Puma Punku and the Ancient Alien Theory

[The Messenger]

Sponsor Messages

There are mysterious structures in many parts of the world that have caused mankind to wonder if aliens interacted with or guided human beings. One such place is Puma Punku. How did the ancients produce such work? Amazing precision and a deep understanding of mathematics are obvious but what about the tools that were used? How could they have had the technology and knowledge to manipulate stone like this?
Ancient alien theorists believe that extraterrestrials interacted with humanity to one degree or another and that they were responsible for many of the mysterious ancient structures such as Puma Punku.
Puma Punka Mystery of Bolivia
The Andes mountains are a majestic sight to behold, covering seven countries on the western coast of South America. The mountains spread into the country of Bolivia where, 12,500 feet above sea level, exists the ruins of the ancient city Tiahuanacu, or more commonly known as Tiwanaku. Among these ruins are…

Posted on Mon, 17 Jan 2011 17:43:21 +0000 at http://www.alienufotruth.com/puma-punku-...en-theory/
Comments: http://www.alienufotruth.com/puma-punku-.../#comments

[D B Sweeney]

For those who believe, there is not enough evidence to completely discount the interplanetary theories. For those who rely on tried and true scientific data, Puma Punku is simply a ruin of a once thriving city existing within the last 2000 years. The point where all can agree lies in the fact that Puma Punku and the nearby abandoned ruin of Tihuanacu are enigmatic pieces of an archaeological puzzle that is far from being complete. Angela Sangster

I fully understand that there are probably unanswered questions about the specific uses of certain structures but the building techniques are fully understood and well within the capabilities of the people and the technology they had at the time.
What I can't agree with is the massive leap in logic that has to be made to make a connection with Extraterrestrial intervention. There is absolutely no evidence to support such a hypothesis other than Danikenesque speculation and confirmation bias.

DB

[scarygirl67]

And if you go by the carbon dating, which is what is accepted by the larger scientific community, then yes, you are absolutely correct. That is why I reiterated those tests that were done. However, as I stated in the quote you used, it is about what people believe even when there is scientific evidence disputing it. For many years, there was a school of thought that places these structures at a much earlier date, and of course, the absence of any tools or construction materials found on the site has led to a lot of speculation.

I simply wrote about the information I found, attempting to show all sides to it. I do thank you for reading and commenting.