Ica Stones

@gungasnake,

Quote:

Why would anybody create many thousands of these things before they could be sure that anybody would buy the first one of them

.

Why did Ford build the EDSEL? How about all the fake DALI prints? They were mostly all done prior to any demand.
Marketing doesnt seem to be a strong point for you either gunga.

You havent presented any compelling evidence. ALl of the wikis and sites you point to arent at all scientifically sourced . They seem to be self published stuff that has no special goal except huckstering .

I am amazed at your gullibility though. You dont show any evidence of having done any questioning of your own. When you brought it to our attention the other day, several sources provided us all doubt that these were even real, and of those that were real, we have no way of distinguishing. Yet you just dismiss the skeptics without any analysis of your own. Can I say MArk 15: 16

If I was in ownership of a few of these goobers Id submit them to Geochron Inc for alpha track analysis on the surface and the scratches in the rock. ALPHA radiation is only a surficial marker. If a scan is done across the native stone and perpendicular to the etching, then the etching and the surface should have about the same amount of alpha tracks because, statistically, wed scan all around the stone and wed see the uptake of alpha radiation of the side that faces the atmosphere as opposed to the side facing the ground. The theory is thatsomewhere along the scan line, if the rocks and the etching were the same ages, the etching and the rock matrix would have the very same alpha track loading. If the etchings are continuously much less dense than the rock itself, badabing, that means its its a fake.

On one of your rocks I saw the dinosaur tracks with " 5 toes". How come nobody noticed the cartoon like features of the dinos. DO YOU THINK that they were done by Mr Hamlin himself?

1 Reply

@gungasnake,

gungasnake wrote:

Seems to work fairly well...

I bet you're peeking Wink

But you can't admit it, so now you're stuck pretending you don't hear us. Meanwhile we're free to demolish your fantasies without challenge. You've turned yourself into a sitting duck (with blinders on). Brilliant.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

On one of your rocks I saw the dinosaur tracks with " 5 toes". How come nobody noticed the cartoon like features

The logic of the thing is not difficult. Ica stones which somebody might buy NOW will be highly likely to include a certain number of fakes. The people in those villages almost certainly have access to electricity and Dremel tools NOW, and they know NOW that people will buy the things.

In 1962 producing one of the things would have amounted to a whole lot more work, and there was no guarantee that anybody could find a buyer for as many as one or two of the things. Under those circumstances, the chances are basically zero that anybody would go to the extraordinary effort to produce thousands of them on pure speculation.

Other than that, nothing I read indicates that anybody has any sort of a scientific way to date the things although most believe that the oxidation layers on most of them indicate significant age.

2 Replies

@gungasnake,

gungasnake wrote:

Quote:

On one of your rocks I saw the dinosaur tracks with " 5 toes". How come nobody noticed the cartoon like features

The logic of the thing is not difficult... [wild blahblahblah speculation]...

That's not logic. That's rationalization.

0 Replies

@gungasnake,

Quote:

Ica stones which somebody might buy NOW will be highly likely to include a certain number of fakes. The people in those villages almost certainly have access to electricity and Dremel tools NOW, and they know NOW that people will buy the things

Your logic is funny.
1They make fake ICA stones today because DREMEL tools are available now.

2In 1962 they didnt have DREMEL tools so these ICA stones of that era are not fakes

WHAT if we discovered that DREMEL tools were manufactured in 1932?, by a Mr Dremel who patented his nifty rotary razor blade sharpener and rotary tool? would that change your theory?
Speaking of tortuoeus logic, yours is almost Midieval.

Quote:

nothing I read indicates that anybody has any sort of a scientific way to date the things although most believe that the oxidation layers on most of them indicate significant age.

I suspect that youre not accepting my discussion on alpha tracking because its not , technically a geochron tool. Yet it would tell whether the scratches and etching in the ICA stone "glyph process" was younger or older than the rock surface itself as the rock is exposed to light Alpha track analysis Its a technique used in archaeology and field geology all the time.

Do you get your science exclusively from the Rush Limbaugh and Filed and Stream magazines?

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Still not reading very carefully. The big problem is the sheer numbers of the things in the first batches which turned up, and that at a point in time at which they would have been difficult to make and nobody had any idea as to whether anybody would be interested. Nobody goes to that much trouble on sheer speculation.

1 Reply

@gungasnake,

I heard of 341 ICA stones . Where did the thousands more come from?. Anyway, Sheer numbers dont ensure authenticity do they?. Bigger Ponzi schemes seem to attract even more gullibles. Mr Poinzi couldnt hold a candle to Mr Madoff.

I think we are boiling it down to which ICA stones are indeed authentic. Since we know that some are FAKES, that door has been opened for more careful forensic examination. I think the reason that noone is spending much time doing it is because many people suspect (from cursory inspections) that they are mostly fake.

You seem to like to fantasize that science is a huge cabal of like minded conspiracists who are trying to hide the truth about Creation evidence. That is total eyewash, since scientists would love to scoop eaxch other and find some new piece of data that would ither be the "next big thing", or would dump the whole theory intom a cocked hat. Look at string theory, there are as many scientists who are working against its primacy as there are those working for.

Evolution and especially paleosciences are hugely competitive with entire careers on the line when one paleontologist or paleoanthropologist ties their career to one or two fossil animals or hominids. People like the LEakeys or Don Johannson have been pretty much left in the shadows of newer more numerous finds in the Horn of Africa and in Asian than Olduvai.

The importnace of geochrono testing is fully supportive of all fossil sequences excavated. Discuss that if you will.

1 Reply

Gunga Dim is fond of ipse dixit. Dr. Cabrera has said there are thousands of these things, and that's enough for him. Dr. Cabrera has claimed that there are 100,000 or more at the original discovery site (which he won't--or can't--reveal), and that's enough for Gunga.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

http://www.forteantimes.com/features/articles/259/jurassic_library_the_ica_stones.html

Quote:

Our story has several possible beginnings, but we’ll start on 13 May 1966 in Ica, the capital town of a small Peruvian coastal province, some 186 miles (300 km) south of the capital Lima. It was the 42nd birthday of a local physician, Dr Javier Cabrera Darquea and his old friend, photographer Felix Llosa Romero, had presented him with a seemingly innocent gift " a curiously marked stone.

Dr Cabrera " who had a long-standing interest in the prehistory of the region " examined the design on the stone and identified it as a species of fish that had become extinct millions of years ago. News of his excitement reached the ears of Carlos and Pablo Soldi, brothers and well-known collectors of pre-Inca artifacts. They showed Cabrera thousands [/i] of similarly-marked stones found in the nearby Ocucaje region and told him that they had repeatedly failed to interest archæologists in investigating the area. Cabrera bought 341 stones from them for the equivalent of UK£30.

Cabrera’s private museum includes a collection of stones belonging to his father " Bolivia Cabrera, a Spanish aristocrat " gathered from the fields of the family plantation in the late 1930s [/i]. They resembled his new acquisitions and soon he found another supplier " a farmer named Basilo Uschuya " and bought many thousands more[/i] from him. By the late 1970s, Cabrera estimates, he had over 11,000 of these anomalous engraved stones.

Every indication is that thousands of these stones had been created before the first one ever was sold. Again there is no evidence that any technology beyond hammers and chisels was ever used.

1 Reply

Gunga is f*ckin' hilarious. This is from the article which he has just cited and linked, although he neglected to include it in the portion he quoted:

Quote:

In 1997, the documentary’s producer, Bill Cote, decided to cash in on two controversial items dropped from the original broadcast. The segment concerning the Ica stones was called Jurassic Art and was marketed for cable television and the video sales market. The production centred on Steede’s research as he was the latest archæologist to investigate the collection. When Steede met Basilo Uschuya, the farmer confirmed that he had engraved the stones from drawings that Cabrera had brought to him. Why? “Making these stones is easier than farming the land.” Uschuya stated that Cabrera had about 5000 ‘genuine’ stones " ie. stones that Uschuya himself had not made " and that he had not fabricated all of the others, contrary to what he had previously stated. We have no clues as to who else might be making these stones.

Cabrera explained Uschuya’s implication by admitting that a large number of stones had indeed been copied, but they were only for sale to tourists. There is of course little harm in creating replicas; a position most museums will be happy to agree with. Doubters will argue that Cabrera only confessed to his part in these forged stones when faced with his accomplice’s statement " so how can we rely on any of his other statements? We also wonder whether Cabrera had asked anyone else to fabricate stones. Cabrera continues to maintain that his stones are genuine and that there is still a hoard of genuine stones, whose secret location is guarded by Uschuya and others. Cabrera claims he was shown a cave in which the cache of stones had remained hidden for millions of years. This cave was revealed, he says, after a severe rainstorm washed open a new area near the Ica river. (This may or may not be the event referred to by Herman Buse in 1965.) Cabrera remains tight-lipped on who took him to the cave and as no maps or pictures of it exist we have only Cabrera’s word for it. Cabrera has stated that he hopes it will not be found. Even Erich von Däniken, who describes Cabrera as a “warm friend”, was denied the privilege. Steede, who offered to be blindfolded throughout the journey to the cave, was also rebuffed and now believes the cave never existed.

0 Replies

@gungasnake,

I too , read the entire article and reach the same conclusion as set. It appears that Uschaya actually carved a stone that, after being surface patina'd and using a dentist drill, looked like all the other stones.
The article does more to disprove your thesis . Its apparent that Cabrera, and USchuya had lied at times (WHICH times were these guys lying), AND, at least some of the stones are fake and the several stones that are GENUINE (by virtue of provenance established by the museum), contained more prosaic subjects, no flying saucers or dinosaurs just men fighting or doing what comes natural to a Moche bloke.

0 Replies

Trying to think where I've seen this sort of logic and what comes back to me is Arlo Guthry telling the sheriff that he PUT the envelope with his name on it under the five-ton pile of garbage.

Again to my thinking the evidence is sufficient that no reasonable person could think that the original groups of Ica stones which turned up were fakes or forgeries.

1 Reply

@gungasnake,

Quote:

Again to my thinking the evidence is sufficient that no reasonable person could think that the original groups of Ica stones which turned up were fakes or forgeries

Well, heres yer problem mister, Your attempts at snotty pseudo-logic aside.

You dont even have a slight clue as to which those "original stones" may be. You only wish that the original stones were covered with the space and dinosaur glyphs. YET, you cant povide any evidence at all.
I dont deny that there may be some ICA stones that are not fake. These probably stood as tem[lates for the fake ones. Now, its up to someone to show that the dino stones and sp[acemen stones ARE NOT fakes. Does that logic penetrate the outer most layers of your cognitave center?

I believe that you are so quick to buy into anything that Art Bell says that your brain has no room for logical analysis.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

I believe that you are so quick to buy into anything that Art Bell says that your brain has no room for logical analysis.

Any I wonder why? Gunga is not alone in his attraction to conspiracy and fantasy. He's obviously afraid of what he perceives as an ethical cost to evolution, but I'm not sure that's enough to explain his obsession with outlandish theories and denial of reality (although it's probably all connected to some core motivation).

Maybe Gunga is attracted to conspiracy theories because in his own mind there is a conspiracy of the ego to undermine the id, and he projects it onto the outside world. Wouldn't that be cool.

1 Reply

@rosborne979,

Not only that, but Gunga's obsession over an alleged ethical cost is not well founded. There is no evidence that the NSDAP or old Joe Stalin used an accurate description of the principles of Darwin's work to justify their deeds. One cannot reasonably condemn someone's work just because someone else attempted to use a distorted version of it to justify their criminal acts. And Gunga only makes statements from authority--he has never provided a shred of evidence that the NSDAP or the Soviet communists were motivated by a theory of evolution.

1 Reply

Quote:

User ignored(view)

User ignored(view)

Say what??

1 Reply

@gungasnake,

gungasnake wrote:

Quote:
User ignored(view)
User ignored(view)

Say what??

We know you're peeking. Just admit it. We'll go easy on ya. Wink

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

Not only that, but Gunga's obsession over an alleged ethical cost is not well founded.

"not well founded" is being generous. It's actually baseless. The facts of reality and nature exist without regard to human preferences and prejudices. Next Gunga will complain that storm clouds look threatening, so we should pretend it's not going to rain.

0 Replies

Apparently, Gunga Dim thinks that having "put us on ignore," we should simply hang our heads in shame and skulk away. Perhaps he thinks that no one is entitled to comment on his threads without his personal imprimatur.

0 Replies

Somebody else has a question on this one I'll respond to it. I don't really have anything more to say to this same little crew of four or five ****birds I have on ignore.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know