Has someone here been able to zoom in on the hill at Visoko which is supposedly concealing a huge pyramid? (Using Google Earth or some other means). The hill is purported to be over 2,000 feet high. It is described here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12273759/from/RL.1/
Here is another link to a different MSN article on it. Looks like they have only begun to excavate at this time…so the jury is still out. I’ll see if I can do a google search and dig up (hehe) anything more recent.
-XT
The jury might still be out, but the media are all in:
Updated MSNBC Link:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12402157/
http://www.theartnewspaper.com/article01.asp?id=237
And for the skeptical viewpoint:
http://www.archaeology.org/online/features/osmanagic/
The real scientists are, for some strange reason, dubious of the claim. Even though the “guy digging” (I can’t bring myself to call him an ‘archaeologist’) has clearly traced the structure’s provenance all the way back to the Pleiades by way of Atlantis. Scientists…jeesh. What more do they want?
Now what will be very, very amusing to me is if–crackpot theories notwithstanding–this thing turns out to actually be a man-made structure, and the media will have to take sides between the archaeologists who say it can’t be real and the guy digging who says aliens drew up the plans.
There never seems to be anything in between, huh?
Now that I see more, the guy sounds like a complete flake. It WOULD be pretty funny though if there were something there. (btw, why does it necessarily have to be 12k years old? Isn’t that just this bozo’s speculation, or is there some other geological indication that the site has been undisturbed that long?)
-XT
I’ve posted about this before, months ago.
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=341911&highlight=Bosnian
Please remember, it’s hard not to sound like a drunken loon when somebody shoves a mike in your face.
The Media always distorts.
Well, that’s the thing…IANAA, but I don’t see why it has to be complete BS or a 12K-year-old Atlanto-Pleiadian pyramid. What’s to say it couldn’t just be a striking natural formation that was somewhat altered by early inhabitants of the region to make it more striking? To my thinking, even just a few hundred years of overgrowth could have a big effect.
But I would guess that (assuming it is manmade) the later one dates it, the more one would expect to have found other monuments or artifacts that indicate that those early inhabitants were in fact monument builders. Still, I think Mr. Rose unnecessarily painted himself into a bit of a corner; so frustrated was he with the media’s treatment of this story that he debunked with a sledgehammer what could have easily been discredited with a rubber mallet.
Perhaps someone more informed will come along…would the validation of this find (even if the timeline is completely different) necessarily force a re-write of our understanding of the area’s (pre)history?