: 4, Informative

      See? See what happens? This is why there are no successful libertarian comedians.

      Investing in growth hardly implies a pyramid scheme anyway, but if you're anti-government, I don't expect there's any way to explain that.


      Quite right! Social Security is not a Pryamid Scheme. That's just silly!

      It's a Ponzi Scheme.

      Oh, and there are successful libertarian comedians. P.J. O'Rourke, for one, has about ten best-sellers. How many books have you published? Bill Maher also self-identifies as a libertarian, and there's little question that Penn Jillette is in the mix as well. Almost half of the episodes of Penn & Teller's "Bullshit" are straight-up libertarian think-tank critiques of society.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    2. Re:Wrong facts! by abscissa · · Score: 0

      Yes, it is atually 1/3 larger than the largest currently known pyramid found here.

    3. Re:Wrong facts! by amliebsch · · Score: 1
      Investing in growth hardly implies a pyramid scheme anyway

      That might be true, but what makes it a scheme there is nothing invested in Social Security. It has no real assets. All the "trust fund" holds are special-issue treasury bonds. The cash that was collected from taxpayers was spent on the bonds, and the money the treasury made on the bond sales went into - what else? - general revenues, and was spent long ago. The only value the bonds have is based on the ability of the treasury to buy them back with tax revenues not yet collected! There is NO money in the Social Security fund!

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
    4. Re:Wrong facts! by MrAnnoyanceToYou · · Score: 0, Troll

      O'Rourke's work has always seemed to me self-centered and sophomoric, so I don't think you should be bragging about him. Brag about Rand instead, because..... her.... work.... is..... completely... um. Yeah, doh.

      Well, you still have the Illuminatus trilogy to..... hrm. Yeah, looking tough.

    5. Re:Wrong facts! by gowen · · Score: 1
      Since someone mentioned Ayn Rand, and J. K. Galbraith just died, here's an apposite quote from JKG:
      "The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."
      --
      Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
    6. Re:Wrong facts! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bill Maher also self-identifies as a libertarian, and there's little question that Penn Jillette is in the mix as well.

      Bill Maher may call himself a libertarian, but in reality he's a democrat. For the past ten years his "act" has consisted of bashing republicans & conservatives and gushing all over democrats & liberals to the point of verbal fellatio.

      The only reason Bill identifies as a libertarian is because he wants his weed to be legal.

    7. Re:Wrong facts! by Rydia · · Score: 1

      By that logic, banks are a scam, too. Holy crap! They take the money you put in and give it to other people through loans! We need to replace banks with more privater schemes, like plastic bags and matresses.

    8. Re:Wrong facts! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's no money in T-Bills either, just pieces of paper backed by the full faith and credit of the US Government. There's no money in money either, just pieces of paper backed by the US Government.

    9. Re:Wrong facts! by fshalor · · Score: 1

      Aparently there is no website anymore either. Looks like we slashdotted em. ;)

      Great... cause of one post, they have to buy more bandwidth and maybe a new server. Wonderful. There goes that month of food I was planning on getting out of my SSI when I retire.

      --
      -=fshalor ::this post not spellchecked. move along::
    10. Re:Wrong facts! by amliebsch · · Score: 1
      No, it's not the same, because the bank is buying things that other people are objectively willing to pay money for. Those things have real, actual, value. The bonds being held by the Social Security fund are cannot even be sold. They have no objective value. They are simply chits.

      Here's a better analogy: Your bank prints several thousand fancy certificates. It then uses its cash deposits to purchase those certificates from itself for a million dollars each. The revenues from the sales are marked as profits and distributed to the bank owners and executives. So now, at the end of the day, the vault is filled with certificates that the bank says are worth a million dollars each, and all the valuable assets have been given away. Are you saying you would be okay with this?

      You might say it's different for the government, because they can FORCE people to give it money which it can use to buy those bonds back. That is, of course true - but people should be under no illusions that anything at all has been saved. The money can only come from taxation that has NOT YET OCURRED, so in order to cover those differences, the government must either (a) cut spending, (b) raise taxes, or (c) borrow yet more money. The idea that there is this pool of money, or a fund with actual valuable assets in it, is simply FALSE.

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
    11. Re:Wrong facts! by Distinguished+Hero · · Score: 1

      Unless you've donated all your property to others and survive only on bread and water, it strikes me that you are being selfish and therefore a hypocrite. Furthermore, if you do not allow other people have access to your body any time they desire it, you are also being selfish (your body is just another piece of private property that you are selfishly hoarding). If you carry out any action primarily due to the satisfaction that you enjoy from it (e.g. reading slashdot, being smug), you are being selfish. I can go on. Face it, evolution and natural selection favours self-interest and enlightened self-interest (sacrificing short-term self-interest for long-term self-interest -- a lot of people confuse this with altruism).

      --
      Uttering logically derived and empirically supported truths to the disciples of the orthodox establishment.
    12. Re:Wrong facts! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Selling future, guaranteed, income is hardly a pyramid or Bonzai scheme.

      I actually did that myself. I believe my bank called it an "unsecured loan".

    13. Re:Wrong facts! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hahahahaha, you win at Slashdot.

    14. Re:Wrong facts! by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      That might be true, but what makes it a scheme there is nothing invested in Social Security.

      Err, the money is send to current recipients while the future recipients can expect their money from future taxpayers. The difference you are, willfully I assume, neglecting is that ponzi/pyramid schemes run into the ground because they run out of new "investors" while no such thing holds true for governments, unless you are expecting a rapid decline in either number of taxpayers or the social security revenue.

      I actually suspect that it is the latter, Libertarians planning to take over at some point and to remove all tax revenue. So in that light the social security is a "ponzi scheme" only because Libertarians plan on making it so, in their infinite concern about themsevles and in love with their own greed.

    15. Re:Wrong facts! by amliebsch · · Score: 2, Insightful
      There's no money in money either, just pieces of paper backed by the US Government.

      But there's value in money, so long as people are willing to accept it in exchange for goods and services. And I think you inadvertently made my point about T-bills. The government sells a T-bill for something of value (cash, the result of goods or services produced by somebody else). The T-bill has value only because of the government's promise to pay it back later. This is how the government borrows money. That's why it doesn't make any sense for the government to buy T-bills from itself! It's like writing yourself an IOU for five bucks, selling it to yourself for five bucks, and then spending the five bucks. All you're left with is an IOU. The five bucks is gone.If you need to spend another five bucks, you have to do what the government does, and rob the nearest guy with something of value.

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
    16. Re:Wrong facts! by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 0
      Quite right! Social Security is not a Pryamid Scheme. That's just silly! It's a Ponzi Scheme

      Its neither. The "ponzi" or "pyramid" schemes depend on rapidly adding new "investors" and channeling (exponentially) all money to the top of the pyramid resulting in running out of such "investors". No such thing holds true for Social Security, where future contributors will cover the cost of future recipients because, unlike for street scammers, such a thing is possible for a national government. The only two ways such a scheme can fail is: a rapid decrease in the number of taxpayers vs the recipients or rapid decline of tax revenue. The first, given the population growth and immigration dynamics is exceedingly unlikely, and the other will happen only of Libertarians take over the government. Which of course is the very reason for their whining: they plan on removing all tax revenue and thus indeed to bankrupt not only the Social Security but the government as a whole.

      Social Security is only a "ponzi scheme" if you consider the plans of Libertarians, who, in their infinite selfisheness and greed, plan to make it happen by their own actions.

    17. Re:Wrong facts! by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      I am a libertarian/anarcho-capitalist, and I find that modern society gives me plenty material that can be viewed as black-humour.

    18. Re:Wrong facts! by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 1
      Of course there's no real savings in the Social Security trust fund. There wouldn't be even if it were filled with physical gold bullion.

      You just can't save capital over time at that kind of scale. Every glass of milk consumed by a retiree has to be produced by a worker in that same year. Some of that worker's efforts will be diverted to feeding old people; there's no way around that fact. No matter how many slips of paper or even precious metals the government shuffles, it works out exactly the same, and it will end up the same exact pyramid-like scheme that it's always been. The economy is like the theory of relativity and the speed of light: any attempt to put too much pure money in one place distorts the framework of entire system until it cancels out much of that effort.

      At the end of the day, there is exactly one parameter that is important in Social Security: the ratio of retirees to active workers. There is also exactly one way to "fix" Social Security: adjust the retirement age to change that ratio to a politically acceptable balance. Talk about anything else is just a red herring.

    19. Re:Wrong facts! by Azghoul · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Well, you certainly lived up to your /. account name......

    20. Re:Wrong facts! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "By that logic, banks are a scam, too"
      Actually, banks are a scam in this sense: They operate upon a principle called "fractional reserves", which means that they only need to keep a small percentage of deposits on hand... and thereby create money from nothing.

      Ever had a loan from a bank? Odds are, it was simply created from thin air... and, you got to pay interest on something that was created from nothing in the first place.

      Nice work if you can get it!

      Oh, and you get to pay income taxes on income, too, sometimes, which is just as funny... especially when you look at the income tax on labor: You exchange your time, skill, knowledge, etc., for pieces of paper that cost next to nothing to make, and only have value so long as everyone agrees that they do.. THEN, you get to let the Federal Government TAKE some of it from you, in the form of taxes, making your labor worth even less of those fictional pieces of paper, which were created from nothing.

      It's a beautiful scam - I'm wondering how I can get in on it? Oh, that's right, I can't - it'd be called "counterfeiting" if I did it, but it's perfectly OK when the Federal Reserve and commercial banks do it.

    21. Re:Wrong facts! by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      Well, you certainly lived up to your /. account name......

      Message of: "I am unable to defend my arguments rationally, so I will settle on a critique of your account name instead" received loud and clear.

    22. Re:Wrong facts! by PIBM · · Score: 1

      Sadly, you are wrong about the population growth & immigration being enough to take care of the top of the pyramid. Here, in Quebec, we are about 110 billion under the 'market cap' .. we would need an incredible amount of immigrants or general population growth ..

    23. Re:Wrong facts! by UbuntuDupe · · Score: 0

      So why do they need to keep raising taxes or reducing benefits to keep it afloat? Hell, I can keep *any* scheme working as long as I can compel people to join and unilaterally dictate how much they get!

    24. Re:Wrong facts! by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      Sadly, you are wrong about the population growth & immigration being enough to take care of the top of the pyramid. Here, in Quebec, we are about 110 billion under the 'market cap' .. we would need an incredible amount of immigrants or general population growth ..

      Or simple re-balancing of the retirement age. It is really simple, to take a small tax spread out over a whole employment life-time of an individual and pay it back out at the last 10 or so years of his life. What is so complicated? The "imbalances" are caused by some seriously screwed up managment of the thing, not the underlying principle.

    25. Re:Wrong facts! by amliebsch · · Score: 1
      The first, given the population growth and immigration dynamics is exceedingly unlikely

      That's utterly incorrect. Population growth is a fraction of what it once was. Worse, there is a large demographic "bulge" (known as the "baby boom") which is currently approaching the age at which they will draw money out of the system, and worse, they are living far longer than the generation that they paid for did, which will compound the effect of the bulge. The result is that the worker-to-retiree ratio is going to decerase quite substantially, for at least the next thirty or so years. Immigration does help somewhat, preventing situtations like they have in Japan or western Europe, but it's a drop in the bucket.

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
    26. Re:Wrong facts! by amliebsch · · Score: 1

      It's a matter of simple demographics that the worker to retiree ratio is going to be declining quite dramitically over the next thirty or so years, and that's assuming that population growth doesn't continue its downward trend.

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
    27. Re:Wrong facts! by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      That's utterly incorrect. Population growth is a fraction of what it once was. Worse, there is a large demographic "bulge" (known as the "baby boom") which is currently approaching the age at which they will draw money out of the system, and worse, they are living far longer than the generation that they paid for did, which will compound the effect of the bulge. The result is that the worker-to-retiree ratio is going to decerase quite substantially, for at least the next thirty or so years. Immigration does help somewhat, preventing situtations like they have in Japan or western Europe, but it's a drop in the bucket.

      And that would have nothing to do with exporting all of the jobs overseas, yes? Look, if one is hell-bent on screwing up one's economy due to some hare-brained "free market uber alles" ideas which results in a decline in the growth of the job market, then one does not get to whine about schems which made some growth assumptions having difficulties. The obvious answers are of course to: increase immigration while ensuring existence of domestic industry, raise taxes or raise the reitrement age. And balance the whole scheme more carefully.

    28. Re:Wrong facts! by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      So why do they need to keep raising taxes or reducing benefits to keep it afloat? Hell, I can keep *any* scheme working as long as I can compel people to join and unilaterally dictate how much they get!

      Because some growth asumptions and subsequently the amounts collected from the working "baby boomers" turned out to be incorrect. Mostly due to the fact that the job market seems to be going overseas, due to the same "free market" geniuses who are now complaining about Social Security. So adjustments are needed. Options are: increase working populace via immigration and protection of domestic industry, increase taxation or increase retirement age. And then plan more carefully.

    29. Re:Wrong facts! by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 3, Informative

      a rapid decrease in the number of taxpayers vs the recipients or rapid decline of tax revenue. The first, given the population growth and immigration dynamics is exceedingly unlikely

      You clearly don't know the first thing about the demographics of the situation. When SS was fist set up there were about 15 contributors for every retiree (and the age of eligibility was _above_ the average life span).

      Now there are 3 contributors for every retiree and the eligibility age is about 15 years lower than the average life span. With increasing life expectancy and declining birth rates, the problem is getting worse not better, and that will only accelerate. It won't be long until there are only two workers supporting each retiree, who is likely to collect for 20 years or more.

      Social Security is undoubtedly an intergenerational Ponzi scheme and the fat part of the pyramid is looking for their cut! And this doesn't even take into account that the alleged Trust Fund is really just a big IOU from Congress.

      Ladies and Gentlemen, the Mafia couldn't pull off a scheme this brazenly unfair.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    30. Re:Wrong facts! by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      It's a matter of simple demographics that the worker to retiree ratio is going to be declining quite dramitically over the next thirty or so years, and that's assuming that population growth doesn't continue its downward trend.

      No it is not. If it were, it would mean that the global economy is shrinking due to wonders of "free markets", no? There are literally billions of people out there working on $1 dollar a day, who would love to be working as US taxpayers, assuming that all the "globalization" idiots are kicked away from the controls.

      The whole Social Security thing is quite straightforward and logical and it is truly a testimony to people's stupidity that they have managed to mess it up.

    31. Re:Wrong facts! by khallow · · Score: 1
      Its neither. The "ponzi" or "pyramid" schemes depend on rapidly adding new "investors" and channeling (exponentially) all money to the top of the pyramid resulting in running out of such "investors".

      So Social Security isn't as "rapid" as a chain letter. Still it fits the other aspects. It depends on adding new investors, early investors fare a lot better than late ones - there's been a declining return on investment for Social Security recipients ever since its inception, and the long term steady state seems to be less than what you put in including general taxes.

      No such thing holds true for Social Security, where future contributors will cover the cost of future recipients because, unlike for street scammers, such a thing is possible for a national government.

      The numbers don't add up. My take is that the US government will find a way to weasel out of the commitment probably through inflation that isn't reflected in CPI.

      Out of curiousity, what do you think Social Security does? It's not a retirement program. It's not retirement "insurance". Just seems to me to be a wealth redistribution from young to old with the surplus, scraped off the top for generic government spending, being the primary point of the exercise.

    32. Re:Wrong facts! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The only way that's going to be a problem is if there's a massive change in life-expentancy. But if people are generally living longer, they can work longer too, and there's no harm in increasing the retirement age.

      Interestingly, the ratios work very much in your favour at that point. If you raise the age such that, say, assuming most people expect ten years of retirement, they still have ten years of retirement, then you're essentially increasing your taxed income by one quarter. Seriously:

      Most people start full time work around 25, and retire around 65 (today.) That's forty years of working. Add ten years, and that's fifty years of work. 25% more work.

      Increased life expectancies are a political problem, not an economic problem. Social Security is fine as long as it's properly managed, and retirement ages aren't kept artificially low, and there's no sudden shrink in the population.

    33. Re:Wrong facts! by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      Now there are 3 contributors for every retiree and the eligibility age is about 15 years lower than the average life span. With increasing life expectancy and declining birth rates, the problem is getting worse not better, and that will only accelerate.

      Why? There are billions of possible immigrants willing to work and pay taxes waiting to get in. Instead the "globalization" idiots would have them working at $1 a day overseas. Why?

      It won't be long until there are only two workers supporting each retiree, who is likely to collect for 20 years or more.

      If idiotic policies hell-bent on reducing the population of productive workers by exporting their industries and not letting any immigrants in persist, then sure, you are breaking all the assumptions of the Social Security and it (along with the whole economy of the nation) will fail. Is that the plan?

      Social Security is undoubtedly an intergenerational Ponzi scheme and the fat part of the pyramid is looking for their cut

      Only because someone has decided to artificially restrict the influx of funds! That way anything can be a "pyramid" scheme. Put money in the bank and then have crooks steal it and sure enough you lost it! The whole premise was based on growth of economy and if you allow "free market globalization" idiots, combined with xenophobic bigots to run the show, the results are predictable. Both the Social Security and the nation's economy will collapse.

      And this doesn't even take into account that the alleged Trust Fund is really just a big IOU from Congress.

      And what is wrong with that? Do you plan on making sure that the Government is no good for it? Overspend it on wars? Or perhaps to eliminate taxes or reduce economy to nothing?

    34. Re:Wrong facts! by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      So Social Security isn't as "rapid" as a chain letter. Still it fits the other aspects. It depends on adding new investors, early investors fare a lot better than late ones - there's been a declining return on investment for Social Security recipients ever since its inception, and the long term steady state seems to be less than what you put in including general taxes.

      That is a balancing problem not a fundamental failure of the scheme. In a normally functioning nation, the population would remain steady or (more likely) grow. So would the economy. In both cases, the number of retirees is a fraction of the workforce. In perpetuity. As seniors die, new workers join the force. That is the fundamental difference from a "ponzi" scheme which has finite and rapidly exausted supply of "investors". Only if these basic assumptions fail, or if the balancing of the scheme is incorrect (i.e. too low retirement age or too low contributions) will it fail.

      Out of curiousity, what do you think Social Security does? It's not a retirement program.

      It is. The initial problem with implementing it was that the destitute people during the Great Depression had to be paid even though they did not contribute to the scheme (either this or death by starvation). So a payout was made, forever putting the scheme on wrong footing: the revenues were spent before they were collected. But even then the scheme is workable, because of the assumptions of the dynamics of a nation: workforce should always outnumber the retirees by a certain factor. And economy grows. If any of these assumptions fail, the Social Security is the least of our problems: the whole economy of the nation will collapse. Which thanks to "globalization" and exporting of all the jobs overseas, combined with lack of immigration is a real risk, failure of Social Securtiy being only a tip of a far more devastating iceberg.

      Just seems to me to be a wealth redistribution from young to old with the surplus, scraped off the top for generic government spending, being the primary point of the exercise.

      When the scheme was implemented, the old were in dire straights, and after "baby boomers" pass, this new generation will be also in the same boat, impoverished old as no savings are possible for most at present.

    35. Re:Wrong facts! by amliebsch · · Score: 1
      The obvious answers are of course to: increase immigration while ensuring existence of domestic industry, raise taxes or raise the reitrement age. And balance the whole scheme more carefully.

      Yes, that's exactly what we've been saying. The status quo cannot stand. The problem is that there is no political will to do make any necessary changes.

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
    36. Re:Wrong facts! by amliebsch · · Score: 1

      I completely agree. The problem is that it may work out to be more politically expedient to cause a catastrophe, then clean up the mess, as opposed to prudently planning and adjusting for real-world factors.

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
    37. Re:Wrong facts! by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      The status quo cannot stand. The problem is that there is no political will to do make any necessary changes.

      I think the "lack of the political will" comes from the paralysis resulting from a realization that the whole "globalization" and job exporting strategy is about to implode. In face of that, tinkering with Social Security is paramount to shuffling the chairs on the deck of the Titanic.

    38. Re:Wrong facts! by amliebsch · · Score: 1

      I think it has more to do with the fact that the elderly are the single largest voting bloc, and nobody can propose any changes to their detriment without being demonized by his or her political opponents.

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
    39. Re:Wrong facts! by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      I think it has more to do with the fact that the elderly are the single largest voting bloc, and nobody can propose any changes to their detriment without being demonized by his or her political opponents.

      While that is probably also a major factor, the underlying problem is that the numerical assumptions which were used in calculating the retirement age and benefits to be paid out are clearly not corresponding to the current situation. The assumptions were actually rather reasonable and made by knowledgable people, but have failed to take into account the fact that some very greedy and very irresponsible individuals have managed to systematically de-construct the economy in favour of short-term profiteering for themselves. And now it is time to pay the piper for the fools who listened to their demagougery.

    40. Re:Wrong facts! by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      impoverished old as no savings are possible for most at present.
      I could save 6.2% of my income if it were not being syphoned away for social security, and I would probably be getting paid another 6.2% if my company didn't have to pay their share of the social security.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    41. Re:Wrong facts! by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      I heard this weekend that the newest generation is expected to be the first one in centuries to have a shorter life expectancy than the preious generation, due to eating and exercise habits. That should help the SS program in about 60 years.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    42. Re:Wrong facts! by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      I could save 6.2% of my income if it were not being syphoned away for social security, and I would probably be getting paid another 6.2% if my company didn't have to pay their share of the social security.

      And that would mean starving to death a whole lot of old people, who did pay SS payments their whole lives. Are you OK with that? If not, where do you get the money to keep them fed? If you rather have them die, then you don't mind if I take that same attitude towards you, should some of your brilliant saving plans, all based on a whole lot of assumptions about the economy, investments and banking systems fail, do you?

    43. Re:Wrong facts! by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1
      The assumptions were actually rather reasonable and made by knowledgable people,

      Yes, they were. The original assumption behind Social Security was that payouts begin at age 65. It is perhaps helpful to note that at the time, the average life expectancy was...65.

      Today, average life expectancy is 77+, as I recall.

      So, we designed a system that didn't pay anything to anyone unless they lived longer than average. And we're now paying out to everyone who gets within a decade of average lifespan.

      And average lifespan continues to increase.

      Oh, and for anyone who thinks the obvious solution is to raise retirement age to 77, I suggest you talk to AARP about the feasibility of that particular plan. I'm sure they'll disabuse you of the notion quickly....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    44. Re:Wrong facts! by mobby_6kl · · Score: 1

      Incredible, a single joke managed to turn the whole thread into a giant waste of time for IgnoramusMaximus.

      Well, at least judging from the logic (and general quality) of arguments in his comments, we are not distracting a productive member of society from creating something of any significant value.

    45. Re:Wrong facts! by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      Yes, they were. The original assumption behind Social Security was that payouts begin at age 65. It is perhaps helpful to note that at the time, the average life expectancy was...65.

      Today, average life expectancy is 77+, as I recall.

      So, we designed a system that didn't pay anything to anyone unless they lived longer than average. And we're now paying out to everyone who gets within a decade of average lifespan.

      That is not the cause of the problem. The cause of the problem is the decline of revenue vs payouts due to the ratio of retirees to productive workers increasing, life-expectancy being merely one of the factors in that ratio, others, more important ones, being simply brain-dead policies resulting in overall decline of workforce vs the retirees. Once can simply increase the retirement age to match the life expectancy increases (which is by the way not designed to prevent payouts completely as vicious demagougic oponents of SS would have people believe), the other is to increase or maintain the ratio by simply having a viable economy and compensate for birth rates falling with immigration.

      But the underlying problem is that without a functioning economy no plan like SS is possible, and never mind that, an old-fashoned economic collapse will occur regardless, as it is impossible to maintain the increasing retiree to worker ratio, SS or no SS, as the old (and the very young) always consume far more resources then their savings would afford.

    46. Re:Wrong facts! by amliebsch · · Score: 1

      That's nonsense. How can they possibly take into account the medical advances made in the next sixty to ninety years, most of which we probably can't even yet guess at?

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
    47. Re:Wrong facts! by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      Incredible, a single joke managed to turn the whole thread into a giant waste of time for IgnoramusMaximus. Well, at least judging from the logic (and general quality) of arguments in his comments, we are not distracting a productive member of society from creating something of any significant value.

      What precisely is this post supposed to contribute? You feel compelled to declare someone's posts "waste of time", because he dares to disagree with you? With no further justification, or factual argument, naturally. And so you do waste time for the sole purpose of the world becoming aware of the extent of your snotty disapproval of "wasted time". Is that it?

    48. Re:Wrong facts! by Jim_Callahan · · Score: 1

      "Social Security is only a 'ponzi scheme' if you consider the plans of Libertarians, who, in their infinite selfisheness and greed, plan to make it happen by their own actions."


      Yes, because "We don't want any of your damn handouts! Stop giving out money!" is definitely the rallying-cry of a group caught up in fits of greed and self-interest.

      SCORE: Your syntax is inelegant and your post is lacking in logical continuity. Plus, the attack on a party that was unrelated to the discussion was a bit too spontaneous, as ad-hominem needs to be presented as an implication rather than a direct statement: you want to tempt the respondents of your post to engage in logical fallacies, not do so yourself. I give your troll an overall rating of 3/10, and that's only because it at least contained some logical statements, albeit out of order and disconnected.

      Thank you for using troll-o-tron 5000 trolling editor, have a nice day.

      --
      ...it's really a sad day for America when we require a goddamn ACT OF CONGRESS to make our DVD players work properly. ~
    49. Re:Wrong facts! by aevans · · Score: 1

      I'll pay 6.2% of my income to my parents so they won't starve. And it will be a lot more than the 2% they'd get of my dad's income (which was less than mine, due to inflation, all other things being equal) he'd get back for every year he lives past 65. And I'll keep the other 6.2% of my income for my retirement so I won't be a burden to my kids.

    50. Re:Wrong facts! by khallow · · Score: 1
      That is a balancing problem not a fundamental failure of the scheme.

      My apologies, but your "balancing problem" looks to me like a fundamental failure of the scheme. Now by failure, I don't mean that it in itself is going to destroy the US or anything like that. But I think we need to consider the true cost of Social Security. First, Social Security isn't going to be a decent investment for anyone past the early Baby Boomers. Even the Democrats were saying a 25% reduction in benefits. Doable, but then why pay in? The demographics don't work out unless you import a bunch of labor. And there's no guarantee that the new hires are going to go along with it (they'll eventually be able to vote too) once they figure out what's up.

      Second, the elderly just aren't poor like they were in the 1930's. Sure, wealthwise, they take a big dive in the last couple of decades of life, but they also consume huge amounts of health services. If more was spent living better after retirement and less on living a few weeks more, I think that would be a better balance. A balance that Social Security doesn't address.

      Third, it's a massive shuffling of money. The economy isn't everything, but money flows of this level, which aren't based on economic mechanisms, put some serious drag on the US economy which in turn drags down a lot of desirable things like improving the standard of living. The program is just too big for what it delivers (less poor people, that is). My take is that most people especially the young would opt out if they could. They do have better investments that they could be making. I think it'd be a vast improvement to make the program strictly needs based. We still have tens of trillions of dollars in liabilities so it's something that would take decades to unravel.

      Fourth, the Social Security surplus has been used for decades to fund bigger government. I know that not everyone's worry, but it seems to me that part of the blowback from Social Security is overreaching government that is powerful enough to take away civil liberties, fund a huge amount of rent-seeking (parasitic economic activity or barriers to entry enforced by government mandate or subsidy) in all areas of US endeavor. I think there's a lot of merit in putting the US government and associated programs including Social Security on a diet.

    51. Re:Wrong facts! by phiber9 · · Score: 1

      This is one of the things that mole people started and are waiting for the right time to RULE THE EARTH! :-)

    52. Re:Wrong facts! by gowen · · Score: 1
      Unless you've donated all your property to others and survive only on bread and water, it strikes me that you are being selfish and therefore a hypocrite.
      Dude, if your first sentence is such an idiotic false dichotomy, no-one's going to read the second sentence. I know I didn't.
      --
      Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
    53. Re:Wrong facts! by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The cause of the problem is the decline of revenue vs payouts due to the ratio of retirees to productive workers increasing, life-expectancy being merely one of the factors in that ratio, others, more important ones, being simply brain-dead policies resulting in overall decline of workforce vs the retirees.

      Back in the day, the ratio of workers to retirees (defined as over 65) was 25:1. Today, by the way, before the boom in retirees really happens (most of our old people were born back pre-penicillin, much less modern healthcare - look for the ratio of over 65 to under 65 to continue to grwo dramatically).

      To have a similar ratio today, we'd need a total population of ~850 million.

      So, you're suggesting that the problem could be resolved by allowing 550 million immigrants into the USA?

      Note that 550 million immigrants would imply that in about 30 years we'd triple our number of retirees (or do the immigrants not get SS under your worldview?)

      Which increase in retirees could be supported by allowing another 1.5 billion immigrants into the country.

      See the problem yet?

      Nothing we could do in the way of immigration policy, free trade (or lack of same), or anything else really, will keep the Social Security solvent without a dramatic increase in the retirement age. Which is NOT going to happen, since it is politically infeasible at this point. And will remain politically infeasible until the retiree's lobby isn't the biggest one in the mix....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    54. Re:Wrong facts! by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      I'll try to take your points one at a time:


      Why? There are billions of possible immigrants willing to work and pay taxes waiting to get in. Instead the "globalization" idiots would have them working at $1 a day overseas. Why?


      Because it's cheaper for the corporations who have too much influence in Congress. I say let 'em in, legally. Build a fence, enforce the law and increase legal immigration. I've been saying that as long as I can remember.


      If idiotic policies hell-bent on reducing the population of productive workers by exporting their industries and not letting any immigrants in persist, then sure, you are breaking all the assumptions of the Social Security and it (along with the whole economy of the nation) will fail. Is that the plan?


      Apparently it is. You see, you're preaching to choir on that issue.


      Only because someone has decided to artificially restrict the influx of funds! That way anything can be a "pyramid" scheme. Put money in the bank and then have crooks steal it and sure enough you lost it! The whole premise was based on growth of economy and if you allow "free market globalization" idiots, combined with xenophobic bigots to run the show, the results are predictable. Both the Social Security and the nation's economy will collapse.


      True. But the fact of the matter is that Social Security benefits should be linked to life expectancy measurements. That's the point no one wants to admit. When SS started, the payout started _after_ the average life expectancy. Now it's 10-15 years _before_ the average life expectancy. People are living up to 20 years longer now, but we still have the same expectation of retiring at a certain age. That will break Social Security faster than any immigration or labor policy. But no one wants to admit it.


      And what is wrong with that? Do you plan on making sure that the Government is no good for it? Overspend it on wars? Or perhaps to eliminate taxes or reduce economy to nothing?


      I don't understand why you are personalizing this. I'm not doing any of those things, nor do I support them. The problem is that we are just shy of 9 trillion in debt, much of it to foreign entities like China. Eventually people are going to start calling in these debts.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    55. Re:Wrong facts! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They said pyramid.. NOT pyramid SCHEME!

    56. Re:Wrong facts! by Descalzo · · Score: 1
      "The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."

      Then there's the exercise even older than that: the search for a superior moral justification for exercising dominion over another man.

      --
      I cried real tears when Li Mu Bai died.
  5. Another Book for Graham Hancock? by eldavojohn · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I once read Fingerprints of the Gods by Graham Hancock which explored in depth the theory that ancient civilizations are linked by a possible master race. It is a very loose theory in that I ended the book more confused than anything and doubting not only Hancock but also the conventional history I learned in school. Whether that's good or bad, I can't really say.

    What I can say is that even if they were half baked theories they certainly were outside the box.

    In it, the position and building of massive structures (like pyramids) are very important to his theories. He linked the Egyptian and Incan/Pima cultures via structures and similarities in creation stories (the latter being quite weak). The worst part is that at the end he alludes to a possible alien influence in the matter of building these massive structures (because we can't understand what technology they used).

    With this (possibly) even larger structure, I'm certain that this will give him more ammo for another book.

    If you're interested in things like this, it's a good read. You can take pieces of it like the famous Pirie Ries maps that were coverd by Charles Hapgood. A similar theory is the also famous 1421 Theory. Be warned that many of these theories are unverifiable and can amount to simply someone's imagination running wild. They rely on events thousands of years old--a time darker than the the dark ages.

    Be caution that most of the links below Hancock's Wikipedia page are just rebuttles disproving him as much of his work is a bit hard to swallow.

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:Another Book for Graham Hancock? by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      We know how they built pyramids. Huge dirt ramps and lots of slave labor.

    2. Re:Another Book for Graham Hancock? by Richard_at_work · · Score: 2, Informative

      Egyptologists are pretty certain the Pyramids werent built using slave labour, but using Egypts entire labour effort as a massive public works project to honour the leadership.

    3. Re:Another Book for Graham Hancock? by austad · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Fingerprints of the Gods is a great read, however, it does tend to get a little bit "out there" towards the end when it's talking about alien influence and the end of the world. Mr. Hancock does bring up some interesting points though.

      Part of what he is arguing is that the egyptian pyramids are far older than we think they are, and the hieroglyphs inside are basically graffiti which was places there by the egyptians. Parts of the pyramids at Giza which were not easily accessible are devoid of any markings, with the exception of a chamber above one of the rooms. However, there is a "typo" in what was found, leaving people wondering if the discoverer put the markings there either to make himself famous, or to support his theory on who built the pyramid.

      Additionally, there is water erosion on the Sphinx. That area has been a desert since around 7000BC, which would indicate that the Sphinx is far older than the 3000BC or so that it's currently dated at.

      Hancock doesn't help his case any by going around touting alien collaboration and end of the world nonsense. The Egyptology community has written off all of his ideas as nonsense. It's because of Hancock and people like him that the Egyptologists are completely unwilling to entertain any idea which goes against what they think is historically accurate.

      The fact is, whether or not the Egyptologists think we figured it out, we really don't know anything for sure. A lot can happen over 5000 years, including "graffiti" by egyptians which would lead later generations to conclude that the egyptians were the ones who built the pyramids at Giza. I'm not saying they did or didn't. I think that Graham Hancock and others have pointed out some very interesting things, and this needs to be taken into consideration and investigated instead of just writing it off as nonsense.

      The same goes for the alleged pyramid in Bosnia. This guy has been written off as a nutcase in the past, but it's completely possible he did stumble upon something of interest. I've been watching this Bosnian pyramid story since it broke last year. Excavations stopped at the end of last year, and just resumed mid-April. It will be interesting to see what they uncover. If this is a bunch of non-sense, we should know within the next couple of months.

      --
      Need Free Juniper/NetScreen Support? JuniperForum
    4. Re:Another Book for Graham Hancock? by TrevorB · · Score: 2, Funny

      RIMMER: Of course aliens have visited Earth. Look at the pyramids! How else could the Egyptians have moved such massive stones?

      LISTER: They had whips, Rimmer! Massive, massive whips!

      (Side note: Agreed with the reply above that the pyramid labourers were likely paid)

    5. Re:Another Book for Graham Hancock? by Enrique1218 · · Score: 1

      Has anyone ever consider that a pyramid might actually be the easiest thing to build? Lacking advanced materials (steel) and an in-depth knowledge of physics, they are not going to build skyscrapers or even a medieval cathedral. I don't know jack about architecture but I can pile a bunch of bricks up in the shape of a pyramid.

      XXXXXXXAAXXXXXXX

      XXXXXAAAAAAXXXXX

      XXXAAAAAAAAAAXXX

      XAAAAAAAAAAAAAAX

      --
      You don't have to be smart to use a Mac, you just have to be smart enough to buy one
    6. Re:Another Book for Graham Hancock? by c_forq · · Score: 1

      Last I looked into it they said it wasn't slave labor, but only because they weren't technically owned (as in they were worked and treated like slaves, but since there was no concept of the workers being property it shouldn't be called slavery).

      --
      Computers allow humans to make mistakes at the fastest speeds known, with the possible exception of tequila and handguns
    7. Re:Another Book for Graham Hancock? by Cyrgo · · Score: 1

      A similar theory is the also famous 1421 Theory

      42... oddly familiar.
      Say, does it also involves dolphins and mice?

    8. Re:Another Book for Graham Hancock? by adavies42 · · Score: 1

      Unfotunately, the odds are pretty strong it's all complete nonsense. I understand how attractive the idea of long-hidden secrets can be, but the book Giza: The Truth makes a very good case that the pyramids, the Sphinx, and all the associated Egyptian stuff are exactly what they appear to be and what conventional archaeology claim they are, funerary monuments made c. 3000 B.C, and that everything else is just publicity-seeking conspiracy theories. (N.B.: Even the authors of this book aren't completely out of the lunatic fringe, as they go to some lengths to promote "sonic levitation" as a possible construction technique. They do at least admit that "conventional" architectural techniques (ramps, rollers, cranes, etc.) were most likely sufficient, however.)

      Hancock's latest, Underworld advances what seems like a somewhat more plausible idea: that the roots of civilization (the precursors to the Sumerians, etc.) now lie under coastal waters, as they were settled before the ice age ended and raised the sea levels. He at least seems to have abandoned the idea of a single global civilization leaving "clues" scattered around the globe, which was always the hardest part of his books to swallow.

      --
      Media that can be recorded and distributed can be recorded and distributed.
      -kfg
    9. Re:Another Book for Graham Hancock? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, a more plausible story would be that they used some artificial rocks (like concrete, made out of sand).

      http://www.geopolymer.org/category/archaeology/pyr amids/

      There should be other links, but you get the idea.

    10. Re:Another Book for Graham Hancock? by posterlogo · · Score: 1
      I submit two hypotheses:

      1) The pyramid is an obvious structure. It is more "boob" like than a cube. It is more "phallic" than a tent-like structure, culminating in a single point.

      2) Humans tend to think in the "bigger is better" camp.

      These are not intented to be jokes, but simply some observations that could lead one to believe that many independent civilizations could have come to build pyramids without having common anscestry or knowledge of each other. Even a child who has never seen the great pyramids could arrive at one by playing in the sand: it is one of the few stable structures that is easy to build. I think the central american pyramids and egyptian pyramids were imagined and built completely independently. This new bosnian pyramid... well the jury is out on whether that is even real.

    11. Re:Another Book for Graham Hancock? by 0racle · · Score: 1

      Egyptions did own slaves, so there was a concept of workers being property. As for their treatments at the build site, they were alloted good amounts of food and beer, given days off to attend weddings, birthdays, and when they had a hangover from drinking too much of the aforementioned beer. They weren't slaves and they weren't treated as such.

      A huge building project to the Pharaoh was the perfect way to keep the plebs from revolting during the off-season while they waited for the Nile to flood again.

      --
      "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
    12. Re:Another Book for Graham Hancock? by jameskojiro · · Score: 0

      Hancock is just pissed that Daniel Jackson got his comfy cushy job at the Air Force....

      --
      Tsukasa: All I really want, is to be left alone...
    13. Re:Another Book for Graham Hancock? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, FFS...
      Egyptologists haven't thought that the builders were slaves for quite a while now.

    14. Re:Another Book for Graham Hancock? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The worst part is that at the end he alludes to a possible alien influence in the matter of building these massive structures (because we can't understand what technology they used).

      Space aliens my ass!

      We're not space aliens at all, but TIME aliens. We "aliens" are your decendants from a few million years in the future, who are as far advanced from you as you are from whatever species you are decended from ten million years ago (in your past, not mine).

      As soon as we invented time travel, we of course sent anthropologists, historians, and other specialists to try to determine if we are decended from you or cows.

      Current theory (from 10,000,000 A.D.) postulates that we came from the cows, but we're still researching. We may have come from chimps.

      The science, however, has come to a halt, as we just lost a ship somewhere in what was known as "Roswell" back then (ten million years ago). As soon as we find and revive the bodies we should know which species we are decended from.

      "Space" aliens... do you so-called "people" have to be so damned insulting?

      Oh hell my ship disappeared. I shouldn't have posted this, I guess...

    15. Re:Another Book for Graham Hancock? by suitepotato · · Score: 1

      It wasn't as though they had Slashdot during the flood season.

      --
      If my grammar and spelling are off, I am [distracted/tired/careless] (take your pick)
    16. Re:Another Book for Graham Hancock? by illuminatedwax · · Score: 1

      Ugh, don't forget his support of the "orange peel" crust theory...

      --
      Did you ever notice that *nix doesn't even cover Linux?
    17. Re:Another Book for Graham Hancock? by ronabop · · Score: 1

      Correction: There is erosion with similar *characteristics* to water erosion on the sphinx. This doesn't mean the sphinx predates the surrounding desert climate.
      1). It could be water erosion, brought about by channeling/bringing water to the sphinx in a ritualistic fashion, even during desert times.
      2). For those of you who have never lived in a desert, well, many deserts flood, and have severe damage, but only every 50/100/500 years. They are devastating enough to rip whole stone/concrete/etc. structures apart.
      3). It could be erosion *similar to*, but not *indicitive of* water erosion, or even a combination of the two.

      (Oh, wait, look, there are canals on mars! There *must* be people there! :-) )

      Real science is not about drawing simple conclusions based on what we know, but about finding many possible conclusions based on what we currently know, and being ready to dismiss as "bad" any conclusions that are based on absurd prepositions, if we can find simpler prepositions.

      Since most of the "old sphinx" tripe comes from such reputable folks as alien researchers, astrologists, and similarly accedited (which is to say: not at all) types, I find it generally more amusing (and of intellectual value) to point a finger at the general clown show and laugh. When a real scientist steps in (and they have), they're worth a listen, but they don't make similar absurd and bizarre "statements of fact"... because doing such a thing, quite frankly, isn't science. It's mere showmanship.

      Yes, it seems like the sphinx is only 3,500 years old. Yes, there is odd weathering, that looks like water weathering. That doesn't mean that the sphinx is much older, or teleported to us from another planet, it means that we have a currently dated as 3,500 year old object, which requires new research, to figure out why it shows weathering signs of being dated older. To state it is much older *because* of unusual weathering... well, you might as well start telling your next-door neighbor about the anal probe the greys gave you.

      -Ronabop

    18. Re:Another Book for Graham Hancock? by surprise_audit · · Score: 1
      In it, the position and building of massive structures (like pyramids) are very important to his theories.

      I'm not so interested in this theory that I'd go out and buy to book, so maybe someone can tell me - out of all these whackos who claim some kind of mystical connection between far distant places, do *any* of them take into account continental drift??

      I mean, if these structures really are some kind of signal to space aliens, it's going to take a *seriously* long time for the continents to get back into alignment so the the aliens will come back and enlighten (or enslave) us... Or maybe they already came back, and the alignment at the time read "Sod off" instead of "Welcome back"...

  6. 8th wonder then? by ZSpade · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You know it strikes me that if things this big can escape our detection on a daily basis, just what else are we missing that may lie right in front of us. I mean this is of utterly rediculous proportions and yet it escaped both our vision, and our history? I think this must be added to the list of world wonders, word wonders how we missed it!

    --
    Go ahead and call me unreliable; reliable is just a synonym for predictable.
    1. Re:8th wonder then? by hairyface · · Score: 1

      "... what else are we missing that may lie right in front of us..."
      Spelling mistakes?

    2. Re:8th wonder then? by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 1
      You know it strikes me that if things this big can escape our detection on a daily basis, just what else are we missing that may lie right in front of us...? ...rediculous...word wonders...
      Dictionaries?
      --
      Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
    3. Re:8th wonder then? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This just in: archeologists discover that burried just beneath the surface of the earth is a giant sphere, roughly the size of a planet!

  7. Re:Oil by Yvanhoe · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I am sure that a lot more funds are spent toward oil-finding than pyramids-finding.

    Also we consume less pyramids than oil. That makes finding them a lesser strategical objective.

    --
    The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
  8. Maybe Finally by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Maybe they will finally find my Stargate so i can leave this silly little corrupt planet WOOT!

    1. Re:Maybe Finally by Deus+Acerbus · · Score: 1

      I, for one, welcome our Goa'uld overlords!

    2. Re:Maybe Finally by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And arrive at one of those oh-so-enlightened OTHER worlds out there? Wave Hi to Anubis for me!

  9. But does it have a stargate? by madnuke · · Score: 3, Funny

    We have finally found the ancient outpost! Or it could be that Pyrimid from Aliens VS Predator....

    1. Re:But does it have a stargate? by kahrytan · · Score: 1


      No, Pyramids are Landing pads for Goa'uld Motherships. There is so many damn landing pads. They are in Egypt to Mongols to Aztecs to Bosnia.

      --
      \
  10. Re:Oil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is little financial incentive in discovering lost pyramids. If some of the largest, wealthiest corporations on the planet were motivated to find pyramids, they would have found this one decades ago.

  11. News for the gullible, stuff from last year. by pla · · Score: 5, Informative

    Always right on top of things, eh, editors?

    First: The Bosnian "pyramid" (a roughly four-sided hill where they've found nothing but a mound of dirt so far) hit the news last year, in Early November IIRC.

    Second, the fellow cho claims it a pyramid ranks right up there with Uri Gellar as far as credibility goes, according to Archaology last week.


    So +5 for topical, but minus a million for reporting on entirely the wrong end of the issue. They didn't just discover it, they just debunked the discovery.

    1. Re:News for the gullible, stuff from last year. by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 2, Funny

      What, you've never seen a bent spoon before? I have one in my own kitchen, which just further proves the almighty power of Mr. Gellar.

      --
      This guy's the limit!
    2. Re:News for the gullible, stuff from last year. by saintp · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Okay, seriously, that article in Archaeology is crap. Basically, here's what it says:

      1. If he's right about the time period, it's impossible.

      2. He's a loon.

      His personal views, of course, have nothing to do with the veracity of the story. And it's perfectly reasonable to assume that his wild-assed guess of 12,000 B.C.E. is totally wrong, while he's 100% correct about the pyramid's existance. Nothing in that article casts any doubt whatsoever on the pyramid itself -- only on the researcher. Ad hominem, anyone?

      Had you actually RTFA, you'd see that the reason it's back in the news is that the diggers found cut and polished stone blocks. Let me say that again, just for emphasis:

      They found cut and polished stone blocks.

      It sounds to me like the exact opposite of debunking is happening.

    3. Re:News for the gullible, stuff from last year. by The+Cydonian · · Score: 1
      From the link:
      Others fear that Osmanagic's excavations will damage real sites (the hill he calls the "Pyramid of the Sun" is said to have medieval, Roman, and Illyrian remains on it). In one of the few critical accounts of the Bosnian pyramid story, which appeared in the Art Newspaper, the University of Sarejevo's Enver Imamovic, a former director of the National Museum in Sarjevo, is quoted as saying, "This is the equivalent of letting me, an archaeologist, perform surgery in hospitals."
      Oh well, I suppose it *is* still quaintly romantic to wish for a hill to automagically become a pyramid.
    4. Re:News for the gullible, stuff from last year. by taursir · · Score: 1

      Yeah, old news. Boingboing already reported on it, and made it a "that's so last month" issue, even while using trendy Japanese slang for concepts that already exist in English.

    5. Re:News for the gullible, stuff from last year. by AaronLawrence · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Second, the fellow cho claims it a pyramid ranks right up there with Uri Gellar as far as credibility goes, according to Archaology last week.
      That's all very well, but that Archaeology article spends all it's time slamming the person, not discussing his claims, and reads a lot like a personal attack. The guy may be a loon, but that doesn't mean we should dismiss this automatically.

      The pyramid announcement does seem very premature and is probably something else (or a fake) but I'd like to see some discussion of what he's found, which is not in that article.

      --
      For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert. - Arthur C. Clarke
    6. Re:News for the gullible, stuff from last year. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My thoughts exactly. That story didnt have much credibility half a year ago, but it is picked up NOW when other sites talk about it being debunked already?! Way to go, Slashdot...

    7. Re:News for the gullible, stuff from last year. by pla · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They found cut and polished stone blocks.

      You live in the US, correct?

      We Americans have a somewhat different view of what it means to find traces of a civilization than do Europeans.

      In the US, if you go out and dig in your backyard and find something man-made and more than a few hundred years old, you've most likely really found something of archaeological interest.

      In Europe, you can set up a dig just about anywhere and find crumbled bricks, broken pottery, or some other traces of very very old human civilization.

      Hell, for another recent news item to make my point, the UK Times Online reports that archaeologists just found an almost perfectly preserved Roman city in Spain - Which the Spanish felt so impressed by, they promptly turned it into a parking lot.



      And it's perfectly reasonable to assume that his wild-assed guess of 12,000 B.C.E. is totally wrong, while he's 100% correct about the pyramid's existance.

      I agree that ad hominem doesn't disprove the existance of a pyramid in Bosnia. But when the town loony raves about aliens landing in his back yard, you don't call NASA to disprove him.

    8. Re:News for the gullible, stuff from last year. by Mr+Z · · Score: 2, Funny

      How else would you make a proper Black & Tan?

    9. Re:News for the gullible, stuff from last year. by Xzzy · · Score: 1

      They found cut and polished stone blocks.

      I found a brick in my backyard once. It was buried under some leaves. There must be a pyramid under there!

    10. Re:News for the gullible, stuff from last year. by LurkerXXX · · Score: 1
      Let me fix your post...

      They *claim* they found cut and polished stone blocks.

      Someone who thinks it would be possible to build a pyramid in the timeframe that he claims could very very easily mistake broken rock for rock that had been cut by humans.

      Sorry, until I hear about a few legitimate archeologists claiming this has some merit, it's just a load of crap.

    11. Re:News for the gullible, stuff from last year. by Therilon · · Score: 1

      Well, if you actually read the article, you might have seen that there were Illyrian , Roman, and medieval ruins on the hill. Maybe they, you know, made a mine that this guy found? And left some implements or rocks that they cut out in there. I'd say that the article is and provides grounds for dismissing the claim the guy makes.

    12. Re:News for the gullible, stuff from last year. by hattig · · Score: 1

      The problem is you'll never find a legitimate archaeologist to back it up because the established archaeoligical community has got together and denounced the entire project simply because of the person leading it.

      Maybe if one of them was to send someone out there to 'help', i.e., disprove it at the earliest opportunity, then things would be resolved much quicker, and that person could also ensure that the dig is done under decent archaeological methods and ensure that no harm is done to other remains in the area.

      As it is, this guy could simply smooth the hillside until it looks like a pyramid if he has to, and the entire thing will be covered in controversy for years to come.

      The establishment could do more to actively talk against the actual discovery, rather than the guy, it just reeks of sour grapes.

      If it doesn't turn out to be a pyramid, then maybe at least the guy has found something worthwhile, the tunnels at least deserve more investigation. But no, the academics will sit there laughing at the nutjob until he makes them look like fools.

    13. Re:News for the gullible, stuff from last year. by weeboo0104 · · Score: 0

      But when the town loony raves about aliens landing in his back yard, you don't call NASA to disprove him.

      Of course not. NASA KNOWS they exist but will never acknowledge "them".

      Even if you did make the call to NASA, the men in black would silence you soon afterwards.

      So you do the rational thing. You call Art Bell.

      --
      It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men. -Frederick Douglass
    14. Re:News for the gullible, stuff from last year. by Karma+Farmer · · Score: 1

      Always right on top of things, eh, editors?

      No kidding. The linked article is ten days old, all this was on the Daily Show last week, and Fark mocked it the week before that. Moreover, news about this has been bouncing around in various "news of the wierd" sites for the last six months.

      Of course, it doesn't suprise me at all that this is brand new to CmdrTaco, or that he doesn't realize that it's absolute bunk.

    15. Re:News for the gullible, stuff from last year. by LurkerXXX · · Score: 1
      I don't see how the experts will be made to look like fools. Idiots have been buying into Bigfoot, etc, for a long long time. The experts always come out against it. Who looks like fools? The idiots who believe in it.

      If the guy wants to reshape a hill and take money from suckers, well, as the old saying goes, "There's a Sucker Born Every Minute". The fools are the ones who give him money to reshape the hill, or tour his 'pyramid', not the experts.

    16. Re:News for the gullible, stuff from last year. by jnik · · Score: 1
      There's a reason most scientists don't rush to get to the absolute bottom of every single detail in fishy stories. It's called "whack-a-mole." After sinking a ton of time into picking apart a faulty notion, another one springs up and captures the public's attention. And in the meantime the work you're getting paid to do sits undone. (Phil Plait brings this up occasionally on his site.)

      So eventually you develop a crap filter and say "these, these, and these points indicate this is probably bogus" and move on. There's limited time in the day--you have to work on things that seem most promising. You simply can't follow every single possible idea. And if the originator of an idea is known for a conceptual framework that's highly suspect (at best), it's usually not worth much attention. Building on a bad foundation and all that. Weinberg's book Dreams of a Final Theory has some great parts on this process (has lots of other great parts, too).

    17. Re:News for the gullible, stuff from last year. by psulonen · · Score: 1

      True. And that corner of Europe is richer in ancient history than most. A friend of mine, from Turkey, could tell you about the problems the Istanbul transport authority is having when it's trying to build a metro -- they keep running into priceless archaeological sites (most recently a well-preserved sunken ship) and can't find a clear route to tunnel through.

    18. Re:News for the gullible, stuff from last year. by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      But why would you want to water down perfectly good Guinness?

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    19. Re:News for the gullible, stuff from last year. by at_slashdot · · Score: 1

      "Hell, for another recent news item to make my point, the UK Times Online reports that archaeologists just found an almost perfectly preserved Roman city in Spain - Which the Spanish felt so impressed by, they promptly turned it into a parking lot."

      I think you over-simplify. Europeans are proud of their history (and many times obsessed to show that they had greater history than their neighbours). Most of the archaeological sites are preserved with great care.

      --
      "It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." -- Prof. Dumbledore
    20. Re:News for the gullible, stuff from last year. by AaronLawrence · · Score: 1

      I did read the article, please don't be rude. I saw the mention that there were other ruins. That suggests a likely alternative to the idea of a pyramid, but it does not discuss what this guy has actually found, just assumes because he's an oddball that it's nothing.

      Are you suggesting that as long as we can think of a possible alternative, we don't bother investigating anything? Cause we already know all the answers?

      --
      For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert. - Arthur C. Clarke
    21. Re:News for the gullible, stuff from last year. by hattig · · Score: 1

      Fair point, you can't go chasing every atlantis/lost city/spaceport discovery, and this guy is wacko without the jacko.

      I guess that people will wait on more results from the area before deciding it is worth investigating. The PDF of various analyses of topography and infra-red does seem quite interesting though.

      If it turns out to be a pyramid, then it'd be something interesting at last, even if it was only a shaped natural hill with stone facing.

    22. Re:News for the gullible, stuff from last year. by Random+Utinni · · Score: 1
      Did anyone even bother to notice the header Taco put on this one?
      from the thats-where-the-aliens-really-landed dept.


      Methinks those that aren't taking the story seriously took the story a bit too seriously, no?
    23. Re:News for the gullible, stuff from last year. by Mr+Z · · Score: 1

      Well, that's why you use the spoon to keep them separate, of course!

    24. Re:News for the gullible, stuff from last year. by saintp · · Score: 1
      You seem to be suggesting that, since there are traces of ancient civilizations all over Europe, there must not be traces thereof in Bosnia. Huh?

      The fact that there are bricks elsewhere has absolutely nothing to do with the (non-)existence of this particular pyramid. All it proves is that many peoples in Europe posessed stoneworking skills, which we already knew.

    25. Re:News for the gullible, stuff from last year. by bigpat · · Score: 1

      In the US, if you go out and dig in your backyard and find something man-made and more than a few hundred years old, you've most likely really found something of archaeological interest.

      Actually, my archeologist friend said that you can search around just about any old watering hole, start digging and probably find something left their by native amaricans long ago. American's just don't like to think about it too deeply.

    26. Re:News for the gullible, stuff from last year. by jafac · · Score: 1

      If it's a fake (ie. someone snuck a bunch of huge cut and polished stone blocks in, and stacked them up and buried them) - then I would say that's at least as fantastic as if it were genuine (built by primative humans, and covered up over the centuries by nature).

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    27. Re:News for the gullible, stuff from last year. by dajak · · Score: 1

      I think you over-simplify. Europeans are proud of their history (and many times obsessed to show that they had greater history than their neighbours). Most of the archaeological sites are preserved with great care.

      Sure, but only if it is rare or corroborates or contradicts specific historical events. Roman is only rare in the north of Europe. We are constructing a subway at the moment in Amsterdam (The Netherlands). A newspaper article reported they filtered out several hundreds of garbage bags of mostly 15th to 18th century knives, hooks, pottery, pipes, etc, at the site of the first underground station and the interviewed archeologist who searched them for interesting stuff (most notably a complete harness) uggested giving away the garbage to foreign tourists who buy a ticket to the Rijksmuseum.

      The whole country is covered by a thick layer of human remains and manmade dirt. We don't expect that remains belong to the place they are found without a thorough survey of historical records of the place. In the 17th and 18th century people used the dirt of prehistoric Frisian terps (raised settlements) as fertilizer all over the country. There is no way for the layman to tell prehistoric pottery or bones from ubiquitous later stuff, and even if he is it is only relevant if you can relate it to a historical settlement.

      Same thing for things like altars or Roman milestones with inscriptions. 9 out of 10 times it is from, say, France or Austria shipped down the Rhine, Meuse, or Scheldt to be used as a stone in a medieval construction project.

      Generally speaking, you are not allowed to disturb the deeper soil without an official archeologist present in known or suspected historical sites. Everywhere else people do whatever they want in their garden, and just put the stuff they find in the garbage. Archeologists *never* search for specific places. They have more than enough work just trying to keep up with the tight schedules of construction companies. From this perspective every "archeologist" that goes around disturbing known sites is an Indiana Jones.

    28. Re:News for the gullible, stuff from last year. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Perhaps it is a fake, as you suggest. Or, perhaps they guy excavating it is a fake attention-whore. Maybe the structure is real. Maybe the archaeologist is a misunderstood seeker of truth. Or maybe he is as crazy and unprofessional as his detractors say, but in this particular instance, he has stumbled upon a momentous find. Any situation invites a multitude of questions, but for the scientifically-minded, only the facts are supposed to matter. That's why science is supposed to consist of rational inquiries that are checked out by peers, and validated or invalidated by a sober process of consensus. Yet we humans are so quick to start lobbing the ad hominems when the facts revealed don't sqare with our assumed beliefs. It is as reflexive as blinking and it is really quite unbecoming for adults. A five-year-old uses words like "poopyhead" against his enemies, then he "grows up," meaning he acquires a larger vocabulary and more sophisticated affectations. Now his enemies are "quacks" who "worship crystals and wear hats made of aluminum foil"--or so he imagines.

      But I, for one, am legitimately curious. If this structure does indeed turn out to be a pyramid, then who the hell built it and then who buried it?

      This is a very strange story, but if it turns out to be true, then it's the biggest thing that's happened all year, at least.

    29. Re:News for the gullible, stuff from last year. by menace3society · · Score: 1

      That's nothing. The Greek metro stops in Athens are all mini-museums of stuff they dug up while building it (potsherds, columns, tools, etc) and a couple even have glass walls that show a cross-sectional cutaway of the various archeological strata, including things like tombs and houses. Part of the reason construction of the Olympic facilities came down so close to the deadline is that they had to go through every square inch of earth and see what interesting things they could find.

      Completely off-topic, but once when I was walking around in NYC I saw a classy mediterranean restaurant with a bunch of plaster sculptures of a face on the walls--which same sculptures are available in every tourist shop in Minastiraki. It really got me thinking--I guess American high culture is on the same level as Greek kitsch.

    30. Re:News for the gullible, stuff from last year. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've did a bit of research, and they were excavating for 8 years, the most valuable stuff is in the city museum and they had to reduce the parking space to 50% of what was planned and they are building an open air museum with the buildings in the same place they were found. If someone wants more information and can read spanish:
      http://terraeantiqvae.blogia.com/2005/052802-ecija .-la-nueva-roma-surena.php
      http://www.diariodesevilla.com/diariodesevilla/art iculo.asp?idart=1360975&idcat=1182
      http://perso.wanadoo.es/historiaweb/antiqva/amazon a/arqueologia_en_ecija.htm
      http://museo.ecija.org/

    31. Re:News for the gullible, stuff from last year. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then why did you call NASA in on me last time?

  12. How do you miss a pyramid? by aero2600-5 · · Score: 1

    I've seen a news clip or two about this newly discovered pyramid. One of them was with the discoverer standing in the foreground and the pyramid in the backgroud. It looks just like a mountain, except the sides are the same length and exactly the same angle. How do thousands of years go by without someone looking at it and think 'That mountain is just a little two symmetrical.. Hmm..'. I've seen quite a few different mountain ranges, and I don't recall any of them being perfectly symmetrical.

    How do you miss something like that for so long?

    Aero

    --
    Please stop hurting America -- Jon Stewart
    1. Re:How do you miss a pyramid? by Billosaur · · Score: 4, Funny

      How do you miss something like that for so long?

      The same way the idiot on his cell phone misses the red light and slams into you: inattention to your surroundings.

      --
      GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
    2. Re:How do you miss a pyramid? by Belial6 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Or the way an idiot without a cell phone misses the red light and slams into you: inattention to your surroundings.

    3. Re:How do you miss a pyramid? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about Mt. Fuji?

    4. Re:How do you miss a pyramid? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "How do you miss something like that for so long?"

      Desensitization.

    5. Re:How do you miss a pyramid? by surfinokie · · Score: 1

      Perhaps the SEP (Somebody Else's Problem) field's power source is failing.

      --
      Chance 'em.
    6. Re:How do you miss a pyramid? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or, the way an idiot without a cell phone misses the red light and slams into you. Inattention to your surroundings.

    7. Re:How do you miss a pyramid? by surprise_audit · · Score: 1

      Take a look at some images of Mt Fuji in Japan. That has to be the biggest freaking pyramid ever, right?? Nope, it's just a volcano that erupted relatively gently and gave itself a fairly even coating of lava, instead of exploding violently and leaving a broken rim.

  13. The guy is a loon... by mark0 · · Score: 3, Informative

    ... and if you have any doubt, take a look at this.

  14. Turns out this 'archaeologist' is a loony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    Yeah this link was on Fark last Friday:
    http://www.archaeology.org/online/features/osmanag ic/

    This passage in the link above from one of his other masterpieces pretty much sums it up:
    Ordinary watchmakers repair our watches and put them into accordance with Earthly time. It is my theory that the Maya should be considered watchmakers of the cosmos whose mission it is to adjust the Earthly frequency and bring it into accordance with the vibrations of our Sun. Once the Earth begins to vibrate in harmony with the Sun, information will be able to travel in both directions without limitation. And then we will be able to understand why all ancient peoples worshipped the Sun and dedicated their rituals to this. The Sun is the source of all life on this planet and the source of all information and knowledge. ...And with a frequency in harmony, the Earth will, via the Sun, be connected with the center of our Galaxy. These facts become exceptionally important when we realize that we are rapidly approaching December 2012, a date which the Maya have marked as the time of arrival of the Galactic Energy Cluster which will enlighten us.

    Pretty strong meat there from Semir (Sam) Osmanagic...

  15. this story was proven false already by spacerodent · · Score: 4, Informative

    this story is utterly false and the dude who discovered it is a crazy. Here is a link with handy details. http://www.archaeology.org/online/features/osmanag ic/

    1. Re:this story was proven false already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      as this is slashdot, where no one really reads anything :-)
      I give you a quote from archelogy.org indicating the level of nonsense they regard these claims:

      "These reports are irresponsible on the part of journalists," he says. "These claims are completely unsupported with any kind of factual evidence, such as artifacts or photographs of the alleged architectures. They have not been confirmed by archaeologists who have the training and competence to evaluate them. The person making the claims appears to have no training in archaeology and has not presented his finds in a way that would allow them to be scrutinized by trained experts. This is simply sensationalism and grandstanding and the journalists who have reported on these claims, without first fact-checking the stories with professional archaeologists, should be ashamed of themselves. People who believe these stories, especially when they are presented without evidence, are fools."

      Regards,
      P.

    2. Re:this story was proven false already by mypalmike · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it's not really an ancient pyramid. It's a huge casino in the shape of an ancient pyramid.

      --
      There are 0x40000000 types of people: those who understand 32-bit IEEE 754 floating point, and those who don't.
    3. Re:this story was proven false already by Yonder+Way · · Score: 1

      You must have provided the wrong link. The link that you provided only attacked the character of the archeologist who made the clame of Bosnian pyramids. It didn't in any way disprove the claim. The only way to disprove the claim will be to reveal what is under that hill, either by digging or more advanced technological surveying techniques.

  16. Aliens on Earth by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    That proves it.

    ( yes its a joke )

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  17. Re:Oil by Yvanhoe · · Score: 0

    One could even argue that the bosnian-serbian war would have been very different...

    --
    The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
  18. Not very hidden. by Pedrito · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm not going to point to a particular site, but if you do a google image search on the words: bosnia pyramid

    You'll find pictures of it. I'm kind of surprised nobody has considered the possibility before. If you see some pictures that give you a better 3D view of it, it very clearly has 4 slopes at 90 degree angles.

    Very cool find, though.

    1. Re:Not very hidden. by LarryWake · · Score: 1
      if you do a google image search on the words: bosnia pyramid
      You'll find pictures of it. I'm kind of surprised nobody has considered the possibility before. If you see some pictures that give you a better 3D view of it, it very clearly has 4 slopes at 90 degree angles.
      Indeed -- after studying the remarkable remarkable imagery that Google found I don't see how this can be a hoax at all -- I've packed up my razor blades and it's off to Visoko!
    2. Re:Not very hidden. by DrVomact · · Score: 1

      The alleged "pyramids" project at what seem to be odd angles (not vertical) from fairly convoluted terrain. If I were going to build a pyramid, I'd find a nice flat spot to put it first. I also don't see why people think it's so unlikely that there should be pyramid-shaped hills. You see all kinds of regular geometric forms in nature.

      --
      Great men are almost always bad men--Lord Acton's Corollary
  19. European pyramid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is why Europe is, even today, a world leader in pyramids. You can outsource all the pyramid building you want to the israelites, but when you employ cheap slave labor, you get 1/3 less cubits.

    U send me pyramid 4 ur outsourced job plz.

    1. Re:European pyramid by Rick.C · · Score: 1
      You can outsource all the pyramid building you want to the israelites, but when you employ cheap slave labor, you get 1/3 less cubits.

      Math, people, math!

      This ~is~ slashdot after all.

      "X is one third more than Y" is the same as "Y is one fourth less than X".

      Besides, the numbers quoted in the article don't add up. The Great Pyramid was originaly 481 ft. but is now only 451 ft. (Don't ask me, must be old age or something.) One third taller than 481 ft. is 641 ft., not 722 ft., but one half taller than 481 ft. works out to 721.5 ft.

      So it turns out the Bosnian pyramid is one-half taller than the pyramid in Gaza, which makes the Gaza pyramid one-third shorter than the Bosnian pyramid.

      Which makes the parent post correct, after all.

      Proving one again that it's better to be lucky than good.
      --
      You were 80% angel, 10% demon. The rest was hard to explain. - Over The Rhine
      "Math in a song is good."-Linford
  20. Some consider this to be a bunch of garbage... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  21. I hope that this doesn't turn out to be by zappepcs · · Score: 1

    I hope that this doesn't turn out to be linked to some religion or other. All we need is another whacko group claiming to have the only true religion, and proof of its veracity in this pyramid. I truly do hope that this is built by, or inspired by alien visitors, perhaps stranded travellers or something. As long as its anything but more religious hype/tripe/your-fav-bad-thing-here.

    1. Re:I hope that this doesn't turn out to be by Distinguished+Hero · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I hope that this doesn't turn out to be linked to some religion or other. All we need is another whacko group claiming to have the only true religion, and proof of its veracity in this pyramid. I truly do hope that this is built by, or inspired by alien visitors, perhaps stranded travellers or something. As long as its anything but more religious hype/tripe/your-fav-bad-thing-here.

      Because if your first thought upon discovering a pyramid is that it was "built by, or inspired by alien visitors" you are far saner, more rational, and down to earth than those religious "whacko group[s]"...

      --
      Uttering logically derived and empirically supported truths to the disciples of the orthodox establishment.
    2. Re:I hope that this doesn't turn out to be by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Id say its about even, actually.

  22. what does this tell us? by mikesd81 · · Score: 1

    So, what does this tell us about history of the Egyptians? This is a great find that can explain alot of events. Personally, I wonder who or what is in it. I suppose we'll have to wait til the end of the summer.

    If this is the first one to be found in Europe, could this mean they were built due to Egyptian conquering or were they maybe the first ones?

    --
    That which does not kill me only postpones the inevitable.
    1. Re:what does this tell us? by rwebb · · Score: 1
      If this is the first one to be found in Europe, could this mean they were built due to Egyptian conquering or were they maybe the first ones?

      The Egyptial pyramids developed, over time, from mastabas and step pyramids, eventually to be abandoned as nice looking but rather impracticle tombs. Other civilizations independently developed similar structures.

      Pyramids are bog-simple to make, being just stepped courses of stone, so it's not too surprising that they appear as monumental architecture in several early cultures. They don't require columns, lintels, or arches. Just big rocks.

      If somebody finds a groin vault that's dated 5000 BCE, that would be news.
      --
      Trusted by cats.
    2. Re:what does this tell us? by VorlonFog · · Score: 1

      Time wounds all heels. Let the esteemed archaeologists pooh-pooh his theories now, but wait a few more years and see what turns up. How far is this point from Mount Ararat and the Ark?

  23. escaped our vision by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    Considering its covered in TREES, the fact we never noticed isnt suprising. It looks like a big blob of earth.

    However, i agree about not being noticed in our history.. THAT is the odd part.. Something that large should have got at least a passing mention.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:escaped our vision by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 1

      I guess it also means that there have never been any topographic or stratigraphic maps of the area made before. If there have been, I'd be interested to see their interpretation of it.

      --
      This guy's the limit!
  24. Is that a.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Is that a pyramid in your hill, or are you just happy to see me?

  25. Re:Oil by taursir · · Score: 0, Redundant

    So apparently it's now surprising that humans might want to put survival first?

  26. Poor pyramid by Mistshadow2k4 · · Score: 1

    Why didn't someone tell it when the masquerade ball was over?

    --
    I dream of a better world... one in which chickens can cross roads without their motives being questioned.
  27. He believes it was built by Atlantians... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    no, not the ones for the Peach State.

    From the on line version of the magazine 'Archeology' (published by the Archaeological Institute of America):
    http://www.archaeology.org/online/features/osmanag ic/index.html

    'Frenzied reporting of supposed pyramids in the Balkans ignores the truth and embraces the fantastic.'

    RTFA, it will do you some good.

  28. Official website by najt · · Score: 3, Interesting

    You can find large resolution photos and news on the Official website. Looks like they're still digging.

    1. Re:Official website by demonbug · · Score: 1

      "Large resolution photos"? Are you kidding? The only photos I could find on the site are small and grainy. I don't care if it's a hoax or the real thing - can't they find someone with a $50 digital camera to take a couple photographs of the hill? What is it with all the crackpot theorists who apparently can't even take a damn picture. Seriously - it's a fricking hill. This isn't the Loch Ness monster, it isn't Bigfoot, it doesn't go anywhere. Why can't the "official site" have even one decent photograph?

  29. Geraldo by gregarine · · Score: 4, Funny

    We should probably send Geraldo Rivera to investigate. His experience with Al Capone's vault makes him more than qualified.

    --

    I like traffic lights
  30. Much Bigger Pyramid found ... by rewinn · · Score: 3, Funny

    Look to the left side of this photo. Frighteningly symmetrical, is it not? And it blows away the Bosnian pyramid as to size.

    1. Re:Much Bigger Pyramid found ... by geobeck · · Score: 1

      Mr. Orgasmic's (sp?) pyramid isn't even the biggest one in Europe, as this monument built by the ancient alien Tetrahedron Cult proves. Reconstruction is due to start next month when I gather my army of flying civil engineer monkeys.

      --
      Find environmentally and socially responsible products on http://buy-right.net
  31. Magician!=Comedian by 246o1 · · Score: 1

    Penn is mostly famous for being a cranky magician. (I'm unfamiliar with O'Rourke, but I've heard the name. I'll assume you are correct in calling him a comedian.)

    --
    Although the moon is smaller than the earth, it is farther away.
    1. Re:Magician!=Comedian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I'm unfamiliar with O'Rourke

      You have led a desolate and humourless life.

    2. Re:Magician!=Comedian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, Teller is a magician. Penn is the guy who talks to entertain and distract the audience while Teller works his craft.

    3. Re:Magician!=Comedian by CFTM · · Score: 1

      O'Rourke is a laugh riot; you may not agree with everything he says but any person who puts on the cover of their book "I was tragically hip and I recovered! You can too!" along with snippets saying that he "Read Camus and Sarte", "Wrote Poetry that did not rhyme" and "Knew the Words to Folk Songs". The dude is hysterical; and he exposes the connection that often exists between youth and liberalism and age and conservatism. Worth a read and a good laugh :)

    4. Re:Magician!=Comedian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I'm unfamiliar with O'Rourke...
      Few people are. I think the GP was using some kind of subtle sarcasm, highlighting a name everyone's heard of but nobody actually reads (Rourke), a left-"libertarian" (Mahler), someone nobody has ever heard of (Penn Jilette who?), and a couple of magicians, as examples of "successful libertarian comedians".

      On the other hand, ESR is a laugh riot. Though I don't think he intends to be.

    5. Re:Magician!=Comedian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You knew Penn & Teller were magicians (actually, comedic parodies of magicians), yet didn't realize that Penn Jilette was one of them?

    6. Re:Magician!=Comedian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Been a very long time since I watched P&T as they got old pretty quickly, but I didn't know that was Penn's surname, no. I apologise profusely, though note it means one less "comedian" (*snort*) in Golias's list.

      And no, they're not parodies. Parody means a lot of things but "Doing magic but explaining how it works afterwards" is no more parody than making a meal and giving people the recipe afterwards makes you a parody of a cook. At the very least, the critical attributes of parody would include impersonation, which isn't what P&T do.

      They're "just" magicians. They have a style. That's it. They may occasionally make you laugh. But I dare say Paul Daniels will crack a joke once in a while too. Is he a parody too?

    7. Re:Magician!=Comedian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're "just" magicians. They have a style. That's it. They may occasionally make you laugh. But I dare say Paul Daniels will crack a joke once in a while too. Is he a parody too?

      Um... Yeah. You clearly have not seen their act in a long, long time. It's 90% comedy.

      Likewise, their Showtime series "Bullshit" is nothing but humorous 30-minute documentaries on stuff like Astrology, religious cults, left-wing nuts and government foolishness. Stage magic is hardly ever performed on the program (other than the occasional faith healer.)

  32. Despite all the skepticism... by TheNoxx · · Score: 5, Interesting

    And everyone pointing to the archaeology organization site naming him as a nutjob, guess what folks? It won't be debunked until they've fully excavated the site. Whether or not the man in charge is crazy or not has little bearing on the validity of his claims, particularly when the evidence would be a gigantic fucking pyramid. There isn't anything to debate, it's either there or not.

    Also, I'd say that a majority of the archaelogical society hates new findings that contradict their old theories, and can often go out of their way to ostracize and decredit people that publish or support findings that would invalidate all the time spent writing papers on any particularly well-accepted idea.

    --
    Ex nihilo nihil fit.
    1. Re:Despite all the skepticism... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      For once someone who has a grasp on things. Until this mound is dug up all the name calling in the world won't make a difference. Whether or not something is found at least he is guaranteed to have his name go down in history for something. Only question I have is why don't they just hit it with ground penetrating radar and see what comes up before they dig up the whole thing. Would make life a hell of a lot easier.

    2. Re:Despite all the skepticism... by eln · · Score: 1

      Bullshit. If the pyramid isn't there, he can just claim it IS there, but it's surrounded by an SEP field.

    3. Re:Despite all the skepticism... by TrevorB · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I understand the sentiment, but this is science: Guilty until proven innocent. Until we see any kind of evidence other than "That mountain is pyramid shaped", this guy is worthy of ridicule in proportion to the size of the claim.

      Consider it a "hazing ritual" that *all* scientists have to go through when they make extraordinary claims that aren't (yet) backed up with extraordinary evidence.

      I'm a bit concerned about your meter for debunking. "Excavating the entire site", when the entire site is a *mountain*. It will never be debunked. This will probably fall into the realm of consipracy theory in a few years, probably when his funding is cut.

      As for hating new findings, I think I'd be pleasantly surprised. I'm not holding my breath though.

      For the record, my wife has a degree in archaeology. I would guess that archaeologists are far more defensive about known theories because there's been a fair number of charlaitians and hucksters in the past.

    4. Re:Despite all the skepticism... by iamlucky13 · · Score: 1

      While nobody likes to have their theory debunked, not everyone is opposed to the idea, and I'm not sure who's theories this would really debunk. The article mentions some archaeologists give the idea some credence, but don't want this guy screwing around on the site because he isn't really a credited archaeologist and could mess up the site. I guess that could also be translated as they want to get a grant to study it themselves.

    5. Re:Despite all the skepticism... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually that was something that caught my eye on the Arch site. They make ZERO mention that his claim is false but keep pointing out that he is probably crazy. While they do try and prove that his date may be wrong for the age due to climate conditions they dont explain what he has found so far.

      and hey, even once and a while a crazy guy just might be right.

    6. Re:Despite all the skepticism... by soloset · · Score: 1

      The article on Archeology today comments that his excavation is quite possibly going to destroy a lot of other legitimately valuable sites.

      From the article on http://www.archaeology.org/online/features/osmanag ic/:

      Others fear that Osmanagic's excavations will damage real sites (the hill he calls the "Pyramid of the Sun" is said to have medieval, Roman, and Illyrian remains on it). In one of the few critical accounts of the Bosnian pyramid story, which appeared in the Art Newspaper, the University of Sarejevo's Enver Imamovic, a former director of the National Museum in Sarjevo, is quoted as saying, "This is the equivalent of letting me, an archaeologist, perform surgery in hospitals."

      So we might be losing quite a bit while we wait for this guy to prove or disprove his theory.

    7. Re:Despite all the skepticism... by sfjoe · · Score: 1

      Whether or not the man in charge is crazy or not has little bearing on the validity of his claims

      I'm trying to think of the last time a certifiable whack job came up with a brillant scientific discovery. I'm fairly confident that a man who thinks the Maya were descended from the Atlanteans isn't going to discover much of anything.

      --
      It's simple: I demand prosecution for torture.
  33. This is apparently a hoax by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See this: http://www.archaeology.org/online/features/osmanag ic/

    According to the article, Osmanagic is a "self-described archaeologist, who believes the Maya and others are descended from Atlanteans who came from the Pleiades".

    It's startling that reporters aren't more skeptical about claims of pyramids larger than the Egyptian ones from 12000 BC.

    The sad thing is that he's raised a lot of money with this hoax and with his dig he's going to destroy a log of real artifacts from a far less spectacular historical period (Roman ruins).

  34. The Pyramidthropic Principle states ... by rewinn · · Score: 1

    ... that someone will eventually notice natural features that have vaguely pyramidal shapes, ignore those that do not, and write a book that sells well to people who are not good at science.

  35. Re:Oil by CastrTroy · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Maybe, but then again, finding pyramids isn't a trillion dollar industry. If you told somebody they'd get a billion dollars for finding a pyramid larger than the Great Pyramid, then i'm sure someone would have found it long ago.

    --

    Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
  36. Re:Oil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm propose we mine cubes as they contain twice the pyramid amount.
    I'm calling Gene Ray,the cube specialist.

  37. And dowsers have located... by dpbsmith · · Score: 1

    ...Noah's Ark of the Convenant, perched on the pyramid's side, exactly where Nostradamus said it would be.

    1. Re:And dowsers have located... by 3waygeek · · Score: 1

      No, the Ark is in a US Government warehouse.

    2. Re:And dowsers have located... by iamlucky13 · · Score: 1

      Well shoot...don't the Israelites that Noah had an Ark of the Covenant, too.

      For those who don't know, the Ark of the Convenant was the one built by Moses and the Israelites to hold the 10 Commandments and the priestly vestments. Noah's ark was a 300 cubit long boat that probably smelled really bad at the end of 120 days. I believe geneologies in the Bible suggest this would've been about 1500 years before Moses.

  38. conan by russellh · · Score: 1

    It's gotta be conan's tomb

    --
    must... stay... awake...
    1. Re:conan by SnarfQuest · · Score: 1

      It's gotta be conan's tomb

      Who'd want to build a pyramid like that for a late-night talk-show host?

      --
      Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
    2. Re:conan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Conan O'Brien is dead?

    3. Re:conan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Finns of course!

  39. Wait for the Results .... by minairia · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Lots of people are debunking the discovery because the fellow who might have found the supposed pyramid is a wack-job. I think that the "Chariots of the Gods" stuff can be disposed off without, as it were, throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

    From the pictures on the web-sites linked to, it does seem reasonable to assume that there is something there. Geography is rarely THAT regular and it seems like the people digging have found evidence of blocks, construction, tunnels etc. These might be Roman or Ottoman era remains, or they might not.

    History is long and great periods are undocumented or forgotten. It seems absolutely reasonable that the ruins of great civilization could have gone unnoticed in Bosnia especially as this area has seen almost constant and vicious warfare for most of the modern era. I think it is very unfortunate that this discovery has been tarred with pseudo-science before real results have been developed.

    1. Re:Wait for the Results .... by powerlord · · Score: 1

      I agree that a resonable approach might be to take a look at the actual evidence instead of "tossing out the baby with the bathwater".

      Unfortunately, while we may champion the cause of science, I'm not always sure that most scientists (or at least the vocal ones), are able to look at evidence and question the beliefs they work in.

      I remember seeing an article in Scientific American that explored how the Physics world was mostly static (at the time), and that they expected a major revolution soon to shake things up (similar to volcanic action of 'startling discovery' followed by development and then stagnation/domancy within a scientific field, until the next major discovery).

      If you're interested in a different way of looking at things, I recomend Kicking the Sacred Cow by James P. Hogan. He's an interesting character (check out the Biography section), and the book poses a few interesting questions. Wether you agree or disagree with the ideas he brings forth, he's pretty good about including bibliographic notes so you can do your own "further research".

      I'd recomend it for most Slashdot readers who are curious about a critical view of dogmatic scientific belief, but not of the scientific process itself.

      --
      This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
  40. Re:Oil by MightyMartian · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    There are those who claim the Earth is still full of oil and that we're not running out at all and we'll only continue to discover more in new places for generations to come. I think finding a 772 foot pyramid 33% bigger than the Great Pyramid in Bosnia, in 2006 no less, lends credence to this argument.

    Why? They're two unrelated phenomona, and there's a significantly greater amount of effort being put into finding oil than into new archaeological sites.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  41. Duhhh by donutello · · Score: 2, Funny

    Between 27,000 and 12,000 years ago, the Balkans were locked in the last Glacial maximum, a period of very cold and dry climate with glaciers in some of the mountain ranges. The only occupants were Upper Paleolithic hunters and gatherers who left behind open-air camp sites and traces of occupation in caves. These remains consist of simple stone tools, hearths, and remains of animals and plants that were consumed for food. These people did not have the tools or skills to engage in the construction of monumental architecture.

    That just proves that they were built by a superior alien race. Duhh.

    --
    Mmmm.. Donuts
    1. Re:Duhhh by Gryle · · Score: 1

      Damn Goa'uld, leaving their pyramids everywhere...

      --
      Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
  42. Discredited Pseudo-science by bananaendian · · Score: 2, Informative
    Nothing to see here, move along.

    Seriously, why must we have to read on every populist or pseudo-science story out there? Are we competing with the New / American Scientist and Fortean Times? This guy is a nutter and his 'research' has been widely criticised and discredited.

    Is it too much to ask for the submitters and editors to do a simple Google/Wikipedia search on the articles and maybe include a hint of criticism and doubt when faced with such BS stories.

    --
    www.tribalnetworks.org - helping tribal people around the world to own their own means of high-tech communications
    1. Re:Discredited Pseudo-science by MeatNoodle · · Score: 1
      Is it too much to ask for the submitters and editors to do a simple Google/Wikipedia search on the articles and maybe include a hint of criticism and doubt when faced with such BS stories.
      Well, yes it is too much to ask. Geez, it takes a lot of time to run a web site geared towards science oriented news stories. They don't have time to actually read read them!

      P.
      --
      "That's exactly what I said, only different."
    2. Re:Discredited Pseudo-science by maggot+the+shrew · · Score: 1

      Seriously, why must we have to read on every populist or pseudo-science story out there?

      Knowing the hoaxes and the way the minds that perpetuate them work is at least as important as the genuine discoveries. This discovery will prompt countless hours of discussions on critical thinking, scietific method, and archological methods. It also gives us a great opportunity to throw salt on the tails of the flat earther/atlantis myth types and perhaps shake some reason into them while they are pinned down trying to defend themselves.

      But there is always a simple solution if you are dissatisfied with your slashdot experience. Personally I just skip the articles I don;t find interesting, but if you don't let it hit your posterior on the way out you probably won't even notice it's gone.

  43. The prophesy of AVP realized by teal_ · · Score: 3, Funny

    Our discovery of this pyramid was orchestrated by the predators to lure us there so that when they revive the alien queen and she starts laying her eggs, there would be hosts for the face-huggers to implant their eggs. Once a few aliens are running around, down will come some teenage predators looking to pass their manhood ritual by trying to survive an alien hunt in the pyramid. It's all been foretold here. Beware if the predators lose though, they'll blow the whole place up.

    1. Re:The prophesy of AVP realized by b1t+r0t · · Score: 1
      Our discovery of this pyramid was orchestrated by the predators to lure us there so that when they revive the alien queen and she starts laying her eggs, there would be hosts for the face-huggers to implant their eggs.

      I don't think we need to worry. The latest rumour is that a 1960's era blue British police box has mysteriously been sighted in the area, and also that two British tourists have been seen in the vicinity of said police box.

      That being said, I welcome our new insectoid overlords.

      --

      --
      "Open source is good." - Steve Jobs
      "Open source is evil." - Microsoft
  44. Crazy people are fun by Vinnie_333 · · Score: 3, Informative
    He's a crackpot. Archeology magazine is pretty much ripping him a new one. link

    For an example of his unique theories, here's an excerpt from his book, "The World of the Maya":

    Ordinary watchmakers repair our watches and put them into accordance with Earthly time. It is my theory that the Maya should be considered watchmakers of the cosmos whose mission it is to adjust the Earthly frequency and bring it into accordance with the vibrations of our Sun. Once the Earth begins to vibrate in harmony with the Sun, information will be able to travel in both directions without limitation. And then we will be able to understand why all ancient peoples worshipped the Sun and dedicated their rituals to this. The Sun is the source of all life on this planet and the source of all information and knowledge. ...And with a frequency in harmony, the Earth will, via the Sun, be connected with the center of our Galaxy. These facts become exceptionally important when we realize that we are rapidly approaching December 2012, a date which the Maya have marked as the time of arrival of the Galactic Energy Cluster which will enlighten us.

    --

    "We shall party like the Greeks of old! You know the ones I mean." - HedonismBot
    1. Re:Crazy people are fun by Peyna · · Score: 1

      Amateur archaeologists tend to good and bad in some ways. Sometimes they'll uncover stuff that might not ever have been found otherwise. At the same time, they'll fail to understand the significance of it, completely destroy something more valuable in the process or fail to provide anyway for other archaeologists to review their work by not actually bothering to keep track of what they did and where they found anything.

      --
      What?
    2. Re:Crazy people are fun by An+Onerous+Coward · · Score: 1

      Is it just me, or do people like this seem to use the words "energy" and "vibrations" the way 24 uses the words "firewall" and "encryption"--which is to say, pretty much randomly.

      --

      You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!

    3. Re:Crazy people are fun by Mal-2 · · Score: 1

      Looks like we found Gene Ray's day job.

      Mal-2

      --
      How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
    4. Re:Crazy people are fun by surprise_audit · · Score: 1

      Breaking news! The Mayans failed to account for continental drift! New calculations show that instead of arriving in Dec 2012, the Galactic Energy Cluster actually arrived last week. There are no confirmed sightings, but there's a rumour going around in the US that the Cluster was arrested for no apparent reason and is now being held for questioning in several overseas locations.

  45. Texas by sckeener · · Score: 1

    I am surprised any European believes what a Texan claims as evidence.

    (sometimes I am ashamed to be a Texan and as a sixth generation Texan, that is saying a lot.)

    --
    "Only one thing, is impossible for god: to find any sense in any copyright law on the planet." Mark Twain
  46. This might be for real by unity100 · · Score: 1

    Many people were labeled as 'nutjobs' over the course of history, and now their theories are being taught in college courses. Solid proof is important. The below, which is very easy to verify is solid proof that there is a man-made structure at any place, in archeological respect : "Earlier research on the hill, known as Visocica, found that it has perfectly shaped, 45-degree slopes pointing toward the cardinal points, and a flat top. Under layers of dirt, workers discovered a paved entrance plateau, entrances to tunnels and large stone blocks."

    1. Re:This might be for real by Russ+Steffen · · Score: 1
      But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.

      -- Carl Sagan

    2. Re:This might be for real by unity100 · · Score: 1

      That very quote from sagan does not incorporate the 'timing' of the lauging into the equation, you see.

      We are at the stage that the extreme conservatism of the science crowd is active - the stage that they shun, demean, frown and snob upon something that is just discovered or proposed.

      The laughing is something that should be done in proper time - WHEN and IF something that pops up to be a fraud.

      The science crowd is so that they act against anything that is new, BEFORE and without getting to the field personally to verify the truth or lies. This is because of modern science's scholastic roots dating from the churches of 1200s, when first diciplines of science were incorporated to the establishment.

      Science can not be done without EVER leaving the office in the campus. Every now and then people should take to the field.

      The irony is that, the same people who are shunning and chanting against this new discovery will be the ones that will praise it the most later on, if the discovery is confirmed real.

    3. Re:This might be for real by Elminst · · Score: 1

      So why is none of this "proof" posted or printed anywhere for any one else to see? IANAA, but the images presented on the website don't look "man-made" to me.
      And anyone who has seen erosion tunnels can tell what made that hole in the ground; water. Look at that soil, it's not rock. It's an amalgamation of dirt and small stones. See how the stones have collected near the center depression of the "tunnel"? Go look at a dried up creekbed, you'll see the same thing. If a person built that tunnel, would he leave all those annoying rocks right in the middle where his hands and knees are going to go? Not likely.

      --
      No unauthorized use. Trespassers will be shot. Survivors will be shot again.
    4. Re:This might be for real by unity100 · · Score: 1

      That might, or might not be so. It is very early to tell for sure yet.

      It is on the other hand pretty logical that the party making the discovery would be trying to use the discovery's hype/the publishing rights as far as they could. Which is something that has happened in many earlier discoveries.

      What i am against is that the science crowd is TOO hasty in 'disproving' something that is proposed anew, and with WORDS only. People talking out of their offices in colleges. This is no science.

      Skepticism should not be used as a 'ready made philosphy to reject anything that is anew without making any experiment or confirmation'.

    5. Re:This might be for real by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How, exactly, does one "snob upon" something?

    6. Re:This might be for real by Hognoxious · · Score: 1
      If a person built that tunnel, would he leave all those annoying rocks right in the middle where his hands and knees are going to go? Not likely.
      Since the enlargement of the EU and the consequent wave of bricklayers, plumbers etc. flooding into the UK, I'd say yes, he probably would do that.
      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    7. Re:This might be for real by unity100 · · Score: 1

      It happens with a 'typo' of course.

    8. Re:This might be for real by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Compton in the house! --Rob Maggi

    9. Re:This might be for real by maggot+the+shrew · · Score: 1

      The irony is that, the same people who are shunning and chanting against this new discovery will be the ones that will praise it the most later on, if the discovery is confirmed real.

      In my experience they will be the most intractable. The claims of the hypocrite scientist taking credit for ideas they spurned are just consolation stories for people with unproven or just bad ideas. People who thought Jackson Pollock's work was shit still think it's shit. Paul of Tarsus died a long time ago, and he was probably just boasting his radical conversion to make it easier on gentiles.

      That said the older science crowd has *always* been conservative. The younger has *alwasy* been ready to carry new ideas forward. However, this mountain is not science, nor is there anything new about claiming to see Atlantean relics in natural phenominon. The only thing different here is that the claimant actually has the money to put his claim ot the test.

  47. They mention the controversy elsewhere on MSNBC by paladinwannabe2 · · Score: 4, Interesting
    On this page they mention the controversies surrounding the 'pyramid'.

    April 28, 2006 | 11:40 p.m. ET
    Pyramid problems: Is the tale of the Bosnian pyramid too good to be true? Last week, The Associated Press reported evidence that a 2,120-foot-high hill in central Bosnia-Herzegovina might actually be a buried step pyramid. This week, Archaeology magazine questioned the scientific soundness of the operation and its leader, amateur archaeologist Semir Osmanagic. Archaeology quotes experts who say there's little more to the project than "sensationalism and grandstanding," and worry that it may be damaging legitimate artifacts from medieval, Roman and Illyrian times.

    There's certainly a good deal of kookiness surrounding the story. Osmanagic, for example, links his pyramid theories to Atlantis and the Maya, while an online petition aimed at stopping Osmanagic's dig refers darkly to U.S.-orchestrated conspiracy theories. Stay tuned for further twists in the tale, and feel free to send in your comments after you read Archaeology magazine's report.

    --
    You are reading a copy of my copyrighted post.
    1. Re:They mention the controversy elsewhere on MSNBC by kaoshin · · Score: 1

      The only thing I dont understand out of all this discussion is why are others suggesting that other artifiacts may be damaged? Anything here to warrant such a statement? From the stories about his work, it sounds like hes been very careful so far. Is that just hogwash statements from scientific snobs?

    2. Re:They mention the controversy elsewhere on MSNBC by timjdot · · Score: 1

      If it was a real pyramid he would have investors to finance ripping off any good stuff before the announcement to the world; at least that was the case with Egyptian and South American pyramids. I remember visiting "Chicken Pizza"....not much left. I also saw some pyramid hills along I-10 and even along the I-405. ( :0] better shut up and start digging!)

      --
      Expect Freedom.
  48. Cautiously optimistic by Scrameustache · · Score: 3, Insightful

    http://www.archaeology.org/online/features/osmanag ic/
    "Too bad that it is not a credible story at all. In fact, it is impossible. Who is the "archaeologist" who has taken the media for a ride?


    They said the same thing about the guy that found the lost city of Troy.

    Let the nutjob dig up the site some, then we'll know. I'm really not happy about "real" archeologist simply declaring that something is impossible.

    The train was declared impossible.
    Meteorites were declared impossible.
    Heliocentrism was declared impossible.
    Heavier than air aeronefs were declared impossible.

    The experts keep using that word, I do not think it means what they think it means.

    --

    You can't take the sky from me...

    1. Re:Cautiously optimistic by Maru+Dubshinki · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I like how you take the skepticism of a few experts, posit that all experts believed that, and promptly conclude that all experts cannot be trusted on anything.

      I would also like to conclude with a quote from the archaeologist concerned, from http://www.archaeology.org/online/features/osmanag ic/index.html:

      "Ordinary watchmakers repair our watches and put them into accordance with Earthly time. It is my theory that the Maya should be considered watchmakers of the cosmos whose mission it is to adjust the Earthly frequency and bring it into accordance with the vibrations of our Sun. Once the Earth begins to vibrate in harmony with the Sun, information will be able to travel in both directions without limitation. And then we will be able to understand why all ancient peoples worshipped the Sun and dedicated their rituals to this. The Sun is the source of all life on this planet and the source of all information and knowledge. ...And with a frequency in harmony, the Earth will, via the Sun, be connected with the center of our Galaxy. These facts become exceptionally important when we realize that we are rapidly approaching December 2012, a date which the Maya have marked as the time of arrival of the Galactic Energy Cluster which will enlighten us."

      --
      Enquiring minds want to know!
    2. Re:Cautiously optimistic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      They said the same thing about the guy that found the lost city of Troy.

      It's not the gospel that Heinrich Schliemann's Hissarlik is Troy. Here's some interesting food for thought: Troy in England

    3. Re:Cautiously optimistic by Frozen+Void · · Score: 1

      How can non-experts be right?
      Only experts can challenge experts!
      (thats what i get thrown at in forum debates,heh)
      Its just fails to acknowledge people who
      determine who is expert or who is not have biases and lack full understanding on scope of knowledge non-experts have.

    4. Re:Cautiously optimistic by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

      I like how you take the skepticism of a few experts, posit that all experts believed that, and promptly conclude that all experts cannot be trusted on anything.

      I'm glad you like that. It's nowhere near what I said, but you like what you hallucinate, that's nice.

      "Impossible", I don't trust impossible.

      I would also like to conclude with a quote

      Yeah? He's an Age of Aquarius nutjob, I know.
      That doesn't make the existance of a pyramid impossible. It makes that guy highly untrustworthy, but sometimes the nutjobs get something right.

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

  49. Re:Oil by eightheadsofdoom · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Where did the poster imply any surprise?

  50. Re:Oil by Douglas+Simmons · · Score: 1

    On the other hand, you have different fingers.
    -- Stephen Wright

  51. Not just old, but WRONG! by hesiod · · Score: 1

    This "Pyramid" theory was announced more than a week ago, and has since been debunked. Way to go.

  52. The reason it stayed hidden so long? by mmell · · Score: 2, Funny
    It is made of the same type of rock and soil as the surrounding countryside, giving the appearance of simply being more earth.

    It's only after they excavate the soil and rock from around it that the true shape and size of the pyramid will be apparent!

  53. Center of the earth by hackwrench · · Score: 1

    The center of the earth is thought to be a core of solid iron.

    1. Re:Center of the earth by Profane+MuthaFucka · · Score: 1

      That's been updated, as new information indicates the core is solid iron in a liquid state. Otherwise known as liquid iron.

      --
      Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
    2. Re:Center of the earth by SpaceLemur · · Score: 4, Funny

      It could exhibit plasticity lying somewhere between solid and liquid, like Silly Putty, which acts like a highly viscous fluid in a relaxed state, but solid properties under stress.

      But the point is moot anyway. The Earth's core is made of creamy nougat.

    3. Re:Center of the earth by 'nother+poster · · Score: 1

      I thought it was "fluid iron core". Hmm. A quick google has both terms being used even though thay don't mean quite the same thing.

    4. Re:Center of the earth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The core is divided into two parts, the outer core which is liquid, and the inner core which is solid. If you are curious why this is, you need to study the phase diagram (P-T graph) of iron.

      How is this known?

      S waves do not travel through liquids.

    5. Re:Center of the earth by SEWilco · · Score: 1

      Silly Iron?

    6. Re:Center of the earth by phiber9 · · Score: 1

      solid iron or superheated :-) liquid iron ?

    7. Re:Center of the earth by hackwrench · · Score: 1

      The search http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22core+of+mo lten+iron turned up:
      http://www.globalchange.umich.edu/globalchange1/cu rrent/lectures/first_billion_years/first_billion_y ears.html
      which states:
      The Earth's core is composed of two portions, an inner core of solid iron and an outer core of molten iron.
      Seems that the responses seem to only know the second half of that.

    8. Re:Center of the earth by phiber9 · · Score: 1

      Seems that the responses seem to only know the second half of that. Your effort to educate me is astonishing, not to mention replying to a totaly off-topic post.... which brings me to the conclusion that you're one of the MOLE PEOPLE. :-)

    9. Re:Center of the earth by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      You mean damp corn starch?

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
  54. Semir Osmanagic = SCAMMER AS I GO IN by dpbsmith · · Score: 1

    Running "Semir Osmanagic" through the Internet Anagram Server can be time well spent.

    1. Re:Semir Osmanagic = SCAMMER AS I GO IN by tehpwn · · Score: 0

      A SCAM MINE, GO SIR!

  55. Leaps of faith by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I sorta like those Discovery and National Geographic programs that explore things from the past. Like the recent Judas Gospel. Fascinating stuff.

    What I however find most amusing are on the one hand the leaps of faith were assumption after assumption is made only to then conclude the end result to be fact. In this case it is assumed the document was found in a certain part of egypt. They then use the fact that the document is in a certain style/era to then claim that because they found another cave with artifacts in that style/era that it could very well be the cave.

    WTF? First off, just because the document was from an era/style DOES NOT mean it has to have spend all the time in a cave of the era/style. It could have been picked up before an buried somewhere else. Second of all just because some cave contains stuff from the same era that does not mean that the object must have come from that region.

    Oh look. A pair of mickey mouse ears. They must have come from florida!

    Eh? No? They could have come not only from one of the other disney parks but they in fact never have come from a park at all.

    Then there is the other side. The entire program is about how there are more gospels then there are known today. It is shown that a mere human decided wich gospels would be included in the new testament.

    It is even clearly shown that very simple political and marketting reasons lay behind the choice.

    So then what do people think about the Judas gospel. Well it is funny but the "real" gospels are somehow still more real and have something holy about them.

    WTF? Just goes to show that facts and believes have nothing to do with each other.

    But I suppose that if you have to answer the question why and how did the egyptians build the pyramids the answer "bored, lots and lots of people with no tv to watch" just doesn't cut it. Better to get some fantasy going. Star people! Yeah, never mind that amazing as the pyramids are they seem kinda primitive for a star faring civilization.

    I just go with the old prove for the fact that we have been visited by intelligent aliens in the past. They ain't been back. Smart move.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:Leaps of faith by Jim_Callahan · · Score: 1

      "So then what do people think about the Judas gospel. Well it is funny but the 'real' gospels are somehow still more real and have something holy about them. WTF? Just goes to show that facts and believes have nothing to do with each other."

      New gospels must be approved by the college of cardinals and, ultimately, the pope to be legitimate Christian scripture. The real gospels are more holy because they have been thus certified by the official arbiter of such descisions. Things that aren't so approved aren't scripture, and things that are considered for approval and rejected are called "Apocrypha" and also aren't scripture, i.e. they aren't holy.

      This holds for most of the offshoots of the church as well, just the appoved/unapproved scriptures were frozen at the time whatever branch broke off from the main body of the religion. The exception are the fringe cults, like Mormonism (the largest one) which either formed for the specific purpose of including one of the Apocrypha in their scripture (the book of Mormon, in my example) or simply lost all structure upon their break-off.

      This may, of course, seem rather arbitrary to you, but remember that root Christianity was based on solid practicality: that was part of its appeal(they got a bit crazy later and some of the founders were quite bats, but that's another story). Having the pope in charge of the official canon was neither hypocritical nor a poor idea, but a simple precaution against everyone and their little dog Toto forging their own documents and attempting to fragment the church and steal part of its power base. (And don't think that they wouldn't, manufacture of 'artifacts' was one of the biggest industries through the middle ages and the end of the roman era.) Papal control prevents that kind of hijacking and, perhaps ironically, served to shield the church from a bunch of fanatics and lunatics leading people astray.

      Between that and the "mere human" comment (he's not a mere human, he's the mere human explicitly put in charge of the canon by the basic tenets of the religion), I am forced to conclude that you've never even met a christian, and must have watched the programme in esperanto or something to prevent you from picking up this kind of basic knowledge from context. Please, at least know something about what you're talking about before posting on public forums. Even though that involves going against the grain.

      --
      ...it's really a sad day for America when we require a goddamn ACT OF CONGRESS to make our DVD players work properly. ~
    2. Re:Leaps of faith by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think I speak for a great many people when I say, "What?"

    3. Re:Leaps of faith by 10Ghz · · Score: 1

      "New gospels must be approved by the college of cardinals and, ultimately, the pope to be legitimate Christian scripture. The real gospels are more holy because they have been thus certified by the official arbiter of such descisions. Things that aren't so approved aren't scripture, and things that are considered for approval and rejected are called "Apocrypha" and also aren't scripture, i.e. they aren't holy"

      Cardinals and Pope? Since when did Catholics have the authority to decide what are "Christian" scriptures and what are not? There are other Christians besides Catholics you know. And before you give me that "Catholic Church is the direct descendant of the original Church"-argument... Well, I would place that title upon the Eastern Orthodox Church, not Western Catholic Church.

      And why do I get the feeling that those Cardinals and the Pope would select texts that they would personally agree with and which supported the Catholic Church and it's teachings? Nothing is free from politics and personal bias. Espesially religion.

      Speaking as a non-Christian here.

      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
  56. Re:Oil by Bloke+down+the+pub · · Score: 1
    a lot more funds are spent toward oil-finding than pyramids-finding.
    I'm wondering if it's the one that went into hiding after it wrecked the Albanian economy?
    --
    It's true I tell you, feller at work's next door neighbour read it in the paper.
  57. Duh. by Shifty+Jim · · Score: 0

    ...the theory that ancient civilizations are linked by a possible master race.

    Stargates.

    This has all already be explained by MacGyver, what more do you need?

    --
    "To surrender to ignorance and call it God has always been premature, and it remains premature today." -Isaac Asimov
  58. 2,000 year old European pyramid by permaculture · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Yo! I found a European pyramid!

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/stefz/115233678/

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyramid_of_Cestius

    As the photographer says:
    "What makes my head spin is the thought that this was built 2,000 years ago, as a copy of the Great Pyramid which was built 2,500 years before that"

    --
    Environmentalism is the new Victorianism. Everyone ties on a green corset and pretends we're virtuous.
    1. Re:2,000 year old European pyramid by Basehart · · Score: 4, Funny

      "Yo! I found a European pyramid!"

      Fuck that one, what about that giant pyramid right in the middle of Las Vegas?

      Photo

      People sleep, work and play in it without even realizing the historical and architectural significance even though it's RIGHT ON THEIR DOORSTEP!!

    2. Re:2,000 year old European pyramid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For two reasons. It's a cheap copy - if the casino cost a few trillion dollars to build it would be much more noteworthy. Sure it's big, but these days anyone with a hundred mill can build something like it... Also, the pyramids are interesting because of a glimpse into another culture, the casino is a sleezy glimpse into our own and thus much less new and exciting. If it was standing in 1000 years, it would be much more interesting.

    3. Re:2,000 year old European pyramid by twiddlingbits · · Score: 1

      which is an obvious copy of the one next to the Mississippi River in Memphis, TN! The one in Memphis is the tomb of the Great Pharoh of the Rock n Rock period who was named Elvis. Vegas rips off everyone.

    4. Re:2,000 year old European pyramid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Americans are always ignorant of their cultural heritage!

    5. Re:2,000 year old European pyramid by tonigonenstein · · Score: 1
      --
      The sooner you fall behind, the more time you have to catch up.
    6. Re:2,000 year old European pyramid by de+Siem · · Score: 1
      --
      Beating up people in little rooms, if you do it for a good reason you do it for a bad one.
  59. the anwser ! by Ploum · · Score: 1

    Read on http://www.archaeology.org/online/features/osmanag ic/ :

    "In the sacred Mayan book, the Popul Vuh, there are descriptions of cosmic travelers, the use of the compass, the fact that the Earth is round, and **knowledge of the secrets of the universe**...."

    They can count to 42 ! OMG PYRAMIDS !

  60. Who's really behind this... by gregarican · · Score: 1

    Must be John Dvorak I would be willing to bet.

  61. Not Slaves by neoshroom · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Actually, a lot of recent evidence suggests that the pyramids where not built by slaves, but rather by paid workers. See below:

    http://www.harvard-magazine.com/on-line/070391.htm l

    __
    Elephant Essays - Custom Research Papers

    --
    Big apple, new Yorik, undig it, something's unrotting in Edenmark.
    1. Re:Not Slaves by Dunkirk · · Score: 2, Informative

      Thanks for pointing to the article. I had heard this before, but had not read about it in depth.

      What's interesting to me, as a Bible-believing Christian, is how one academic can make his career on a hypothesis such as this. He's basically spent his entire life in the pursuit of undermining the thought that "slaves" built the pyramids. In support of this, the only two pieces of evidence that I can read from this article are 1) that some graffiti inside the pyramids referred to, perhaps, "holy" people that led the efforts, and 2) that the camp that housed the what-seemed-to-be-skilled laborers were well fed.

      Now, I understand his point about a civilization who wanted to honor their leader -- who, in terms of their religion -- represented an earthly vessel for the highest god of their pantheon. To me, that makes a lot of sense, and the comparison to an Amish barn raising seems apt, in that context.

      But I still don't see how someone can look at just the 2 previously mentioned pieces of evidence, and come away with a conclusion that, no, contrary to thousands of years of common understanding, slaves had nothing to do with the construction of not just the pyramids, but most of the massive structures of Egypt in general. (I love how the article leads with how this idea is "rooted firmly in the popular imagination." No editoral lede there, huh?)

      It would seem much MORE likely to look at this article and come away with a conclusion that the teams LEADING the effort -- who would naturally have been Egyptian -- would have made their mark on the buildings, and that the SKILLED laborers, whether they were Egyptian or Semitic, would have been well taken care of. They would HAVE to have eaten well to do good work. As far as the guy's initial supposition goes, he still hasn't figured out where "all the people" lived. He's still looking for where the rest of them lived. How can you not conclude that they must have lived in non-permanent structures, in what must have been sub-optimal conditions for living in a desert? Again, the actual evidence being uncovered (or NOT uncovered, as the case may be) points to slave labor factoring prominently into the equation.

      The reason I thought that it was really interesting to see an actual article on this was because it's rumbled around in the back of my mind for awhile, and I had forgotten it. The way it came up years ago, i.e. the way it was reported, I would have thought that they found the grave yard where they buried the workers, did some DNA testing, and PROVED their case. Not so. Now I've looked for myself, and, if this is the best evidence, then color me even more convinced of the story, uh, just about everyone has believed for, uh, just about all of recorded history.

      I think it's just another case of someone who wanted funding and a name, and came up with a shocking supposition to get them. Now he seems to be justifying the expense and the effort on the thinnest of evidence.

      --
      Acts 17:28, "For in Him we live, and move, and have our being."
    2. Re:Not Slaves by belmolis · · Score: 1

      A fact that adds plausibility to the use of non-slave labor to build the pyramids is that we know, from extensive written records, that the Egyptians had a form of corvee ("labor tax") in which people were conscripted for tasks such as dredging canals. This is a fairly common feature of urbanized agricultural societies: the Inca empire did it too, for example, and it survives even in the United States in the form of military conscription.

    3. Re:Not Slaves by bigpat · · Score: 1

      Actually, a lot of recent evidence suggests that the pyramids where not built by slaves, but rather by paid workers.

      Yes, they would be considered "paid workers" by modern standards.

    4. Re:Not Slaves by deacon · · Score: 2, Funny

      They must have called them grad students.

    5. Re:Not Slaves by cnoocy · · Score: 1

      IIRC, this comes up in the DVD commentary for Fellowship Of The Ring. It's on the actor's commentary, during the credits.

      --
      This sig is not the Zahir. Lucky for you.
    6. Re:Not Slaves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Offtopic: that's one of the best sigs I've ever come across in nearly seven years of slashdot surfing.

    7. Re:Not Slaves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      um, yeah, but was that union wage or undocumented immigrant wage?

    8. Re:Not Slaves by Frozen+Void · · Score: 1

      Just for your information,You Can Interpret historical evidence just like bible, no one stops you.
      There is a difference though:
      History is established by scientific research.
      If you want to undermine some deeply held stereotype,theory or interpretation
      you need to present the evidence in your
      Point of View and explain logically how
      A leads to B and Causes C(or any inference chain) without using Your Point of View as Evidence or Inference tool.If the evidence is flawed it does
        nothing to credibility of logic that being used(except if evidence relies on logic fallacies).
      Is the work Without motive and determination? Hardly
      anything can be said to be neutrally motivated.
      (in this case,removing the weight of stigma of having Egypt as slave society and Evil Empire and portraying it in more positive light.)

    9. Re:Not Slaves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, a lot of recent evidence suggests that the pyramids where not built by slaves, but rather by paid workers.

      Actually, they were H-1Bs.

      In all seriousness, this "recent evidence" is little more than a dishonest attempt overly constrain the definition of "slave" such that the workers' involuntary servitude doesn't count as slavery. Even the article you cite states:

            "Lehner currently thinks Egyptian society was organized somewhat like a feudal system, in which almost everyone owed service to a lord."

      News flash. That is slavery.

    10. Re:Not Slaves by cnoocy · · Score: 1

      Thanks!

      --
      This sig is not the Zahir. Lucky for you.
  62. The watchmaker theory... by hackwrench · · Score: 1

    Similar to my own, except for two things. The Mayan aren't watchmakers so much as watches, and we are all watches, although clocking devices would be a better term.

  63. Hello? 2006 calling.... by argStyopa · · Score: 1

    As just another symptom of how lax and sloppy this reporting is, IF this weren't a complete load of bollocks, wouldn't it have been nice if the the internet-posted story would offer WEB LINKS (or at least long/lat) of the coordinates, so those of us with google earth (ie everyone) could look at the satellite pics for ourselves?

    No, of course they aren't available.

    More interesting would be a psychological paper on the strange compulsion of the Slavic peoples to keep trying to 'validate' themselves, frequently pointing to dubious claims of some superlative or another: the first, the last, the biggest, the tallest, the oldest, etc. etc. They have plenty to be proud about, but it never seems...enough?

    --
    -Styopa
  64. Maps by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    From what i saw, a topo map would just show a big bump.. However an IR map should have stood out like a sore thumb i bet.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  65. God dammit by GuloGulo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "That's all very well, but that Archaeology article spends all it's time slamming the person, not discussing his claims"

    No, there's an entire paragraph on why it's impossible.

    BUT THAT WASN'T THE POINT OF THAT ARTICLE.

    The point, which you obviously missed, was that in the search for new and amazing discoveries, the media

    "ignores the truth and embraces the fantastic."

    This article was an indictment of the media's behavior, not an ad hominem attack on the guy and his results.

    "The pyramid announcement does seem very premature and is probably something else (or a fake) but I'd like to see some discussion of what he's found, which is not in that article."

    IT WASN'T SUPPOSED TO BE. The article, AGAIN, was a critique of the behavior of the media, and their willingness to embrace "fringe" characters in an effort to report dramatic findings.

    You completely missed the point, and yet SOMEHOW got modded up.

    --
    "The government grants you rights, not the other way around."-- beav007. Yes, these people really exist...
    1. Re:God dammit by AaronLawrence · · Score: 1

      We're not talking about the article though, we are talking about the possibility of a pyramid. Someone used the article in archaelogy saying it totally disproves the possibility of a pyramid, and it does nothing of the sort.

      Why so frustrated? Being modded up isn't the blessing of the gods, just some other person reading slashdot.

      --
      For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert. - Arthur C. Clarke
    2. Re:God dammit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Focus on the subject and leave moderation to karma whores.
      Whining about bad/good karma causes (by Law of Karma) new karma.Usually Of Offtopic variety.Perceived Importance of Karma drags one back into the Circle of Reply.
      Karma doesn't have a value its an opinion,a impermanent and fluid thought.

  66. Pictures by Rxke · · Score: 1

    he put up pictures himself: http://www.bosnianpyramid.com/Archive_files/240420 06.html

    Any archeologist or rather: geologist has anything to say about this: does this look artificial or natural (at least one of the pics looks *really* natural in origin in my untrained eyes)

    1. Re:Pictures by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What kills me is not only is this guy a certified nutjob, but his choice in wardrobe makes him look a little too much like another archaeologist of fame. All he's missing is a bullwhip:

      Semir Osmanagic:
      http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12388657/displaymode/1 168/rstry/12402157/rpage/1/

      Dr. Jones:
      http://home.kendra.com/urania/stargate_Sg1/fanfict ion/trinityxiii_indy.jpg

      I think we can all expect to hear about proof of mummified nazis inside this "pyramid" any day now.

    2. Re:Pictures by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is interesting. In the pictures on their website, under the heading Work in Tunnel, there appears to be Viking runes carved into the rock. Maybe it's a Viking temple!

  67. Maybe.... by puppetman · · Score: 1

    May 1st is the Bosnian April Fools Day?

    1. Re:Maybe.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it's not.

  68. Satellite Picutures, and and interview with lead by jakupovic · · Score: 4, Informative

    I have been following this story since October of last year, there has been a lot of information published and a lot of time spent on either side of 'piramidasa' and 'antipiramidasa' arguing whether the former pyramid believers and later pyramid non-believers are right. Here is a link to a satellite analysis of the region http://piramidasunca.ba/ajaxfiles/epodmeni/eizvjes taji/Geophysical%20Analysis.pdf

    At http://www.astreamagazine.com/osmanagic_serie_radi o_frm.html there are links to an interview with astraea magazine, good listen a direct link at http://www.astreamagazine.com/interviews/osmanagic /osmanagic_high.m3u

    At http://www.piramidasunca.ba/ you can find the official foundation site and more pictures, click on the British flag for english version :).

    Also googling "sarajevo-x piramida" will get you a link to a forum that's been going since last year, with posts mainly in Bosnian with some in English.

    --
    You always point your finger at the bad guy, but what if the bad guy points his finger at you?
  69. Maybe it was meant to be 45 by G3ckoG33k · · Score: 1

    Still, the Gaza pyramids are way off the equator. Perhaps the Bosnian were meant to be located at 45N.

    1. Re:Maybe it was meant to be 45 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      There are Pyramids in Gaza? Quick! Tell the Palestinians they have a great tourism opportunity!

    2. Re:Maybe it was meant to be 45 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn you, *I* wanted to make that joke! :(

    3. Re:Maybe it was meant to be 45 by Sique · · Score: 2, Informative

      You can cut a sphere in half on EACH great circle. It doesn't have to be parallel to the equator or to a longitude. If the line Surface-Center is in the plane of the cut, it is surely cutting the sphere into two halves. The line Bosnia-Egypt then only fixes the acutal position of the plane.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    4. Re:Maybe it was meant to be 45 by IamZed · · Score: 1

      The Gaza Strip is a really crappy titty bar.

  70. Oil and Archaeology by zogger · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Both type efforts (archaeology and minerals/oil location) are benefiting from satellite remote sensing. We just recently had the lost city in guatemala found, the huge impact craters in the sahara, etc from satellite analysis (radar/photo). The impact craters were also helped by web based universal access, google maps helped amateur researchers there.

    As to the bosnian pyramid, it has long been known/suspected there in the locals handed down oral histories. It was more accurately RE-discovered. Just like when western scientists "discover" some new animal the locals have been *eating* forever and have names for.

    There's another interesting development off the coast of cuba, an alleged underwater city.

    http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/05/05 28_020528_sunkencities.html

    similar off of japan

    http://www.abc.net.au/foreign/content/2004/s110720 3.htm

    (I am sure there are better links for those stories)

    It's an interesting topic. A lot of oral and written tradition from around the world all relate a period in history with a "great flood". It will be nice if modern tech helps us discover what really happened and add to our knowledge of the real "olden days", whichever way it shakes out.

    1. Re:Oil and Archaeology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would probably be productive to figure out where the coastlines were during the ice age and search for cities and temple complexes at that depth in the ocean.

      Modern humans build their biggest cities on the shores of the seas, why wouldn't anciant people do the same?

      Supposedly the baltic basin was a massive valley that flooded in a few weeks time about 7000 years ago; maybe the carribean experienced the same sort of deluge at the end of the last ice age?

      I bet the shorelines of ice age earth have many interesting settlements to explore!

    2. Re:Oil and Archaeology by Bloke+down+the+pub · · Score: 1
      Just like when western scientists "discover" some new animal the locals have been *eating* forever and have names for.
      Discover? I think you mean "patent".
      --
      It's true I tell you, feller at work's next door neighbour read it in the paper.
    3. Re:Oil and Archaeology by salec · · Score: 1

      You are of ccourse right about shorelines, but this mention of neolithic Baltic valley just made me think of something else:
      Ancient humans built their largest cities on the banks of great rivers in the middle of great aluvial plains. If Baltic was a valley, supposed cities would be found on along former river routes. Same goes for North Sea and definitely for part of Atlantic European continental shelf between England, France and Ireland...

      In the past, that part of the world, due to mild climate (Golf stream?), richness in freshwater (Thames, Rhein, Sena, all merging in
      one huge river flowing SW along what is now known as English channel/Lamanche...) may had been agricultural hotspot and a site of one of the great ancient civilisations similar to ones we discovered in other great river valleys throughout the world. I guess they may had invested a lot in building irigation system and major cities, and probably fought the rising of the sea and loss of shoreline land, ... untill they were overwhelmed and disaster claimed their whole world in one single event (i.e. a cyclone storm, or an earthquake shattering down most dykes and sea walls).

      Perhaps that would be the basis of Plato's Atlantis legend... (as well as some medieval celtic legend of city of Ys) it is near the Mediteranian, it is beyond (from Greeks' perspective) Pillars of Hercules (Gibraltar), it had lot of good, arable land to support reach and mighty state, it must had ended catastrophically (because of trying to fight inevitable loss) and most importantly, for our (archeological) purposes, if it is there, it must have been burried very deep under thick layer of mud deposits by now, which is good explanation for why it evaded all our efforts to locate it, even using sofisticated equipment.

      I wonder if that part of continental shelf was ever subject to geophonic searching for oil deposits? It seems like the only way to "peek" thru the aluvial deposits on the sea bottom. If this research was conducted, is there a clue hidden in raw data?

  71. Be very, very careful... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    ... when digging up ancient stuff in those southeastern regions of Europe. Especially just a little ways further northeast of the alleged pyramid, up in the valleys of the Transylvanian Alps.

  72. interesting picture by Ploum · · Score: 1

    http://www.bosnianpyramid.com/index_files/image490 1.jpg is interesting.

    You can see that only two faces of the pyramid remain. But I must admit that by seeing this map, I would think "it looks like a pyramid with a collapsed part".

    We also learn that the pyramid is 300m high ! This is huge !

    Pictures of the stairs are also astonishing.
    http://www.bosnianpyramid.com/Archive_files/240420 06.html

    Now, the strange things are :
    - not a lot of pictures. The most used picture is a 1950's postal card. Why ? (it could be simply bad communication but we always have to be careful with pictures, remember the martian face).
    - If the pictures are real, it must be really easy to have a proof. If the stair is a real stair, well, there is few doubt about it.

    Both part being equals, the probable story is that we have a semi-natural pyramid. A natural hill with some human constructions to make it more "pyramid".

    But, in this case :

    - Why nobody ever saw it ? Why is there no legend ? No other trace of a civilization ? No artifact ?
    - How can the global form of the pyramid in a such good state after years of erosion ? This is very strange that the good sides are on the river side ! 10000 years ago, the river was probably higher. In fact, the pyramid itself was probably done by the river.

    The weakest point is certainly this river. Without the river, I would have say "why not ?". But if you look at the map, you will immediatly understand that "I looks like but it's not possible".

  73. SlashDot's "Tagging Beta" Sucks Ass by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The three terms on the pyramid story are:
    fake, bullshit, hoax

    Nice job.

    1. Re:SlashDot's "Tagging Beta" Sucks Ass by Thumpnugget · · Score: 1

      Maybe they meant 'tagging' as in 'graffiti'?

      --
      Free yourself. Everything else will follow.
    2. Re:SlashDot's "Tagging Beta" Sucks Ass by ampathee · · Score: 1

      Seems like the system works to me.

  74. Re:Hello? 2006 calling.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ummm, sorry but Bosnians are hardly Slavic per se, except for their language and the interracial marriages between them and Serbs and Croats. They're not Orthodox either, and most people postulate about their Illyrian ancestry.

  75. Why compare to Egypt pyramids? by Peyna · · Score: 2, Informative

    Why do they always compare to the pyramids in Egypt? While they might be the most famous, they're not the largest. Cholula, Teotihuacan and Cahokia are much larger in size and volume than anything in Egypt.

    Do people just have a hard time admitting that the people who inhabited the Americas before Europeans showed up might have actually not be inferior? Perhaps it's just more comfortable to imagine them as haphazard small groups of primitive people running around in the forest than to realize they had just as advanced civilizations and cities as Europe, but mostly difference in appearance. And that their technology, while it took a different path, wasn't necessarily "inferior" at all? /rant

    --
    What?
    1. Re:Why compare to Egypt pyramids? by Danny+Rathjens · · Score: 1

      Because the Egyptian pyramids were famous for thousands of years before the pyramids in the Americas were discovered. Egypt is what comes to mind in most peoples heads when you say pyramids; one of the Seven Wonders of the World, and all. Do not attribute to malice what can be attributed to ignorance. :)

    2. Re:Why compare to Egypt pyramids? by glwtta · · Score: 1
      Could it be that it's because the Egyptian ones are better known? If they say it's 1/3 larger than the Khufu pyramid, I (and most other people) have a rough idea of the size; saying it's as big as the Great Pyramid of Cholula tells me nothing until I look it up.

      But no, you are right, it must be racism.

      Incidentally, the pyramids you listed are larger by volume, impressive enough to be sure, but height tends to be a more impressive feat for huge stone structures.

      --
      sic transit gloria mundi
    3. Re:Why compare to Egypt pyramids? by Frozen+Void · · Score: 1

      Egyptian civilization is better studied a specific Discipline of Egyptology is dealing with it.
      there is active research on south american civilizations today,though less organized.

      It is to be notable that
      Kofun structures(Tombs of Japanese Emperors and aristocrats of 3-5th centuries) are also large(by volume) and have little publicity/research in comparison.

      Some structures are just popular and egyptian pyramids are sort of common
      point on which you can compare.
      They (been known to)Existed for enough time(since about 27Th century BC) to be
      a common point of reference.Information requires time to become significant,even in internet age(getting faster recognition though).

      As for racism/superiority/etc its just
      not releveant today,like that Egypt wasn't a
      primitive slave state based on agriculture and polytheism(which it seems roughly,in modern times.).
      Proper Research isn't based on prejudiced conceptions.The idea that people
      thousands of years ago might be inferior/primitive and undeserving of attention by science is wrong and primitive itself.Its like deliberately ignoring the world features(its isn't wrong by itself,such things are common in daily life(such as who reads to
      read the Egyptian papyri today),but for archeology/history is mistake of core principles).

      We need history whatever the subject is,
      more information helps to see the complete picture in greater detail.
      A few articles on archeology are always
      in demand on slashdot.

    4. Re:Why compare to Egypt pyramids? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      good lord, do you spasm randomly and hit the enter key or something?

    5. Re:Why compare to Egypt pyramids? by Peyna · · Score: 1

      But no, you are right, it must be racism.

      Please note that my comments were mostly facetious; I know why the pyramids in Egypt are referred more often than others. Perhaps a few slashdotters learned something by my reference some of the lesser known ones (at least among the general public). My comments had nothing to do with racism, and maybe more to do with the fact that only that up until very recently schools pretty much taught kids that American Indians were no more than nomads with no concept of civiliations and that might be a good reason why such accomplishments of their as building very large pyramids are lesser known.

      --
      What?
    6. Re:Why compare to Egypt pyramids? by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      Probably because the Egyptian pyramids are about 5000 years old, whereas the pyramids in the Americas are less than half that -- some as recent as 400-500 years old. That there is much more known about the ancient Egyptians via a fully developed written language helps too. Regardless, any comparison is quantitative, not qualitative, and it's not worth worrying about people who believe otherwise.

  76. Which is more likely... by psulonen · · Score: 1

    (a) that the folks who put the Hanging Gardens of Semiramis on the must-see list of the ancient world somehow missed a pyramid bigger than Cheops's on their doorstep,
    (b) that a previously unknown pyramid-building civilization existed in European prehistory,
    (c) that a nationalistic and highly imaginative Bosnian-American amateur archaeologist got a bit carried away?

    Don't get me wrong, I'd absolutely love (b), especially as I just finished reading the Conan omnibus and all, but my money is on (c).

  77. Re:Oil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Actually, someone did find one bigger than the Great Pyramid long ago; in Mexico.

  78. Re:Oil by PhakeDC · · Score: 1

    Would you care to elaborate that POV? I'm Bosnian myself, and interested in knowing.

  79. Bah! by Otto · · Score: 3, Funny

    It's not solid iron. The Mole People couldn't live in solid iron. It's gaseous iron, at best.

    --
    - Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set him on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
    1. Re:Bah! by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 3, Funny

      You mean there is a race of humanoids made entirely out of a traditional Mexican sauce?

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    2. Re:Bah! by Happy+Monkey · · Score: 2, Funny

      No, they're perfectly ordinary people. It's just that there are 6.0221415 × 10^23 of them.

      --
      __
      Do ya feel happy-go-lucky, punk?
  80. Excellent Link from Parent by iamlucky13 · · Score: 1

    That was one of the best-written and most informative articles I've ever clicked to off of a slashdot discussion. A very good case study of the challenges and rewards of archeology.

    It sounds like, although the labor force might not have been slaves, the system would have been somewhat similar to feudalism. Also, the article does not discuss the possibility of a hybrid work force of slaves and free workers, which I suspect would be just as possible.

    Harvard's George Reisner found workers' graffiti early in the twentieth century that revealed that the pyramid builders were organized into labor units with names like "Friends of Khufu" or "Drunkards of Menkaure."

    That interpretation of the names (I presume they would've been heiroglyphic) is pretty funny. They sound like modern band or football (soccer) team names.

  81. Here's how it's done without excavation... by Khyber · · Score: 1

    You take a large slug of metal, put a massive gunpowder charge behind it, fire the slug into the ground, and you read the "images" produced from sonar/whatever similar technology there is. Didn't you watch Jurassic Park? :)

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  82. MSNBC did the same thing with "Noah's Ark" by Creosote · · Score: 1

    P.Z. Myers complained not long ago about their idiotic gee-gosh-golly reporting of the umpteenth claim that the Ark has been located on Mt. Ararat (Sleuth closes in on Noah's Ark mystery").

  83. Who Built it? by iamlucky13 · · Score: 1

    My first thought was this is so cool! Then it occurred to me that Europe did not develop large cultures needed to build stuff like this until the Greeks, and I think Bosnia was a very late bloomer. Who built it then? And how did it get covered with dirt? The article gives no clues, but some of the other articles indicate the man claiming the discovery thinks the people who built it were from Atlantis. Hmmm...

  84. For The Record... by Khyber · · Score: 1

    We have seismic imaging - two slugs in different places, preferably on opposite sides of the mountain, will almost IMMEDIATELY prove or disprove this.

    Jurassic Park was a very handy reference for this - perhaps you should watch it again?

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  85. Your words ring truer than anyone else so far. by Khyber · · Score: 1

    To quote you, Minairia, "Geography is rarely THAT regular"

    To quote THE LEVELORD "Nature rarely has right angles - make your terrain look natural by varying the angles and composition of structures that are not man-made.

    In all fairness, Nature does make 90 degree things (Starolite, Bismuth hypergrowths, etc.) But almost every single one of those is done on a very SMALL scale. To have something this large, with what is assumed to be 90 degree angles, will generally hint at it being man-made.

    Holy hell I never thought I'd use a game level designer's quote to back up an archeological dig.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  86. It was not only well-preserved... by jd · · Score: 4, Insightful
    ...but it was also one of the largest ever found and one of the most significant cities in the Roman empire, according to the article. Personally, I am of the opinion that since we only have one history and whatever is lost can NEVER be replaced, any destruction of our heritage should be treated as a crime of extreme seriousness. Ok, they need a car park. Let the archaeologists gather ALL the data, excavate ALL the ruins, build a complete virtual model and salvage what they can. THEN build your friggin' car park.


    (Mass transit is infinitely superior to cars, anyway, and any "socialist" worthy of the title should know this. Wiping out a key piece of history is also about as anti-social as you can get. Besides which, the city can't take up that much space. Build the car park UNDER it. Spain does have mining equiptment, right? It's not totally deprived of technology, however bereft of wits it might be. Then you can have the ruins AND the car park.)

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    1. Re:It was not only well-preserved... by thrillseeker · · Score: 2, Funny
      I am of the opinion that since we only have one history and whatever is lost can NEVER be replaced, any destruction of our heritage should be treated as a crime of extreme seriousness

      My son was always trying to get out of cleaning up his room, too.

    2. Re:It was not only well-preserved... by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 1
      Personally, I am of the opinion that since we only have one history and whatever is lost can NEVER be replaced, any destruction of our heritage should be treated as a crime of extreme seriousness.
      The thing about history is that no matter how much of it we destroy, we'll always have more of it tomorrow.

      (How serious I'm being is left as an exercise for the reader.)

      --

      How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
    3. Re:It was not only well-preserved... by Russ+Nelson · · Score: 1

      If our predecessors were so wonderful, HOW COME THEY DIED? My feeling is that anybody who builds something gives up his right for its continued existance when he dies. So if you want your creations to last forever, plan on living forever.

      Old shit is just old shit. Get it the hell out of the way so I can build my new stuff.

      --
      Don't piss off The Angry Economist
    4. Re:It was not only well-preserved... by lejerdemayn · · Score: 1

      what does Spain have to do with this?

    5. Re:It was not only well-preserved... by jd · · Score: 1
      Remember that when you get saddled with death taxes. Hey, they gave up their right to the continued existance of their estate when they died, right? No? How's it different? Besides, history doesn't belong to an individual, so the rights of an individual are of no consequence. Oh, and they died because humans have a tendancy to do that. You will too, someday. It's nothing to be ashamed of.


      Regardless, though, I gave as one option the recording of all that information so that people could "clear it away" and let someone build there. If you didn't do that some of the time, you'd run out of space and resources very quickly. Recycling of physical material is inevitable. However, the capacity to store information with regards to something far exceeds the physical space to keep those somethings, and storing information does not obstruct your building.


      My argument is solely that the data is kept in SOME form or other. I care little about what form you end up choosing.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    6. Re:It was not only well-preserved... by alnjmshntr · · Score: 1

      Putting a carpark on top of it, is not going to ruin the .. erm ruins. If they ever want to excavate it later on they'll know where it is.

      --
      If I had created the world I wouldn't have messed about with butterflies and daffodils. I would have started with lasers
    7. Re:It was not only well-preserved... by FirienFirien · · Score: 1

      Besides which, the city can't take up that much space.

      Wha...?! Did you forget what 'city' means?

      Btw, digging and excavating a tunnel is vaguely expensive, requiring shoring and roof supports to prevent it from collapsing. Building underground structures is very expensive, but since they usually reach to the surface the structural stability is reduced to a more normal structural problem. Building underground structures underneath things is so vastly expensive it's simply implausable. It's why we expand cities sideways rather than downwards; even with vertical downwards structures the cost is generally prohibitive for anything that's looking to make a profit. There's a range of sunlight-redirection technologies that allow you to pipe natural light into buildings, and underground buildings wouldn't be a problem. Digging sideways to go underneath something is so rampantly expensive it's simple inconceivable to do it. Lay a very expensive car park to preserve another bit of history? It's laughable. Seismic imaging and sampling will have been done to see if it was the same as any of the hundred other ruins in the area, and since it's most likely to have been the same they'll have had the go-ahead to cover it over.

      "Wiping out a key piece of history" would indeed be bemoanable; wiping out one of the bits of history that's near-identical to the many others that have already been investigated and dismissed - did you even read the parent post? - is trivial. There's simply too much information about that heritage to need more copies of the same stuff.

      --
      Browsing with +2 to insightful posts and a higher threshold makes the average post seen seem a lot more ingenious
    8. Re:It was not only well-preserved... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a weird non sequitor.

          You think Slashdot is some hotbed of estate-tax angst?

  87. Bad Science by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    To sum up the bleow article:
    1.When he claims these pyramids were build, the area was under a glacier.
    2.The 15 years studing pyramids, were concocting crazy ideas about Alantis.

    http://www.archaeology.org/online/features/osmanag ic/

  88. Basic engineering proof for ramps idea? by casemon · · Score: 1

    "Huge dirt ramps and lots of slave labor."

    Not supporting one theory over another, I have a basic engineering question. Some say that "huge dirt ramps" though a popular guess, is said to be an impossible / unlikely method to build the Great Pyramid at Giza given the amount of dirt needed to support the 10-70 ton blocks that make up the 146.5 metres (481 feet) tall monument. That the amount of dirt needed to support an average block at that height would collapse under it's own weight.

    It is said this is a relatively simple problem of physics for engineers... so the question is... any engineering majors out there that can make a few quick calculations followign these ideas of "huge dirt ramps"?

    Would really like someone to try some simple equations to shed light on the above. Also further interesting to note that the amount of dirt needed to build such a huge ramp was apparently never found... and the apparent evidence that the Egyptians were actually not very war-like or aggressive casting doubt on the "slaves" aspect of the idea.

    1. Re:Basic engineering proof for ramps idea? by unity100 · · Score: 1

      The theories proposed to explain building of the great pyramid each hang in balance in one respect or another anyway.

      It is highly possible that during the proposed period the pyramids are built, most of the middle east should do nothing but produce pyramid byproducts - no wars, no migrations, no other stuff, just production - to have pyramids meet that schedule.

      And considering middle east was then the center of civilized world, and the place with most of the chaos and mayhem going on, well it seems just odd ...

  89. ObRedDwarf by smellsofbikes · · Score: 1

    Rimmer: "There are so many things we don't know about aliens! They could've helped built the Egyptian pyramids! After all, we have no idea how people could have built such huge pyramids."
    Lister: "They had whips. Massive, massive whips."

    --
    Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
  90. Yes, this guy WAS talking about the article by GuloGulo · · Score: 1

    "That's all very well, but that Archaeology article spends all it's time slamming the person, not discussing his claims, and reads a lot like a personal attack."

    My post was an explanation to the GP, who clearly did not bother to even TRY and understand the context of the article, and instead, assumed it was something it wasn't.

    "Why so frustrated?"

    You're kidding, right? Do you know how amazingly irritating it is to see good posts that deserve more discussion tossed aside in favor or worthless tripe like this?

    --
    "The government grants you rights, not the other way around."-- beav007. Yes, these people really exist...
  91. If you're never guilty of hypocrisy by benhocking · · Score: 1

    If you're never guilty of hypocrisy, then your standards are too low.

    --
    Ben Hocking
    Need a professional organizer?
    1. Re:If you're never guilty of hypocrisy by amliebsch · · Score: 1

      If you are always guilty of hypocrisy, your ethical system is impractical.

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
  92. Pyramids in Italy by deepb1ue · · Score: 1
    I'm surprised no one has mentioned the pyramid's of Montevecchia, Italy.

    Google gives the following article in Czech:

    http://www.mwm.cz/CD/c1184.htm#I...20Piramidi

    There was a buch of news articles about them in 2003 although its been quiet since.

  93. Fightin' Hellfish, HELL YEAH! by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    Claims that SS is a Ponzi scheme overlook the factor that SS was designed so not all contributors survive long enough to collect from it. You might as well call it a tontine. Or you could just call it a giant slushfund that the government uses to buy the votes of the elderly.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  94. Bill Maher, you say? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You mean the guy who picks up whatever flavor-of-the-month ideology is the latest thing? Much like most of Slashdot does?

    Score: -1, True But Offends Me Personally As A Sheep

  95. that explains stonehenge then by BestNicksRTaken · · Score: 1

    i remember being told by the tour guides at stonehenge that the little hills dotted around are burial mounds.

    what they didn't tell us was that they were the tops of pyramids and there's another 720ft under the earth!

    --
    #include <sig.h>
  96. Stupid claims by jd · · Score: 1
    Yes, there is no question that the claims made are utterly absurd. They have far too little information at this point to say anything other than "we have these artifacts, datable to year X". Mind you, archaeologists (even the reputable ones) do make such claims a lot. It can take decades - sometimes centuries - before archaeological groups will 'fess up, and usually grudgingly. As such, the claims do not shock me in the fact that they were made, but rather it shocks me that anybody takes such unsubstantiated claims seriously despite the notorious history of the field.


    It would not surprise me in the least if there is a pyramid in Europe, somewhere. Stone circle technology migrated from somewhere in the north of Scotland down through Britain and much of Europe. Pyramids, once the technology was mastered, would have looked far more impressive and would therefore likely have appealed to societies that went seriously overboard on monumental constructions. Indeed, the idea that nobody the Egyptians traded with bought access to pyramid technology, when they bought any other technology they could lay their hands on, seems absurd.


    However absurd the notion of there not being something akin to a pyramid in Europe, it should be kept in mind that none has been found and no evidence exists that any were ever built. It is certainly possible that a pyramid has accumulated so much topsoil that it has become a hill - this happened to a number of Duns in Scotland. This seems awfully large, though, and I'd want more evidence first.


    Are there more likely possibilities? Yes. We do have limited evidence that European cultures may have built underground settlements and much more evidence that they built underground tombs. This would explain the apparent tunnel into the mountain. We also have EXTENSIVE evidence that Europeans terraced hills and mountains - there are many known examples, even if we don't always know the reasons. Virtually everything so far discovered can be accounted for by these known and established facts alone.


    Does this mean that there's something there? No. Merely that what is described has proven alternative explanations. The guy has suspect credibility and the finds have not been confirmed (as far as I know) by any independent archaeologist. However, even a hoaxer will eventually find something of interest, even if it isn't what they say it is.


    Does this mean it's not a pyramid? No. We won't know that until much more information has been collected. The largest provably man-made hill in the ancient world is Silbury Hill, and that's a mole-hill compared to this mountain, making it very unlikely that it is artificial. However, as I pointed out, the technology existed, technology was traded, and one-upmanship was the name of the game in those times.


    For now, at least, I'll stick with the theory that the "steps" are indeed artificial but just your plain, ordinary, vanilla terraces that exist everywhere, that the mountain itself really is just a mountain and nothing more.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  97. Realize the Truth by uberjoe · · Score: 1

    Don't you know there is no spoon?

    --

    The days of the digital watch are numbered.

  98. Keep your head ... by guysmilee · · Score: 2, Funny

    Keep your head buddy ... I just watch AVP and there some whacky stuff in those pyramids ... I mean the kinda stuff you could really lose a head over.

  99. Re:Satellite Picutures, and and interview with lea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Has anyone thought that any 'ancients' could have simply took a mountain, and carved it into a pyramid? Theres been alot of landscaping as opposed to mountain building in many civilizations globally. It's quite possible that the geologic region was ripe for this sort of thing with faulting rocks in many forms. Much like the caves in arizona by the native americans.

    Until that line of thought is disproven, it's hard to say if it's man made the same way as the egyptian pyramids were man made.

  100. oh no! by x1n933k · · Score: 1

    "...massive pyramid which had been masquerading as a hill" Moments later, UN officals ordered a blockade and sent 200 troop from Antartica to regulate and keep the peace with the surrounding hills. One was quoted, (translated),"We suspected something was wrong with the last centry they moved 2inches into a offivive positions." No other hills would comment at the time.

  101. Oh yeah, I can see it clearly.. by Kitsune818 · · Score: 1

    ..obviously a gigantic pyramid as displayed by the photographic evidence. Also, somehow those rocks there are supposed to be "polished cubes". .. Reminds me of "America's Stonehenge" (a.k.a. "Mystery Hill")

  102. Looks like a Scythian burial mound to me by tyrr · · Score: 1

    Scythians inhabited Black Sea region and could have gone as far as Bosnia
    Their burial mounds - kurgans were created in a similar fashion - stone chamber + artificial pyramidal hill. Some of the kurgans are as old as pyramids - 2000 BC.
    Burial mounds like this are nothing new to Europe. In fact it's a traditional burial for nomands' nobility.

  103. google map of the pyramid by JDizzy · · Score: 1

    the raw link is here:
    http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&q=43.9800731 058,+18.1793241944++(bosnian+pyramid)&ll=43.980093 ,18.179283&spn=0.040269,0.10849&t=h&om=1

    You can clearly see the edges of the big thing.
    Seems quite clear to me that I'm looking at a shrub covered geometric shape.

    decide for your self. enjoy

    --
    It isn't a lie if you belive it.
  104. As a Bosnian.. by dino213b · · Score: 1

    ..I think this parent thread is a whacky conspiracy theory.

    First of all, the White House can't even prevent its own leaks. What would have stopped AP, Reuters and many legions of reporters from mentioning this news about a pyramid discovery? Secondly, the "Pyramid" has not been actually discovered yet. In fact, there is no discovery. Local citizens have always referred to the site as a potential pyramid; I remember these legends being told to me since I was a child. The name of the site, Visoko, is a conjugated form of "tall".

    This latest publicity stunt is just that - a publicity stunt. The person who is currently digging, gospodin Semir Osmanagic, should be given credit for revitalizing the interest in the site. In the name of science, he is going to need all the help he can get to push past the resistance of both skeptics and the local land speculators (yes, that is already happening in anticipation of discovery related tourism). In my opinion, he is a valued spearhead in the search for knowledge.

    If there is a pyramid out there, let us all discover it patiently; conspiracy theories and quick conclusions are not helping. Bosnia has gone through waves of cultures over the years, from Illyrians to Ottomans. A Roman fortification was once built on top of the location; going through layers of discovery will take some time. This project needs careful support in terms of excavation and other logistics before the Bosnian winter sets in. How about a public call for archeological internships?

    On the other hand, it would be nice to see an onslaught of frenzied Egyptologists pump up the Bosnian economy!

  105. Some better quality photos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  106. Re:Oil by B'Trey · · Score: 1

    It's completely uncredible. The "archeologist" behind this claims that it was built by descendents of Atlantis, who themselves came from the Pleiades.

    Debunking here.

    --

    "The legitimate powers of government extend only to such acts as are injurious to others." Thomas Jefferson.

  107. Thanks... by G3ckoG33k · · Score: 1

    :D

    I was so blocked I had to look it up...

  108. I must protest sir! by Thud457 · · Score: 1
    I must take exception to your sloppy treatment of the facts and mischaracterizations.
    1. Firstly, Fortean Times should capitalized, it is : 1) the name of a publication and 2) the term "Fortean" is derived from a proper name.
    2. You imply that Fortean Times is a unreliable source of information right up there with the Journal of Applied Kookology and Better Fraud. They may report on "unusual phenomena", but they work very hard to get the facts, as known, right. (Granted, they do have a section where they pass on newsclippings as is. That's just being true to their namesake.)
    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  109. linker3000 by Linker3000 · · Score: 1

    In other news, Amway announces it is to relocate its World HQ to Bosnia.

    --
    AT&ROFLMAO
  110. A wackjob? by east+coast · · Score: 1

    For all the naysayers who scoff at the claims of a "wackjob" let's not forget Kary B. Mullis.

    Is the guy a little "out there"? Sure, but his acheivements don't seem to be harmed by it.

    --
    Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
  111. Crackpot archeology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Osmaganic is a metal shop worker. A crackpot. There's a real effort among the Bosnian archeologists to stop the destruction of Visoko pre-neolitic site by Osmanagic's gang. Here's the petition:
    http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/NoPyramidsInBos nia/

  112. What about Mayan pyramids? by gknoy · · Score: 1

    I'm pretty certain that using slave labor was very much in the spirit of old mayan culture. ;) While the egyptian pyramids were (according to some documentary I saw, lol) primarily a well funded public works project, complete with relatively advanced medical care (e.g., bone setting and surgery), I don't think that applies to the pyramids across the pond.

  113. project website by schizohead · · Score: 2, Informative

    Here's a link to Sam Osmanagics website:
    http://www.piramidasunca.ba/indexeng.htm

  114. SG-1 by __aalnoi707 · · Score: 1

    Is that Richard Dean Anderson and Amanda Tapping investgating the pyrmaid in the backgroud?

  115. It's not in Bosnia, it's Michigan! by TheSpatulaOfLove · · Score: 1

    I thought the largest pyramid in the world was in Ada, Michigan

  116. Later news reports indicate... by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

    ...that the forces of Nod are already en route to claim the pyramid. No comment was available from GDI at this time.

    Chris Mattern

  117. Actually... by brian0918 · · Score: 1

    "And everyone pointing to the archaeology organization site naming him as a nutjob, guess what folks? It won't be debunked until they've fully excavated the site."

    Actually, if you had bothered to read "the archaeology organization site", you'd see how it is already debunked: "Between 27,000 and 12,000 years ago, the Balkans were locked in the last Glacial maximum, a period of very cold and dry climate with glaciers in some of the mountain ranges. The only occupants were Upper Paleolithic hunters and gatherers who left behind open-air camp sites and traces of occupation in caves. These remains consist of simple stone tools, hearths, and remains of animals and plants that were consumed for food. These people did not have the tools or skills to engage in the construction of monumental architecture."

    You're telling me that small groups of hunter gatherers working out of their huts constructed pyramids larger than those in Egypt ON FRICKIN GLACIERS?!

  118. It's a Glacial formation! by zifferent · · Score: 1

    Hey that that kind of looks like the rocks here or here or here or here.

    and check out these regularily "cut" bad boys here.

    But how do you explain natural pyramids?
    Oh I don't know maybe this quote:

    "If the glacier erodes three or more cirques on different sides of the mountain, a peak will begin to form. The peak may be a steep pyramid shaped rock, which is known as a horn. The Matterhorn in the Swiss Alps is a well known horn."

    Yah!

    --
    cat sig > /dev/null
  119. Absolutely by benhocking · · Score: 1

    I assume we agree on this. Make sure you read the comment I was originally responding to (and the GP as well, for context).

    --
    Ben Hocking
    Need a professional organizer?
  120. Re:Good post, but.... by Jim_Callahan · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Yes, a thousand years of common understanding is definitely a reliable source of information. What have I been thinking, trusing empiricism and the modern sciences all these years? Clearly, I've been suffering from a brain fever, and need a good leeching to remove the black humours from my system.

    I spent far too much money on education, when all I needed was the five thousand years of common understanding gathering dust on my bookshelf. I mean, if you can't trust that the first woman was grown from the rib of the first man, sho was in turn formed from river clay, then what can you trust?

    Ok, I'm done now. It was really just that bit about the understanding that got me, the rest was quite insightful (though not informative, either the mods don't know the difference between the two words or they've recently moved from crack to LSD). Hope you aren't offended by the nitpicking.

    --
    ...it's really a sad day for America when we require a goddamn ACT OF CONGRESS to make our DVD players work properly. ~
  121. In related news... by Macdude · · Score: 1

    I just found the worlds largest hole, all I have to do now is take all the dirt out of it...

    --
    "Grab them by the pussy" -- President of the United States of America
  122. Oh, the usual tangents. by jd · · Score: 1
    This was a side-thread on how important history was to various nations. The thread itself is important for several reasons: first, we have problems understanding a European pyramid due to there not being any others, but if nobody has regarded history as important, those may have been destroyed in the past to make way for hyperspace bypasses - oops, I mean car parks, or whatever the cultural popular thing to build was at the time.


    The second reason has to do with real and imagined history. The more pumped-up history is, the more likely people are to invent it. "Modern" America has very little meaningful history, which is why there is a booming trade in things like fake war medals. (Oh, and stolen Italian art, but that's another issue.) In Europe, where there really is history to speak of, there is a lot of pressure for major population centers to have something ancient in their backyard to draw the tourists in. That's been true for a long time. Victorians would build fake ruins ("follies") for the prestige value and would often "decorate" real ruins with gaudy fake relics to spice up the site. The Roman city of Bath, in England, was badly destroyed by these tourist hunters.


    Bosnia desperately needs people to visit. It's in bad shape, after being devastated by deliberate destruction of population centers AND of cultural heritage. A pyramid could bring in the kind of hard currency they need.


    This archaeologist also has a major credibility problem, and that's going to affect how he is treated. He would not be the first to invent a major discovery for the sole purpose of trying to restore his image, assuming that it is a fake. He would also not be the first to stretch his work to the absolute limits to find something - anything - that is real, so that history would forgive him the fakes, assuming that the discovery is real.


    However, much of this becomes moot when history is wantonly destroyed (as has happened in many countries, Bosnia included, although there the Serbs did most of the destroying). If a site is completely and irretrievably destroyed, then all we have is what is recorded. And usually, that is suspect at best. Had the Pyramids or the Sphinx of Egypt been destroyed, nobody would believe they ever existed. To this day, people are highly skeptical about all of the other Seven Wonders as they seem far too dramatic for the cultures of the time. We have as much evidence of the Colossus of Rhodes as we do of Atlantis. Archaeologists refused to believe ancient navigators were capable of anything much, until the Kon Tiki Expedition, and even then they spent far more time slagging off those involved than they did in reconciling the observed results with the archaeology as it was known.


    People need to see things to believe in them. That's not always a bad thing, but it can get awfully complicated when no effort whatsoever is made - even in the slightest - to preserve the necessary evidence.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  123. Osmanagich apparently not a scientist by sl4shd0rk · · Score: 1

    "Osmanagich is a construction contractor from Texas who came to the US when the Bosnian war started. He has no education whatsoever in any science. "

          http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/NoPyramidsInBos nia/

    Now that's almost as silly as voting in an Oil Whore (tm) for president, and then wondering why they want to kick ass in an oil rich country. Yea, that'd never happen.

    --
    Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
  124. Late in the story by Tibor+the+Hun · · Score: 1

    As a Bosnian, I gotta tell you that this could easily be a hoax. On the other side his claims could be completely true, stranger things have happened there.
    Medjugorje is not too far away. (Where it is claimed that Virgin Mary has appeared.)

    On the 29th of April apparently they have uncovered some surface plates on the outside of the "Pyramid."Link.
    From the article, and from the mouth of the Osmanagic himself:
    "The very surface of these monoliths lost the shine it had thousands of years ago. However, the shape is phenomenal, and the surface is completely flat. Places where the plates connect are symmetric and as can easily be seen, are hand-made."

    He expects that within the next 200 days, as he will be doing more digging, he will have certain proof.

    --
    If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
  125. Orgasmic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Osmanagic said Wednesday's discovery significantly bolsters his theory that the 2,120-foot hill rising above the small town of Visoko is actually a step pyramid -- the first found in Europe.

  126. No they mean ... by willtsmith · · Score: 1


    No they mean the thetans, you know the ones that Xenu brought to earth to murder and brainwash into thinking that they are mole people.

    Errr... gotta go, I'm feeling flu-like symptoms. Catch ya ajijdoijh ja;ijjdjijijisjijijjpppo89hnvnj....

    --
    -------- -------- Support Wesley Clark for president!!!
    1. Re:No they mean ... by Tharkban · · Score: 1

      Did you hit preview before submit?

      --
      Tharkban (It is a signature after all)
  127. Amateurs and Nutjobs ... by willtsmith · · Score: 2, Interesting


    Let's not forget that most of the really great discoveries are found by amateurs and nutjobs. The experts cannot be everywhere.

    The skepticism in the archaeological community is understandable, but there are being a little overbearing. All their models depend on having civilizations that create monuments, not monuments being evidence for civilizations. One need only examine the work of Shockley in regard to the Sphinx to see how aggressive the pros can get when their models are challenged.

    Now, the really great discoveries do come from amateurs and wackos. But only a few. Most of them are just plain wrong. So the experts are kinda right to express heavy skepticism. But I agree, let the man finance his dig. If he uncovers more and more cut stone blocks, the archaeologists will be eating humble pie, especially that Zawari guy who has consistently chewed Shockley's ass off and has to be "THE GUY" who discovers everything in Egypt now.

    The evidence for a lost "pre-civilization" keeps growing. We have found tobacco in ancient Egyptian tombs and a curious correlation of various mega-lith complexes around the world built in the image of the various signs of the Zodiac. If this is indeed a pyramid, it could be yet another in this pattern (along with the Pyramids in China). I don't think this the work of Aliens. It's just the work of an ancient civilization that rose, kept it's secrets too close to the vest then died off. And perhaps it WAS the Atlantians and Plato just did not have his details straight. The odds of various pre-cultures spontaneously deciding to build their mega-liths using a unique Zodiac sign over thousands of years is pretty low.

    --
    -------- -------- Support Wesley Clark for president!!!
    1. Re:Amateurs and Nutjobs ... by chthon · · Score: 1

      A "pre-civilisation" is called a "culture", ie. a bunch of people from which artifacts and remains can be found, but no writings.

  128. Yes, it is insurance ... by willtsmith · · Score: 1


    And just like ANY insurance plan, the benefits are paid with a combination of current contributors who are not collecting and the securities purchased with the contributions of beneficiaries. In this case, the Social Security Trust Fund loans money to the general government fund. It sounds like one hand borrowing from the other, but you have to consider it a bargain when you look at what it would cost to borrow that money elsewhere.

    The only real threat to Social Security is the rampant irresponsible spending occuring for the last 6 years that is adding Federal debt outside of the trust fund. When the baby boomers retire in mass, the Federal Government will no longer be able to borrow from the fund, they have to get over that hump. The debt service incurred from the Bush administration is not helping this.

    Not to worry, elect some Democrats and they'll save the Republican bacon (yet again). This is the way things go. Democrats stabilize the nations finances, than Republicans come in to cut taxes on wealthy people and create more work for Democrats.

    --
    -------- -------- Support Wesley Clark for president!!!
    1. Re:Yes, it is insurance ... by khallow · · Score: 1
      My point is that it's insurance against something that is almost sure to happen. It's like buying insurance that pays out if you run into someone stupid. There's no sharing of risk which is the point of an insurance pool because everyone goes through the same problem. And Social Security is going to run into trouble because of that too.

      It sounds like one hand borrowing from the other, but you have to consider it a bargain when you look at what it would cost to borrow that money elsewhere.

      Yea. Life is good for the people at the front of the demographic wave. I have a better idea. Give me my 12-15%. I put that money into mutual funds and other sensible investments. And get a better interest rate because my money isn't dependent on US treasuries.

      The only real threat to Social Security is the rampant irresponsible spending occuring for the last 6 years that is adding Federal debt outside of the trust fund.

      That extra spending certainly isn't helping the problem. But Social Security is in trouble anyway. I'm not one of those doom sayers that says Social Security is going to Destroy Us All, but it's far too big for the little it does.

      Not to worry, elect some Democrats and they'll save the Republican bacon (yet again). This is the way things go. Democrats stabilize the nations finances, than Republicans come in to cut taxes on wealthy people and create more work for Democrats.

      Oh please. Another person who doesn't understand the role of the two political parties in creating the current mess. Sure I'm disturbed by the more naked greed shown by Republican leadership ever since the mid to late 90's (especially when they started to remake K street in their image), but the Democrats are the other side of the political oligopoly here. But in one sense, you're right. The Democrats will save the Republican bacon again.

  129. Indentured Servitude ... by willtsmith · · Score: 1


    It's not quite the same thing as slavery. It is 100% evident that Egyptians were certainly involved in laboring. At the same time, that would not prevent the Egyptians from being a little more demanding of "ethnic minorities" including religious dissidents and conquered peoples.

    --
    -------- -------- Support Wesley Clark for president!!!
    1. Re:Indentured Servitude ... by belmolis · · Score: 1

      Right. I was citing the use of corvee labor as evidence supporting the use of NON-slave labor, the point being that they had a system in which the non-slave population were available for work on public projects.

  130. Whats amazing to me ... by willtsmith · · Score: 1


    What is amazing to me is that a people who are recognized to have chariots are not credited with the ability to lash some oxes together to harness some REALLY effective pulling power. What is more amazing is that archaeologists who talk about Egypt as an "advanced" society with Chariots somehow could not apply the principle of the wheel to freight transportation.

    I daresay they got the idea of light built chariot and wagon wheels from carved solid rollers. Why would the Egyptians suddenly become so mind numbingly ignorant where it concerned carrying heavy things.

    Yes Imhotep ... we travel at great speed on wheels. But instead of using round things, we'd rather use sledges on sand for extra heavy things. And using an ox, or horse that is WAY more powerful than a man ... no that is a bad idea. Lets use a dozen humans instead at greater cost where one OX would have done the job.

    --
    -------- -------- Support Wesley Clark for president!!!
  131. It goes deeper than that ... by willtsmith · · Score: 1


    Lets face it, if it doesn't spring from Zawari's brain ... it's not true. He's the guy in charge down there.

    --
    -------- -------- Support Wesley Clark for president!!!
  132. Idiot. by TheNoxx · · Score: 1

    Obviously not, seeing as the pyramids at Giza were built 4,500 years ago. Not only that, why the flying fuck would someone just assume that a gigantic pyramid would have to be over 12,000 years old? Did the article say anything claiming that he believed it to be that old? Damn you're dumb.

    --
    Ex nihilo nihil fit.
    1. Re:Idiot. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you are a dumb fuck. The 'archeologist' himself claims that the pyramid is over 12000 years old.

    2. Re:Idiot. by brian0918 · · Score: 1

      Glad you did your research before making a moron out of yourself....

  133. We are not talking about theories. by TheNoxx · · Score: 1

    The subject is a giant god damn pyramid. What the fuck is so hard to understand about this? He could believe Batman saved him from a fucking rabid Easter Bunny, and it wouldn't make the slightest bloody difference whether or not the pyramid was there.

    The only thing that matters is if the structure exists or doesn't exist, period. End of the stupid fucking conversation.

    --
    Ex nihilo nihil fit.
    1. Re:We are not talking about theories. by maggot+the+shrew · · Score: 1

      No, my friend, the subject is a mountain, in a poor country that abounds with innumerable genuine archeological sites that are not being excavataed or preserved. We having nothing to go on, no evidence, no imaging, no reason to believe that there is anything under the mountain (We had reason to believe that Troy existed).

      All we have is the shape of a mountain that from some angles looks like a pyramid, and the word of a man with no credentials in geology or archeology. Since no one has seen this pyramid, nor found any evidence or historical record of it, then there is only the evidence of a pyramid shaped mountain and the presence of neothilic artifacts in caves on the surface.

      One man thinks it is a buried 12,000 year old step pyramid. --Theory.

      So, before we spend billions of Bosnian dollars to excavate a mountain based on one man's opinion, why is it not a credible aspect of discussion to examine the credentials of the man?

  134. Existence of a monument ... by willtsmith · · Score: 1


    The existence of a monument is not nullified by the lack of a civilization to build it.

    That having been said, this guy has yet to prove it's a monument. But if he finds a stone facade buried under dirt in the shape of a step pyramid, you can rest assured the rest of the archaeologists will INVENT a civilization in the most convenient time period to account for it.

    Let the guy dig with his volunteers. If he comes up empty handed, than that says something. If he find a pyramid, than you can try to identify the civilization that built it.

    --
    -------- -------- Support Wesley Clark for president!!!
  135. History 2006 doesn't support it. Flame me if u can by gd23ka · · Score: 1

    so it will have to be debunked, right along with the submerged cities of the coast of Japan and India
    or the many archaelogical sites in North America such as the egyptian artefacts said to have been
    discovered in the Grand Canyon. They still haven't come up with a good explanation for how they built the
    Sphinx or the Great Pyramids so what makes you think they want one in southeastern Europe?

    But before you fire away with me and flame me as an esoteric mushroomhead (the irony) just answer this question:

    Jesus was "born" on the 25th of December to a virgin, started his ministry at the age of 30, was executed
    three years later and came back to life and ascended into heavens.

    Horus was "born" on the 25th of December to a virgin, started his ministry at the age of 30, was executed
    three years later and came back to life and ascended into heavens.

    Krishna was "born" on the 25th of December to a virgin, started his ministry at the age of 30, was executed
    three years later and came back to life and ascended into heavens.

    Attis was "born" on the 25th of December to a virgin, started his ministry at the age of 30, was executed
    three years later and came back to life and ascended into heavens.

    Wittoba was "born" on the 25th of December to a virgin, started his ministry at the age of 30, was executed
    three years later and came back to life and ascended into heavens.

    etc.etc.

    Why is it that

    Mexican Quetzalquoatl was "born" on the 25th of December to a virgin, started his ministry at the age of 30, was executed
    three years later and came back to life and ascended into heavens????

    IF you're going to flame me then tell me why the same story is told over and over across the entire globe and you
    can flame me to the day I die, I will bask in the jet of your flamethrowers. Looks like History 2006 is missing quiet
    a lot, isn't it?

  136. What the hell? by TheNoxx · · Score: 1

    Do you even speak english, or are you just throwing random shit from a translator onto /.? That was the most incoherent horseshit I've ever read.

    --
    Ex nihilo nihil fit.
  137. They call that ... by willtsmith · · Score: 1


    They call that the full faith and credit of the United States of America. And god help the world if it ever fails because EVERYTHING is based upon it.

    By the way, if you think those treasury bonds are useless, I'll offer you 10 cents on the dollar for any you possess. And if you think paper is useless, I'll take everything in your wallet at 5 cents to the dollar.

    --
    -------- -------- Support Wesley Clark for president!!!
  138. Unfair portrayal of Libertarians ... by willtsmith · · Score: 1


    In actuality, the Republicans are the ones enacting this plan by slashing taxes while hiking spending. The "bankrupty" comes when Social Security asks for some of the money back from the Treasury and they cannot oblige because of the massive debt service payments on the GW Bush mega-debt.

    At what point will the Laffer Curve drooling syncophants actually LOOK at the data and find out that cutting income/captial gains taxes does NOT increase revenue unless you accompany it with a hike in FICA taxes? If the Bush tax cuts are "stimulate revenues" why does Bush keep pulling off bigger and bigger deficits every year?

    --
    -------- -------- Support Wesley Clark for president!!!
  139. Sure it makes sense ... by willtsmith · · Score: 2, Interesting


    Social Security has a MASSIVE surplus and it needs someplace to invest it's money. Congress has a voracious need to borry money to mean general fund obligations and it's cheaper to borrow money from a trust fund than to incur debt from external entities.

    The fraud comes in when you include FICA revenues in for the caluculation of the deficit. The real deficit is quite a bit higher when you consider what the federal government owes to the Social Security Trust fund.

    If the Congress and the President can get it's financial house in order and pay down the debt (along with the debt service obligations), than the looming crisis is really a non-issue. But Bush seems really motivated to MAKE the crisis happen and then pretend he wants to stave it off with a plan that would DOUBLE the obligations of Social Security in the short term.

    --
    -------- -------- Support Wesley Clark for president!!!
  140. It's also possible ... by willtsmith · · Score: 1


    It's also possible that those ancient people were a little more clever than we believe with their "primitive" tools. It is highly probably that they had better mastery of "primitive" tools than we do and knew a few tricks or two that we are not aware of.

    There is an anecdote about the "power" needed to raise the heads on Easter Island. Many people have speculated that some "greater" technology must have been lost or that aliens must have done the job. Than one day some numksull tells this BS to the locals. They take a crew of 3 guys with levers and raise one the fallen heads.

    Modern people are way to into their power tools. We don't appreciate the inventiveness of need and the ability to make due with the tools at hands. The fact that some technology is not evidenced may simply mean that it was abandoned for a better one or that needs simply changed. And maybe it's simply that we haven't built enough stone block pyramids to learn the correct skills and lessons that lead to efficieny.

    The Egyptians did not START with the great pyramid. They started with smaller structure and doubtless they learned a few things along the way. If Archaeologists want to learn how to repeat the feat, they should consider building more pyramids instead of writing more books.

    --
    -------- -------- Support Wesley Clark for president!!!
    1. Re:It's also possible ... by unity100 · · Score: 1

      Those guys actually did erect one of the smallest kind of heads in the island.

      As for the pyramids, well, they might have started with smallest of possible pyramids, however, the economic power that is neccessary to build yet one greatest pyramid is a major work for entire middle east, leave aside a phletora of pyramids with different sizes that are built in a 1000 year period.

    2. Re:It's also possible ... by willtsmith · · Score: 1

      Well, if thats the case, than either Egypt controlled the greater portion of the Middle East, or they new some time saving tricks that our 5000 year post project evalutation are not aware of.

      People are always crowing about so called "primitive" people being unable to build megolithic structures. Than some people credit it to aliens or other things. My personal guess is that this is simply the arrogance of modern people who have never bothered to build a pyramid.

      --
      -------- -------- Support Wesley Clark for president!!!
    3. Re:It's also possible ... by unity100 · · Score: 1

      Well, it did not. Egypt has only been able to go as far as caanan (middle lebanon) around 1500 bc, and at that time they were fighting against the hittites, another superpower. This period lasted short, and the reason ramesses II is named such a great pharaoh is that he have undersigned most of the military action egypt did in that period against other nations. Almost all other time egyptians were either not fighting, or fighting amongst themselves. They were a rather self contained nation.

      The reason people propose that 'they are not doable' comes from the economics and the way of life of the era, not only technology. These buildings are megaconstructions, even now. Just as 17th century europe was not able to build a london bridge, it is shady proposition that egypt, a mainly agricultural nation was able to do hordes of similar projects by itself, and in such a short and turmoiled time.

    4. Re:It's also possible ... by willtsmith · · Score: 1

      And yet their upon the Giza plateua stands the great monuments. This is where the modern arrogance comes in. The existence of the pyramids is proof that the Egyptians were capable of doing these things. You don't need a modern Gantt chart to prove it. And you certainly do not need to invent aliens either. Because I'm sure that if aliens were involved, they probably would have chosen a more flexible material than stone.

      --
      -------- -------- Support Wesley Clark for president!!!
    5. Re:It's also possible ... by unity100 · · Score: 1

      Not if they did not want to show themselves.

  141. Its not a pyramid. by mnmn · · Score: 2, Funny

    It just doesnt smack of a pyramid. They probably just tiled a hill or built many cobbled streets all over a hill. The Egypt pyramids sharply break the horizon, testament to the enormous amount of work required to move so much material there. If I were to build a pyramid in ancient Bosnia, I'd just tile a hill and present a huge bill to the king.

    --
    "Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
  142. Ancient Plume by fuego451 · · Score: 1

    Looks like an ancient plume of magma much like 'Enchanted Rock' in Texas.
    Just my two cents worth.

  143. Tour de Bable by corngrower · · Score: 1

    This pyramid thingie would then probably be the tower of Babel.

  144. Joint Venture by berenixium · · Score: 1, Funny

    Osmanagic has found the secret Alien Base of The Greys at the same time.
    E.T.'s and Pyramids, together at last!

  145. Re:What the hell? "Damm you're dumb". by gd23ka · · Score: 1

    Right. You also "contributed" this to the discussion before turning around to attack me:

    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=184542&cid=152 42058

    Idiot.
    (Score:1)
    by TheNoxx (412624) Alter Relationship on Monday May 01, @09:15PM (#15242058)
    (http://thenoxx.deviantart.com/ | Last Journal: Wednesday November 30, @05:14PM)
    Obviously not, seeing as the pyramids at Giza were built 4,500 years ago. Not only that, why the flying fuck would someone just assume that a gigantic pyramid would have to be over 12,000 years old? Did the article say anything claiming that he believed it to be that old? Damn you're dumb.
    --
    Ex nihilo nihil fit

  146. Remember when Troy was 'found' in Bosnia? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By Salinas ... that was fun: http://www.troya.com.mx/

    This seems to be more of the same. Otoh, Oslobodjenje's ironic commentary http://www.oslobodjenje.com.ba/index.php?option=co m_content&task=view&id=48337&Itemid=46 says that having another tourist attraction beside Medjugorje wouldn't hurt, so ... :)

    cheers,
    dalibor topic

  147. While we're on the subject (in your Journal) by gd23ka · · Score: 1

    "Oh, they can't catch me.... , "
    Under the Christmas' day sun.....

    Caetano Veloso is my personal savior

    Guess what, anybody who even remotely has heard anything of astrotheology knows that the Christmas day sun
    is the sun on the 25th of December, exactly the day after the winter solstice. After "resting" for
    three days during the solstice the sun is considered "dead" and then reborn on the 25th when it exits the
    solstice. This is why astrotheologically the saviors (Jesus, Mithra, Krishna, Horus etc.etc.etc.) are (re)born
    on Dec 25th.

    "Oh they can't catch me" ...

  148. Racist? by bemenaker · · Score: 1

    You're joking right?

  149. Are the KLF involved ? by TractorBarry · · Score: 1

    Personally I think it'll turn out to be part of a stage set for the KLF

    So the interesting question is has it been discarded ? or is it under construction ?

    --
    Sky subscribers are morons. They pay to be advertised at !
  150. Its a fake by Catholicgauze · · Score: 1

    I blogged about this nut job: http://catholicgauze.blogspot.com/2006/04/pyramids -of-eastern-europe-update.html Research, slashdot, research!

  151. IRA? 401(k)? by tepples · · Score: 1

    It is really simple, to take a small tax spread out over a whole employment life-time of an individual and pay it back out at the last 10 or so years of his life. What is so complicated?

    Being forced to do so by your government, rather than through an IRA or 401(k) or other personal retirement plan.

  152. Your 12%-15% by willtsmith · · Score: 1


    The net of your 12%-15% is where the insurance comes in. If you do really well in life, you don't need social security. But if times hit you hard and things fall apart, then it is enough to survive in old age. It's not enough to thrive ... it's enough to survive.

    --
    -------- -------- Support Wesley Clark for president!!!
    1. Re:Your 12%-15% by khallow · · Score: 1
      The net of your 12%-15% is where the insurance comes in. If you do really well in life, you don't need social security. But if times hit you hard and things fall apart, then it is enough to survive in old age. It's not enough to thrive ... it's enough to survive.

      My point is that it's paid whether you need help in retirement or not. Hence it is not true insurance. It's like insuring against car accidents where you get the money back even if you don't get in a wreck.

      My point is not that there shouldn't be a safety net, but that the "safety net" is overfunded and most of the people it supports don't need it. Further a considerable portion of Social Security goes to funding government rent-seeking and other counterproductive uses.

      It should be needs-based (so it actually is insurance) and make it smaller.

  153. Re:Location via Google Maps: Try GoogleEarth! by oddrunner · · Score: 1

    To those of you who refuse to keep an open mind to the unproven: Be a true open minded skeptic, and wait for real evidence!

            Try looking at this from GoogleEarth if you would. The longitude and latitude given are pretty good. (+43 58' 40.80", +18 10' 40.80") But the easier way to look at this is to just ask GoogleEarth to go to "Sarajevo", then zoom out until the dark rectangle around Sarajevo is about 1/3 the width of the screen. At this point, NorthWest of Sarajevo, in the top left corner of your screen, you will find "Visoko". Pan/scroll over to Visoko, and start to zoom in. The "hill" in question is labeled "Grad" in green. Zoom in further, and then "tilt down" button on the right to get a view from the side. Use the "rotate" buttons to look at it from different directions.
            What you will find is a hill with one REDICULOUSLY flat and triangular face, and two other nearly flat, triangular faces at 90 degrees to that one. Two of the edges between these faces are exceedingly straight and sharp: It is very hard to assume that this is a natural formation just because the publicist is a known charlatan!
            So, are there any more people who would like to hold out hope that this really is a man-made structure after seeing this? I suspect that it may have been cut out of an existing hill as much as built up from the bottom, but who cares?

  154. More importantly than that by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

    Did he step out of the shower one day to find the last six months had been a dream?