Gympien kirkon kivet

Aiemmassa postauksessa oli hieman ”ufolta” vaikuttava video, jossa puhuttiin monesta oudosta teoriasta. Siinä mainittiin myös Australian Queenslandisssa sijaitseva Gympie ja siellä mahdollisesti sijainnut pyramidi. Asia alkoi kiinnostamaan ja löysin aiheesta jotain tietoa. Suurimmaksi ihmettelyn aiheeksi näyttää nousseen paikallisen kirkon (Gympie Regional Uniting Church) edessä sijaitseva kivinen muuri. Alla pari linkkiä aiheeseen liittyen. Ekan linkin takan myös mielenkiintoinen kuva vuodelta 1799 eli vain vähän aikaa eurooppalaisten valloittajien saapumisen jälkeen. Ja aikamoinen kivirakennelmahan sinne on ikuistettu…

Alla vastapainoksi yksi kirjoitus, jossa koko kiviteoria lytätään täysin hölmöksi valeuutiseksi. Mikä lieneekään taas totuus kaikessa tässä…

Yksi kommentti artikkeliin ”Gympien kirkon kivet

  1. Ekan linkin takaa löytyvällä sivulla oli selkeä lista kysymyksiä, joihin vastaamalla oltaisiin varmaan viisaampia(?)

    1. Why did the stone-masons use this method, (at the Church & the School), comprising non uniform/ compound angles and inserts, using “donated”stone to emulate an ancient method not apparently replicated anywhere else in Australia but replicated with a high degree of similarity in many other places and times some in the islands of the Pacific?

    2. Why does the Church & School retaining wall have examples of folded corners, multi faceted stones and inserts; details which are easily argued as functionally unnecessary in this application but which, with varying complexity, are demonstrated to occur in Egypt, Peru, Easter Island, Greece and at other ancient ceremonial and sacred sites spanning thousands of years?

    3. Why are the only examples of this type of construction in Australia found in Gympie?

    4. Why entrust this task to create a wall of this type to essentially unskilled labour /volunteers?

    5. Why is it not in keeping with the architecture of the church? The church was rendered and the lowest price agreed. And then when the retaining wall is added a decision to use unskilled labour to build a complex design?

    6. Why, having gone to such effort to carve such accurate polygonal stone work from the donated stone, would it now look poor in execution compared to say Cusco or Egypt after less than one hundred years?

    7. Could it be that many of the adjoining edges were roughly handled on carts in transit from the original site?

    8. That maybe they were already old when they were moved?

    9. Can you show me any examples of polygonal farmers walls from Italy or Europe that approach this kind of complexity?

    10. Would it not be easier to re-purpose an existing retaining wall – one that has demonstrated its efficacy over time and turns a skilled job into a less skilled yet organized job; in the way that the great pyramid casing stones at Giza were plundered after a great earthquake to construct other structures in Cairo?

    11. And if those stones did come from the Pyramid site – then who made that?

    12. Was it Aboriginal? Was it a shared site? Over how long and why?

    13. And what remains there now and below the surface to now be destroyed?

    14. Is it not completely reasonable to suggest that Gympie was visited for trade and or ceremonial practices by other people’s in pre colonial times almost certainly in peace – and that that could date back thousands of years.

    15. Why is there a military base now where another Pyramid was said to have been pushed into the sea – Tin Can Bay, or was that where the stone came from?

    16. If the stone masons were showing off their skill in the 1930’s (as is sometimes offered) it would be somewhat ok to go to this Polygonal effort for a place of worship – but for a tennis court? That would only make sense if the stones were already these shapes – so who made them?



Sähköpostiosoitettasi ei julkaista. Pakolliset kentät on merkitty *