What strange surface marks are those?
I must admit I was mainly refering to the Mitchell-Hedges Skull wich is both the most mystirious and sophisticated and does have very fine polishing marks (but you DO need a microscope to detect them) the Aztek type ones are very crude in commparison, but then so are most of the modern ones as well!Xanatic said:Okay, not strange surface marks then, just surface marks. I know there are lots of crystal skulls, saw one in a shop for 800 pounds. And the aztec did make a lot of small ones. But these two Skulls of Doom should be quite special. For example that they do not have surface marks, not the ones you would expect from being polished in the hand or on machine.
Apparently when Hewlett Packard Labs did their examination of the Mitchell-Hedges Skull they did find the polishing marks under microscopic examination (vage recolection of a BBC2 mini-series on the Crystal Sculls and their orthentisity or lack of), but then marks or no marks it is one hell of an impressive piece of work!Xanatic said:All the light going out in Cairo. Considering the time and the probable state of their power plants, doesn´t seem all that unlikely.
From what I understood it didn´t even have microscopic markings. Apparently if it is polished by hand you´d find small lines going in all directions. With a machine you´d find parallell lines, but they found no lines at all.
When you polish metal samples for examination under the microscope the direction of the polishing action is purposely altered every so often so that you don't end up with a series of parallel grooves.Xanatic said:Apparently if it is polished by hand you´d find small lines going in all directions. With a machine you´d find parallell lines, but they found no lines at all.
If I may be allowed .....-Oracle- said:Ahem (clearing my throat to give ES a total ear blasting)...
...WHY IN THE NAME OF THE PHAROH'S WOULD IT BE MADE UP FOR HOLLYWOOD IF THE CURSE WAS ALREADY INSCRIBED ON THE MANTLE OF THE ENTRANCE TO THE BURIAL CHAMBER?
Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.......answer me that you small cabbage!
Yep, I've heard that one too. IIRC you're not allowed to take photos of it any more, due to the nastiness gone on before. I know I've got something about it somewhere, but I can't for the life of me remember where now. I'll have to dig around, but don't hold your breath.Originally posted by Johnnyboy
Sorta related, does anyone know anything about the supposedly cursed / haunted sarcophagus in the British Museum? Apparently, a photographer topped himself after taking photos of it, and people have had strange experiences near it and seen figures coming out of it. Or is this just another one from the Usbourne Book Of Scary Mummy Stories?
That would be the same Arthur Conan Doyle who thought that some children's cardboard cutouts of fairies were mythical beings, and who once ascribed the saying 'If you remove the impossible, what remains, no matter how improbable, is the truth' to one of his famous fictional characters. It's a pity he didn't employ this logic in his own investigations. Strange guy.Helen said:The whole curse rubbish was made up by Marie Correlli and Arthur Conan Doyle.
Just 'cos the camera flashes are detrimental to the fabric. Most museums with valuable displays disallow flash photography now.Helen said:...you're not allowed to take photos of it any more, due to the nastiness gone on before
Yep, that makes more sense, and is a bit more obvious. Damn, wish I'd thought of that Obviously, the weekend has killed off a few more braincells....Mr. Bingo said:Just 'cos the camera flashes are detrimental to the fabric. Most museums with valuable displays disallow flash photography now.
There were a number of photographs and yes, taking into account that they were made by kids, they were excellent. However, even a cursory glance will tell you that the figures they depict were cardboard cut-outs. For a long time I actually thought the photos were just 'mock-ups' of the originals and assumed that the originals had been lost. When I realised this wasn't the case I couldn't believe that anyone could have been taken in by them.Xanatic said:Apparently that photo was really well-made. So I think you should be careful before blaming him. Though he did believe too much in spiritualism.
I know from personal experience that some people, no matter how rational they may otherwise be, will swallow all kinds of rubbish if it conforms to their world-view.Mr. Bingo said:...I couldn't believe that anyone could have been taken in by them.
English-speaking mayhap, but AC-D was a Scot. I saw some film of him once - he shounded jusht like Sean Connery!James Whitehead said:....Doyle's involvement in spiritualism - he was its biggest English celebrity - .......
:eek!!!!:Hey you leave my Scots-Irish ancestors out of this! D+mnYaAyes! :madeyes:DerekH said:That wouldn't be the same Ireland that the Scots came from??
(Think you're going to escape that easily, eh?)
There are problems with that "evidence" ,Yes, Mitchell-Hedges was apparently not one to let the facts get in the way of a good story. He claimed that his daughter found the skull in Central America but evidence indicates that he bought it at Sotheby's in 1943: