Know_files/FINGERPRINTS OF THE GODS.pdf - D Ank Unlimited

Graham Hancock – FINGERPRINTS OF THE GODS
physical changes. Some of these, such as the rise of the Altiplano from
the floor of the ocean, certainly took place in remote geological ages,
before the advent of human civilization. Others are not nearly so
ancient and must have occurred after the construction of
Tiahuanaco. 10 The question, therefore, is this: when was Tiahuanaco
built?
The orthodox historical view is that the ruins cannot possibly be
dated much earlier than AD 500. 11 An alternative chronology also
exists, however, which, although not accepted by the majority of
scholars, seems more in tune with the scale of the geological
upheavals that have occurred in this region. Based on the
mathematical/astronomical calculations of Professor Arthur Posnansky
of the University of La Paz, and of Professor Rolf Muller (who also
challenged the official dating of Machu Picchu), it pushes the main
phase of construction at Tiahuanaco back to 15,000 BC. This
chronology also indicates that the city later suffered immense
destruction in a phenomenal natural catastrophe around the eleventh
millennium BC, and thereafter rapidly became separated from the
lakeshore. 12
We shall be reviewing Posnansky’s and Muller’s findings in Chapter
Eleven, findings which suggest that the great Andean city of Tiahuanaco
flourished during the last Ice Age in the deep, dark, moonless midnight
of prehistory.
10 Earth In Upheaval, p. 76: ‘The conservative view among evolutionists and geologists is
that mountain-making is a slow process, observable in minute changes, and that
because it is a continuous process there never could have been spontaneous upliftings
on a large scale. In the case of Tiahuanaco, however, the change in altitude apparently
occurred after the city was built, and this could not have been the result of a slow
process ...’
11 See, for example, Ian Cameron, Kingdom of the Sun God: A History of the Andes and
Their People, Guild Publishing, London, 1990, pp. 48-9.
12 Tiahuanacu II, p. 91 and I, p. 39.
72