You can contact scientists yourself. And sorry, but I don’t think this is worth another look. I think it’s baloney. Just like planet Nibiru, Atlantis, alien abductions, astrology, etc.
My point exactly.
There’s a very good reason why science requires much higher standards of evidence than what we see in the Ica stones. If it didn’t, it would also be granting a free pass to anti-vaccination, astrology, homeopathy, water divining, reading tea leaves, feng shui, indigo children, and the Flat Earth Society. And hospital emergency departments would look like this:
4 Likes
There are true, I’ve had seven trips to Perú from Spain.
My history: PIEDRAS DE ICA - ICA STONE
See you!!! #piedrasdeica #piedradeica #icastone #javiercabreradarquea 
1 Like
If you watch that last video I posted you can see the pictures they copied.
It is an exposed rock. Covered with barely visible graffiti. If someone drew a picture of Noah taking a selfie on a boat … would you accept that as compelling?
A scratched drawing of an out-of-time-sequence image is exactly what we would look for in a fake… don’t you think?
1 Like
So let me understand your thinking: you believe that someone making a faked image would not refer to notes?
Your approach makes little sense to me …
Actually, the dinosaurs posed for their portraits.
1 Like
Join us next Sunday for another episode of “Game of Stones.”
3 Likes
@beaglelady @gbrooks9
You should both check out @Abraham_Veciana_Guti’s website (if you haven’t already)! I would be interested to hear your comments on his testimony!
I’m not fluent in Spanish, but I noticed that he includes a video about Erich von Däniken, the loon who proposed that earth has been visited by ancient aliens. His book, Chariots of the Gods? , caused quite a stir in its day. Some of your stones purportedly show that and other weird stuff.
Don’t get me wrong–I do like science fiction–Star Trek, Star Wars, The Expanse, etc. But I don’t have an overheated imagination, and don’t buy into ancient astronauts visiting earth or the Alien Crash Site in Roswell, N.M. or Planet Nibiru, or whatever.
1 Like
@beaglelady
I have read “Chariots of the Gods,” and I would, for all it’s worth, probably say it is a worthy read (assuming you take most of it with a couple shakers of salt [or maybe a couple Utah salt flats worth in some areas]). Other than that the premises are, as you said, looney, some of the content is…fascinating. However, it is important to note that some (probably a LOT) of it is misleading, as he sites the Nazca lines as ancient alien landmarks and airfields (a point which Dr. Swift demolishes in his book, “Secrets of the Ica Stones and Nazca Lines” (which is a book I would highly recommend [far over “Chariots of the Gods”])
Anyhow, I think we should put the Ica stones on the shelf for now (unless there are a few more pressing questions regarding them), and I will make a new topic for them later, when Mr. Woetzel, I myself, or @Abraham_Veciana_Guti finds anything new (although “I myself” will PROBABLY not be finding anything for the next few years outside the realms of research).
Your Erich von Däniken believes that religions have their origins in visits by ancient alien astronauts. And he interprets some of Ezekiel’s visions as alien spacecraft.
@beaglelady
Yes he does, some area even need to be taken with THE ENTIRE DEAD SEA’S WORTH of salt 
.
However, the key to reading…anything…is figuring out what is probably false (with the tools of logic), and trying to pick out a few fascinating tidbits of truth here and there (in some things these tidbits are sparser than in others; choose what you read wisely).
I think it would be most wise for me not to read this book.
If you really have to ask this question because you don’t know, then you’re not in a position to assess the validity of the Ica Stones.
The testimony of people who have seen them and seen images of them.
Physical evidence on the continent in which they were found that dinosaurs and humans did not coexist, includes layer upon layer of rock and soil separating dinosaur and human remains by millions of years. The most recent dinosaurs for which there are fossils, lived in the Cretaceous Period which ended 66 million years ago. That is a breathtakingly long time before humans even existed on the planet.
As mentioned previously, in this very thread, 'all the footprints and other human artifacts which have been dated as co-existing with the dinosaurs, and all the evidence of dinosaur and human conflict in the fossil record, and all the dinosaur fossils dating to the same time as humans".
3 Likes
This is one of many things I don’t understand about your approach to evidence and sources: You appear—correct me if I’m wrong—to ignore 99.9% of the most valuable, well-documented, peer-reviewed published evidence and focus instead on the least reliable sources and evidence. Why?
For example, you appear to rely heavily on relatively obscure and well-debunked hearsay and that which is little more than rumor. Paleontologists have absolutely shredded any purported anatomical accuracy which a very few non-experts claim to have found in the Inca stones and the Cambodian temple engravings. Yet, it sounds like you consider such “evidence” (i.e., Inca stones and an alleged stegosaurus engraving which looks far more like a rhinoceros surrounded by leaves) as outweighing tons and tons of geological, paleontological, anatomical, and genomics evidence which establishes sound timelines for dinosaurs and humans. Why? I ask NOT to ignite another debate on these topics. No, I’m trying to understand (1) how you go about selecting that which constitutes evidence, and (2) why do you disregard peer-reviewed science in favor of questionable sources, such as a book written by a person untrained in archaeology (or any other relevant field) but having a PhD in Systematic Theology? (That author’s reactions to Stephen Meyers questions about his book and the underlying evidence were both curious and disturbing—and certainly was neither academic nor professional or even the expected reaction of a mature adult.)
And why do you consider Chariots of the Gods a “worthy read” when the author has never bothered to educate himself in any academic field relevant to the book’s focus and his career is marked by sensationalist nonsense that was debunked by scholars long ago? You admit that “most of it” is questionable and even, as you stated, “looney”. Why do you look to discredited sources and (correct me if I’m wrong) you rarely if ever cite peer-reviewed scientific works of proven value? Are you more interested in the sociological aspects of pseudo-science and tabloid journalism? If so, I readily admit that I share that fascination. I am very interested in how people go about selecting the data which matters to them as well as show people go about taking sides in popular controversies. Yet, I don’t look to amateurs for help with scientific analysis requiring intensive training and experience, just as I don’t look to Jenny McCarthy for a scientific analysis of vaccine efficacy.
On the topic of whether humans and dinosaurs were contemporaries, have you ever compiled a list of YES and NO arguments/evidence? Again, I’m not trying to rehash the specific evidence—but I am trying to understand the processes you went through in determining your own position on this topic. Why does something as obscure and poorly evidenced as Ica stone dinosaur drawings feature so prominently in your conclusions?
I had thought that at some point you would post a list of scientific evidences for your position—but I get the impression that your conclusion is based more upon what you want to be true rather than upon the available evidence. Do correct me if I am wrong. But even though the title of this thread includes “and Other Evidences of Humans and Dinosaurs”, we’ve not seen any other of such evidence after 97 posts.
Again, I’m trying to understand how you reached your present position rather than wanting to rehash the merits of specific arguments. Many millions of people believe that humans and dinosaurs co-existed at the same time, but I doubt that even one in a hundred would point to Ica stones as the reason for that opinion. Many people have told me that they don’t even need any tangible evidence for their position because they are simply “taking the Bible as the truth”, even though millions of Christians who disagree with them on dinosaur timelines also believe that the Bible is true. So please help me to understand where you are coming from methodologically. Thank you!
7 Likes
The most damning evidence against the authenticity of the dino stones comes from this video which I posted earlier. If the artist really saw live dinosaurs, why does he portray them the way they used to be depicted before modern research showed that we had it all wrong? e.g. Tyrannosaurus rex used to be depicted like Godzilla, in a standing posture with a dragging tail.
That was shown to be inaccurate, and how T rex is portrayed in a stalking position, like a road runner.
And for pete’s sake, why don’t the dinosaur stones show any feathers?
6 Likes
).