Hello dear readers !!!
I am writing this article as an addition to my video, which was published on YouTube.
If someone did not watch it, but accidentally stumbled upon this article, then you can see it here:
So, my further narration will take place taking into account the fact that you have already watched the video and you know the whole point.
Video format is a very difficult way to convey information, because people don't like too long and boring explanations. Therefore, the videos have to be capacious, but with the most detailed disclosure of the issue.
And it is not always possible to fit all that needs to be told into the timing of the video.
I'll start from the very beginning.
On February 3, 2019, I learned that on the social network Vkontakte, a broadcast from the forum "Scientists against myths-9" was published.
And since I knew that at this forum, the sculptor Olga Vdovina should present the finished (finished) version of the vase, then naturally I watched the fragment of the broadcast, where this vase was shown.
Here is this broadcast:
Promotional video:
The segment of the stream that interests me began at the mark: 2:49:36.
After I looked at this fragment, and took several screenshots of the frames of the shown vase, I immediately thought that I needed to contact the author of this vase, Olga Vdovina.
The reason was that I found a few inconsistencies in a well-rehearsed presentation on the forum.
And so, on February 4, 2019, I wrote to Olga Vdovina:
In the video you saw my questions to Olga.
I told her that I saw several flaws:
Olga read the letter almost immediately, but wrote that she was busy at the moment and could answer later.
And as you know, she answered me:
Now I will ask you to watch the specified fragment of the live broadcast from February 3. (start - 2:49:36)
If you carefully watch that speech, you will not hear anywhere that there were chips in the process of work, that there were glueing of the neck and other incidents. On the contrary, Alexander Sokolov invited everyone to look at the vase and make sure that it was real and made of stone.
In other words, the people present at the forum were not told about this.
And for sure, nothing would have been known to this day. If not for my communication with Olga Vdovina.
Also, pay attention to the fact that on the forum post, there is no information about what material the vase was made of, where this material came from and how long it was made.
After all, the broadcast took place on February 3, and I asked these questions only on February 4:
But as you might expect, Anthropogenesis subsequently faked the forum entry.
Fortunately, the original remained, and everyone can see how Sokolov's group is engaged in falsification.
Here's a forum post they've edited:
This recording appeared on the Anthropogenesis Channel, only on March 18, 2019.
And mind you, there are already explanations about what kind of material it is, where it was taken from, how long it took to make the vase, and also added an explanation that a piece of the neck of the vase broke off, which was subsequently glued.
As you can see, it is documented here that Anthropogenesis added this information precisely because of my appeal to Olga Vdovina.
And besides, so shamelessly subsequently edited the entry from the forum.
Now let's move on to my questions that I still have:
Olga Vdovina, used a modern abrasive - an artificial whetstone.
Anyone who understands this issue knows that the abrasive is made using a very complex technology using a press and glue.
And since, according to modern historians, in ancient times they did not know how to compress abrasive shavings, and they could not make a strong glue, the use of an artificial abrasive looks very strange.
The fact is that natural whetstones do not have such a strong grinding effect as artificial ones. They wear off quickly or just become smooth like a mirror.
Usually, natural whetstones are used for the final processing of blades of edged weapons. Since the surface of a natural grindstone is very fine-grained, unlike a coarse artificial abrasive.
This very rough artificial abrasive was used by the sculptor Olga Vdovina.
In my video, I showed that the abrasive was originally made with a curved shape so that the processing of the vase was as simple as possible:
For processing the inner surface of the vase, a coarse-grained artificial abrasive stone was also used:
The most interesting thing about all this is that we are not shown the intermediate stages of processing the inner surface of the vase. We immediately see the finished cavity. This is very strange.
Further, Like Olga Vdovina, she made the inner hole itself:
She used a sheet of copper that was nailed to a wooden shank:
With rotational movements, she drilled the marble, adding corundum crumbs as an abrasive.
Among other things, the ancient vase-maker should have known how to enrich copper, how and from what to make a crucible for melting, be able to use blacksmith's tools, and know the technology in general.
Then we are shown how, Olga Vdovina, drills holes in the ears of a vase using a bow drive and copper wire:
If the Anthropogenesis group has documentary evidence that the Ancient Egyptians could make wire, then let them provide it.
Conjectures and assumptions are not accepted. Only historical facts.
You can't get away with "nemogliks" here.
Let's summarize all of the above
Making a vase with primitive tools looks questionable.
If there were chips and gluing, then there is no guarantee that the whole vase is not glued from pieces. After all, breccia is a material where it won't be noticeable. Since it itself consists of interspersed stones.
A complete record of the making of the vase was not provided. There are only cuts for which nothing is clear.
There are no intermediate stages. Either the beginning of the process is shown, or a ready-made version.
And although the forum post contains an explanation of how Olga Vdovina made the ears for the vase, there is no manual grinding process without rotational movements.
Although it was necessary to remove a very thick layer of several centimeters.
Total
There is every reason to question the reliability of the frames that were presented by Anthropogenesis. Since the process of making a vase fundamentally does not correspond to historical reality from the point of view of official history. Inappropriate technology was used.
Such as: Artificial coarse-grained abrasive stone, iron hammer, copper sheet, copper wire, glue for gluing broken parts and other small parts such as nails, cement and the rest …
Finally, there is reason to suspect that the vase was made using modern turning technology and stone cutters.
And the cutting of frames is an attempt to pass off the industrial production of a vase for manual labor.
An example of this is the vase made by Olga Vdovina for the last forum:
© TM STUDIO