Non-Human Skulls in Peru By Brien Foerster - ideacity
An intresting web site that encourages all takes on things, this particular one I remember when the scientist was roundly ridiculed for his findings, and yet he just is the messenger. Quite different from mainstream, but very well reasoned.
The Discovery Channel program MythBusters built replicas of the jars to see if it was indeed possible for them to have been used for electroplating or electrostimulation. On MythBusters' 29th episode (March 23, 2005), ten hand-made terracotta jars were fitted to act as batteries. Lemon juice was chosen as the electrolyte to activate the electrochemical reaction between the copper and iron. Connected in series, the batteries produced 4 volts of electricity. When linked in series the cells had sufficient power to electroplate a small token.[5]
Of course this does NOT prove that was what it was, nor that it was used, it only proved that the concept could work. The problem with all exploration and archeology is that they never get it all, there is always something missed or destroyed. I would say there are enough strange things found to always be able to say "we just don't know". There has been a large numbers of sites found under water in the last few years, at the mouth of the Nile, off Okinawa, and one I just saw in 6 feet of water that was a Greek center of commerce, complete with kilns and pottery facilities. The Ice age had dropped ocean levels up to a hundred feet, so there are sites we have yet to find or explore.
"In the "Bad Nauheim Debate" (1920) between Einstein and (among others) Philipp Lenard, the latter stated the following objections: He criticized the lack of "illustrativeness" of Einstein's version of relativity, a condition that he suggested could only be met by an aether theory. Einstein responded that for physicists the content of "illustrativeness" or "common sense" had changed in time, so it could no longer be used as a criterion for the validity of a physical theory." Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_o....
Note: I did not say I believed in this item, I presented it as an alternative view of something. Since there is no conclusive evidence either way to explain all of this, one explanation is as valid as another. Your criticism is not a good way to have debate or discussion, in that you are claiming to be the judge and jury on "science". There are a lot of areas where there is not scientific evidence to make a conclusion, so we are left with hypotheses, and until such evidence is obtained, we should be open minded enough to consider the alternatives. I assume you also dismiss UFOs as "swamp gas"?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=402xHwQG....
Bad methodology and poor logic are combined to build irrational hypotheses that others claim as fact...and on it goes. And, the response to this criticism is almost always a version of the eternal 'begging of the question' (using remotely, or unrelated, rare instances when "mainstream science" was focused in another direction, then later changed course.) When this happens, further useful discussion isn't possible.
It is a new one to me to see these sensationalist posers posited as victims because they were "roundly ridiculed" for the inept manner they reached their conclusions.
Here is a website that suggests what we see is NOT "well reasoned" but instead Bad Archeology.
https://badarchaeology.wordpress.com/201...
Fanciful amateur archeology, geography and prehistory has been popular for quite some time. Swift, von Danekin, and Donnelly have all done well writing such fiction. It's not science.