 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Warp" <war### [at] tag povrayorg> wrote in message
news:48ebb22a@news.povray.org...
> - The first Egyptian pyramids were not constructed until about 3000 BC.
>
> - Overall, complex cities and buildings were not developed until about
> that time, ie. 3000 BC.
haha .... that's what I zeroed in on when the trailers for the theatrical
release was going around.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Holsenback <jho### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> "Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
> news:48ebb22a@news.povray.org...
> > - The first Egyptian pyramids were not constructed until about 3000 BC.
> >
> > - Overall, complex cities and buildings were not developed until about
> > that time, ie. 3000 BC.
> haha .... that's what I zeroed in on when the trailers for the theatrical
> release was going around.
You mean the trailers spoiled the egyptian pyramids? In the movie that
was not really shown until quite late in the movie, and could be regarded
as somewhat of a surprise.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
news:48ecb0ac@news.povray.org...
> You mean the trailers spoiled the egyptian pyramids? In the movie that
> was not really shown until quite late in the movie, and could be regarded
> as somewhat of a surprise.
As I recall the notion of cities is what bugged me .... Caves, grog, and
maybe fire, but cities NO! You are correct! I don't recall pyramids in the
trailer .... that would have been as you said too BIG of a spoiler.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Xavier Manget <NOS### [at] nospamfreefr> wrote:
>> Warp, you're not expected to *think* when you go and see a popcorn movie...
>> ;-)
>
> As I commented, there's a limit to the willing suspension of disbelief.
Yes, but your limit isn't large. I bet 90% of viewers didn't notice any
of the flaws you mentioned.
--
Aim Low, Reach Your Goals, Avoid Disappointment.
/\ /\ /\ /
/ \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z
>>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
anl
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mueen Nawaz <m.n### [at] ieeeorg> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> > Xavier Manget <NOS### [at] nospamfreefr> wrote:
> >> Warp, you're not expected to *think* when you go and see a popcorn movie...
> >> ;-)
> >
> > As I commented, there's a limit to the willing suspension of disbelief.
> Yes, but your limit isn't large. I bet 90% of viewers didn't notice any
> of the flaws you mentioned.
That's probably because 90% of the viewers haven't read their books... ;)
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Btw, is it just me, or did the baddies sound like the Goa'uld?
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
48ecdc26@news.povray.org...
>
> "Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
> news:48ecb0ac@news.povray.org...
>> You mean the trailers spoiled the egyptian pyramids? In the movie that
>> was not really shown until quite late in the movie, and could be regarded
>> as somewhat of a surprise.
>
> As I recall the notion of cities is what bugged me .... Caves, grog, and
> maybe fire, but cities NO! You are correct! I don't recall pyramids in the
> trailer .... that would have been as you said too BIG of a spoiler.
>
> Jim
I didn't see it but I thing I'll look at it as a fantasy.
http://www.ecranlarge.com/movie_video-view-4759-688.php
Marc
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> This must be the movie with the biggest amount of anachronisms I have
> ever
> seen. It feels like they were deliberately trying to put as many
> anachronism
> as they could in the movie, plus other inaccuracies. Artistic license is
> understandable, but there are some limits to willing suspension of
> disbelief.
Just to be fair, I have to point out that there are quite a few
popular counter-culture examples of the current understanding of
pre-history being wrong.
I haven't seen the movie, but I understand it loosely follows
Graham Hancock's theories about pre-history.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graham_Hancock
Autopsies on frozen mammoths often find vegetation they ate was
not typical of the current climate.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v14/i3/mammoth.asp
Rain weathering marks on embankments near the sphinx
are suggested by some to place the dating near 10000 BC.
http://www.robertschoch.com/Sphinx_Geology.html
The largest early Greek ships are known to have been in excess of 200 feet
long.
http://www.discoverychannel.co.uk/ships/ancient_greek_ships/index.shtml
Some early Egyptian mummies (1000 BC) have large amounts of
cocaine and nicotine in them, both coca and tobacco are commonly
thought to have been traded from the Americas only after Columbus.
http://www.faculty.ucr.edu/~legneref/ethnic/mummy.htm
Corn is depicted in Ming dynasty Chinese art. (1368 AD)
http://yakushi.pharm.or.jp/FULL_TEXT/125_7/pdf/583.pdf
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Rain weathering marks on embankments near the sphinx
> are suggested by some to place the dating near 10000 BC.
> http://www.robertschoch.com/Sphinx_Geology.html
>
But one thing is for sure though, the pyramids are not close to 12000 years
old. There is clear evidence of when they were constructed and by whom.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Halbert wrote:
> But one thing is for sure though, the pyramids are not close to 12000 years
> old. There is clear evidence of when they were constructed and by whom.
I read that what they found when they recently looked at the stones of
the Egyptian pyramids with a microscope is ground up limestone slurry.
That is to say, they aren't giant blocks of stones hoisted into place.
They're poured concrete.
Explains quite a lot, doesn't it?
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
