[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: theos-talk Young or old Easter Island Statues

Jul 14, 2012 04:25 AM
by M. Sufilight

Dear John and frinds

My views are:

Perhaps. I prefer an open mind on these matters.
About Tiahuanaco (or Tiwanaku). I have learned that some scientists - of the more respected kind - are giving the view on Tiahuanaco being far older, because of the various facts - som of which you have written about in the below.

An example is this one on the not always reliable Graham hancock's website:
(This article is showing evidence in favour of a more ancient dating is possible. - This is year 2012 science.)

Another more difficult to oppose article is this one:

The Mystery of Tiahuanaco
Compiled and Digitized by Glen W. Chapman-November 2003
"There are numerous other statues which have been found at Tiahuanacu, several of which have
found their way into various museums. Most have the incomprehensible stiff designs scattered
about on their surfaces in the typical Tiahuanacu style. Some are rather large, and others are
small. Depictions of toxodons and several other extinct creatures are plentiful at Tiahuanacu. The
images of these extinct animals are understandable on pottery and textiles - they could be copied
by anyone from the stone monuments dotting the area."

Toxodons got extinct 11.000 B.C. according to orthodox science!
And mastodons 16.000 B.C. according to orthodox science!

Let them try to explain this.
I have not seen any opposition to this theory in the last article in the above.

I have friends within archaeology, and they have neither given any opposing theory - although they are not experts with regard to the area. The only - word against it they uttered was that - the dating of the site might not be that reliable. Well then orthodox science must face the same problems with their very own - and - modest datings! This seem obvious based on the real scientific facts.

Yes. I have seen a halpoid reference once on this issue.
Another striking thing is that Blavatsky in her book the Secret Doctrine mentions that the script from the Eastern Island or nearby Islands in the Pacific have similarities to Middle Eastern ones. I have checked Blavatsky's references, and also more recent references online - and can confirm it.

The honest scientific problem is dating such excavations are not at all that easy - and - scientist are not very prone to admit it  in their official reports. And the Journalists (some no doubt very 4004 BC theoretical Christian in their leanings - or in their greed for saelling news) are not really helpful there in most cases. But various tv channels are however from time to time clearly highlighting the problems these days.

One of the more recent theories, which can be found on the Internet these days (even on Wikipedia I think), which (seriously!) are considered by orthodox science is that there are various signs on migration northward in meso-america - in the years about 12.000 BC. --- as beign more likely based on present day evidence than the opposite direction. The consercvative American archaeological theory on migration as late as 10.000 BC or before the last Ice Age --- is clearly slowly falling to pieces these days!

Finding of a skeleton in Chile somewhere had a DNA similar to African-Astrualian DNA.
Go figure...

M. Sufilight

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2012 12:11 PM
  Subject: Re: theos-talk Young or old Easter Island Statues



       You can't always trust what the Archeologists and Anthropologists decide is the "official" date stamp for a discovery. One prime example is Tiahuanaco,Bolivia   a very ancient if not the oldest discovered site in the world which they, according to internal agreement in order to p reserve a false time-line of their own date at about  the same period you posted. They hate to redact previous members dating as it would invali date all of them and cause loss of professional esteem and recognition.  Arthur o Posnansky ( a Civil Engineer) was the primary cataloger of Tiahuanaco spending o ver 20 years there on situ and published his finding in "Tiahuanaco --- Cradle of American Man" 4 volumes, Published by the Government of Bolivia ( Posnansky is a "Hero" of the Bolivian People by Governmental proclamation in recognitio n of his work- I ha ve his work here). Pos nansk y, using the accredited "Formula" for dating using the measurement of the ecliptic of the sun angle according to the Temple construct measurement fixed the Middle Period of Tiahuanaco at 15,538 B.C.. The Paris Convention in Europe totally accepted his finding as valid while the American Convention rejected it, instead insisted on dating it to about 1500 AD. The y completely ignore that the Gate of the Sun and much of Tiahuanaco was buried by an ancient flood that had  buried the artifacts under many feet o f flood depositions. Such floods did not happen in A.D. times. In addition none of the collective ar cheologists that lie ever succeeded in decipherment of the Tiahuanaco Glyphs which if they had, w ould also reveal the collective lying of the so-called professions.t was only Hans Schlindler Bellemy and American Professional  Astronomer Peter Allen in their research that found a coherent analytical decipherment whic is published in their book "The Calendar of Tiahuanaco - The Measuring System of the Oldest Civilization", Faber and Faber Limited, London. 

    If you go on Google Images and type in "Easter Island Monoliths" there is quite a lot to inspect in the Imges listing. Recently I received science newsletter that had update on the monoliths being further excavated and was focused on new views about  the monoliths Glyphs that were revealed tihs year 2012. 

  The history of the Easter Island people is not a pretty history, they deplated the isla nd of it trees and they split into two warring factions , the social order was destroyed in the process and there are artifact remnants that in dicated they resorted to cannibilism eventually. They are belie ved to be of Polynesion origins tracing back towards china, try searching halpoid group easter island.   

  The links for the gallery off the monoliths you posted  disallow the viewing of the photos of the statues, typical of regressive professionals. 

  Easter Island at thetime of real occupation may have still had active volcanic activity that could have resulted in burying the monoliths in ash that solidified over time by compaction and contraction from heat loss. 

  Here is an article I receiver only yesterday in a science bulle tin about a final view on origin of both american ans south american indian peoples. it declares there were 3 migration waves from "Asia" and far eastern Siberia across the Bering land bridge . The primary first migration and two secondary migrations in ancient times coeval to Plato's final submergence of Atla ntis 12000 to 8000 B.C. 

  Native American populations  from t hree key migrations 


  If these migration proceed all the way down the coast of South America then the Easter Islander may have transferred from Coastal areas to the Island. 


  ----- Original Message -----

  From: "M. Sufilight" <> 
  Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2012 1:33:58 AM 
  Subject: theos-talk Young or old Easter Island Statues 


  Dear friends 

  My views are: 

  H. P. Blavatsky wrote: 
  " "The Easter Isles in 'mid Pacific' present the feature of the remaining peaks of the mountains of a submerged continent, for the reason that these peaks are thickly studded with Cyclopean statues, remnants of the civilization of a dense and cultivated people, who must have of necessity occupied a widely extended area. On the back of these images is to be found the 'ansated cross' and the same modified to the outlines of the human form. A full description, with plate showing the land, with the thickly planted statues, also with copies of the images, is to be found in the January number 1870 of the London Builder." 
  (Secret Doctrine, vol. I, p. 322) 

  Now has anyone ever seen this map over the number of statues in the area? 

  A lot was changed in the early days of Western "discoveries" - and - statues removed. And populations died out within a few decades on these islands. 

  The Cyclopean statues are by science dated to a meagre year 1250 to 1500 After this era. 
  Which of course account for some of them being covered with several centimeters or rather meters of soil due to natural aging of the environment? Or perhaps not? 

  Soil levels are for instance shown here "Easter Island Statue Project": 

  (They still use Routledge map from 1919 it seems - ) 

  I still wonder about the very wide margin of difference in views between ordinary Science and Blavatsky on thsi issues. 
  Both cannot be right it seems. 
  So who are actually right? 

  M. Sufilight 

  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] 

  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Back to Top]

Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application