Drowned Cities

We read about mysterious geological figures under the sea, are they really that mysterious.

The links below help explain how some of these lost sunken cities came to be.

I hope you all find the subject as interesting as I have.

Gradually rising seas

For 4,000 years, the world’s sea level has been inching up.

This has been caused by
(a) the melting of the post-Flood ice and
(b) the gradual evaporation or outflow of inland basins to the sea.

The gradual rise of the oceans is thus another clear relic of the Deluge. Flood waters left behind on the land, in the form of ice or inland lakes, have been gradually returning to the oceans. The result has been not only a drying out of the land, but a corresponding rise in sea level.

The Hadji Ahmed map of 1559, whose original source dates back thousands of years, shows a landbridge between Siberia and Alaska, which existed when the original map was drawn. If the ocean between these two land masses were lowered 100 feet today, there would be a dry-land path between them.

According to some oceanographers and geologists, the ocean level may have been as much as 500 feet lower than today.

Ireland was connected with England; the North Sea was a great plain; Italy was joined to Africa, and exposed land cut the Mediterranean into two lakes.

Since then, the rising seas have engulfed coastal land and islands, turning isthmuses into straits and large islands into underwater plateaus.

Along many of the world’s shorelines are lost islands, now deep below the sea, with remains of cities, palaces and temples.

www.beforeus.com...

Images for hadji ahmed map of 1559

www.google.com.au...=hadji%20ahmed%20map%20of%201559

The Minoans
Something that happened around 1500 B.C. was very significant to our studies. It was a cataclysm that affected people around the entire Mediterranean and may have been the greatest catastrophe in history, short of the Great Flood itself. It was the eruption of the volcano on the island that is currently called Santorini, but in ancient times was called Thera.

betterthanufos.blogspot.com.au...

With over 70% of the earth's surface covered by water, we have successfully explored only one to two percent of the floor of the ocean. Every time someone goes down there, they wind up finding something new, whether unknown sea creatures, unknown geological features on the ocean floor or something from the world of man.

The Mediterranean is one of the shallower seas and has been the site of a great deal of archaeological, professional and sport diving and exploration. Over 200 cities have been located on the bottom of the Mediterranean. They're not just around the shorelines, either, where they could have fallen off the coast as the result of erosion. They are distributed all across the seabed, at varying depths.

betterthanufos.blogspot.com.au...

This link shows 10 underwater cities.

From the Shore Temple of India to the eerie bronze figures lining the floor of the Bay of Naples, the vast waters of this planet are littered with the salt-encrusted remnants of ancient civilizations. Each submerged ruin we stumble across is a reminder that as powerful as our cities and kingdoms may be, they don’t hold a candle to the fierce, merciless power of the sea.

listverse.com...

a reply to: keenasbro

Thanks for creating the thread

A few points; mentioning the deluge as an actual event immediately takes your decussion out of the scientific realm and into fantasy.

The Haci Ahmet map you made the comment,

The Hadji Ahmed map of 1559, whose original source dates back thousands of years,

The material for the map came from contemporary European sources and used a cordioform projection developed by 16th century cartographers and mathematiciansSome fringe get all excited because it shows the world distorted, that is probably because where no information could be had Ahmed put land or drew vague coastlines.

Your link for the map image is broken by the way

The site you go to for lost cities is a creationist one with a strong bias....instead of 10 cities we see 4 or 3 depending on how you look at it

1st city is at best unproven and probably just a fraud or bad data

2nd and 3rd exists (Dwaraka) the other doesn't

4th is a rocky ridge line with a number of hoaxed pictures being used to misrepresent it

Then some non-scientific propaganda.

You might have better luck with this on the Origins and Creations forum.

originally posted by: Hanslune
a reply to: keenasbro

A few points; mentioning the deluge as an actual event immediately takes your decussion out of the scientific realm and into fantasy.

Dismissing a theme found in the myths of every culture on this planet is very scientific, questioning it is. Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

Just imagine how many cities will be underwater when the Caspian and Aral seas are reconnected with the Mediterranean...

a reply to: keenasbro

Several years ago, I read about some speculation of the Mediterranean having been flooded by a breach of the Straights of Gibralter some time since the last ice age. This would mean it would have been a large open valley for many years prior and could have been inhabited. If there had been a deluge, as has been told, it is not likely any remains of cities would be there. There is also evidence a similar fate happened to the Black Sea at a later date after the Mediterranean filled up.
So much water was "lock up" in ice during the ice ages it is easy to understand how man could have settled near the, then coast lines, and have their cities flooded when the ice melted back to its current position.
One other point I might make is about your statement of the fresh water lakes and basins draining "back to the seas. This is a part of the normal water cycle of evaporation, rain, and drain which has always happened. What water which may have been leftover from a deluge would have log since drained away. A world wide deluge would also have left salt wter in every lake and steam, killing the fish which lived there; or there would still be large traces of salt in them

a reply to: Hanslune

Mentioning the scientific realm as if it were actual truth immediately takes YOUR discussion out of the reality realm and into FRAUD.

"...the Illuminati eventually controlled the science departments in all colleges and institutions of higher learning. The plan was to stifle scientific knowledge and then twist what was left to fit the science they wanted the people to believe. They accomplished this by adopting new rules in regards to scientific research."

Secret Societies - Who Controls Knowledge?

With respect to its great contributions to society, I think it is important to make a case that science is really affecting society more like a religion now than a field of study or a resource base of useful information. Many everyday people do not understand it at all and accept ALL its teachings on faith. Unfortunately some scientists and academic professionals are not so noble and have perpetrated deliberate frauds and cover-ups of important discoveries.

Has Science become a Religion

Science - The Illuminati Religion and Mind Control Tool for the Masses

originally posted by: Murgatroid
a reply to: Hanslune

Mentioning the scientific realm as if it were actual truth immediately takes YOUR discussion out of the reality realm and into FRAUD.

The problem Murgatroid with your belief is that while you continual state it you've never offer up any proof of such. I suggest (again) that you start a thread here to expound on this idea of yours.

Until then, I'll just chuckle.

originally posted by: CretumOrbis

originally posted by: Hanslune
a reply to: keenasbro

A few points; mentioning the deluge as an actual event immediately takes your decussion out of the scientific realm and into fantasy.

Dismissing a theme found in the myths of every culture on this planet is very scientific, questioning it is. Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

Just imagine how many cities will be underwater when the Caspian and Aral seas are reconnected with the Mediterranean...

I think you left a world out but I'll let you come and change/ add that yourself.

Nearly every culture has a myth about some sort of flood, and also most other natural disasters, floods happen and were memorable but there was no world destroying Biblical flood as stated in the Bible, the story of which comes from Mesopotamia and recounts a massive flood there.

An aside:

Strangely I just finished writing a book that looks at the British expedition that went to take a look at the connection between the Aral Sea, Caspian, the Oxus and the old river beds there, why do you mention it?

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: Murgatroid
a reply to: Hanslune

Mentioning the scientific realm as if it were actual truth immediately takes YOUR discussion out of the reality realm and into FRAUD.

The problem Murgatroid with your belief is that while you continual state it you've never offer up any proof of such. I suggest (again) that you start a thread here to expound on this idea of yours.

Until then, I'll just chuckle.

Neither does 'science' offer up any proof.

The only proof Science is interested in is the type that they can destroy.

It is true there were giants that roamed the earth. The reason we see no archeological evidence is because the government has the Smithsonian Institute come and take away the findings to their warehouse. Why do they intentionally do this you may ask? Because the archeological findings would prove the Biblical account of creation, and they can't as easily deceive the world into believing the lies we have all been taught. www.wearesmrt.com...

The proof lies in the deception.

Evidence is always destroyed when ever crime, fraud, and manipulation are involved.

9/11, JFK, and all the other perpetraitors crimes against humanity make this VERY plain for everyone to see.

There are FAR too many pieces of evidence that were either buried, lost or just plain lied about over the years.

originally posted by: CaptainLJB
...there's tons of excavations of Giants, most of which were sent to the Smithsonian to...disappear! It's the same story over and over again: skeletons found and lost. It's a cover-up, trust me. There's just too many records of these things being dug up, not to mention Indian testimony that their ancestors fought these big guys. Everything points to the Mound-Builders being Giants...

I find it rather ironic that all those "calling BS" are usually the same people holding up these false illusions of reality that they call "Science" and trying to protect their jobs.

• A human thigh bone 8 feet 4 inches long from Mexico.

• Human skeletons unearthed near Palermo, Sicily, in 1548 and 1550, measuring 30 feet, 33 feet and 30 feet.

• Two human skeletons unearthed near Athens, Greece, in recent centuries (one 34 feet long, the other 36 feet long).

• A skeleton reportedly 29 feet in length found in 1456 near the Rhone River.

• A 19'6" human skeleton found in 1577 A.D. under an overturned oak tree in the Canton of Lucerne.

• 23-foot tall skeleton found in 1456 A.D. beside a river in Valence, France.

• A 25' 6 " skeleton found in 1613 A.D. near the castle of Chaumont in France. This was claimed to be a nearly complete find.

Almost beyond comprehension or believability was the find of the two separate 36-foot human remains uncovered by Carthaginians somewhere between 200-600 B.C.
Source

"...a giant footprint of a woman measuring over 4 feet long has been carbon dated at approximately 9 million years old. "...the two-legged being would need to be some 30 feet tall!

"The model of human prehistory built-up by scholars over the past two centuries is sadly and completely wrong, and a deliberate tool of disinformation and mind control. ...they demonstrate a systematic destruction of proofs that show another reality than that the official story. Falsifications and even destruction of such proofs has been common for more than two hundred years." LINK

“we are told not to look into this, it’s pretty well communicated if you research into giants or other races they will end your career immediately, we are told to say it’s all 1800’s media fraud regardless of the evidence, if you ask questions you’ll be working at McDonalds tomorrow”.

"A cave full of giant skeletons was found by telephone employees near Santa Barbara, California. Unfortunately, the cave entrance was sealed shut before proper excavation could be conducted."

"A giant skeleton on Santa Cruz Island, California, was sent to the National Science Foundation in Washington, D.C., where it was promptly "misplaced". Source

"...the sad fact remains that the most persistent commonality between all of these tales seems to be that the bones - the physical evidence - have all somehow gone missing.

If, as Stephen Quayle seems convinced, there is a concerted conspiracy of silence surrounding this archeological evidence, then it is a conspiracy of, well, gigantic proportions. The accounts of these giant remains are too numerous and too far-flung for all of them to have been lost, stolen, or secreted away. And yet, I truly believe the accounts. They are supported not only by an overwhelming body of evidence found in mythology, but an equally overwhelming body of archeological evidence." SOURCE

Quest for Death Valley Giants and the Cover Up

I asked about what happened to the full bodies and the older curator said University of Berkeley had came and taken all the giant skeletons away for study decades ago and this was all that had survived that grab. ...if you research into giants or other races they will end your career immediately, we are told to say it’s all 1800’s media fraud regardless of the evidence, in fact they think they have found a living tribe of Neanderthals in northernmost Canada, but I don’t know anymore about it, it’s pretty controversial, again if you ask questions you’ll be working at McDonalds tomorrow”. Source

"...authorities ordered the skeleton and all the artifacts secretly reburied- and, of course, lost to the scientific study they deserved.” Source

“the biggest cover-up in the history of mankind is the history of mankind itself”

a reply to: Murgatroid

I believe I suggest you start a new thread to prove your off topic assertion.

Why do you feel you need to take this thread off course and off topic - are you unable to start a thread of your own?

Please try again for I'm interested in discussing this with you but not within this other persons thread on a different subject.

Started at Drowned city then shifted to existence of giants? Wtf!

a reply to: Hanslune

The land bridge between North America and Asia is just one example of how low sea levels were at the height of the ice age. The Aral and Caspian show how high the sea levels are when an ice age ends. Most of our cities are along the coast, as they've been throughout recorded history - raising the sea level by 200 feet or so sounds like a 'world destroying flood' to me, even if it isn't literally the entire world.

Someday we might be searching for New York the way we search for Atlantis now, that's why I mention it.

Propaganda was never the intention, as to sites being bias because of their belief/s that is irrelevant to me.
Having not read the Bible (but am fa miler with the story of Noahs Ark, the great flood) I found what I had read very interesting.
As for scientific evidence of the existence of the drowned cities, I think there is plenty around.

The English sunken sites join a list of others that span the globe. According to UNESCO, submerged settlements have been found in Egypt, India, Jamaica, Argentina, Denmark, Sweden, Italy, and the Black Sea.

“Under the sea is probably the world’s biggest museum,” said James P. Delgado, president of the Institute of Nautical Archaeology based in Texas. “There’s not a lot of work going on in this area right now, however. The issues are time, money, interest, and research. Just to do a single shipwreck can take years.... Underwater archaeology costs 10 times more to dig.

www.smithsonianmag.com...

If the great flood is the topic of no scientific evidence, so be it, The drowned cities still drowned.

My opening statement was based on the mysterious under water cities not being so mysterious.

The links I provided (I thought) offered the reader some reasonable explanations as to how these cities ended up on the bottom of the Ocean.

a reply to: Hanslune

originally posted by: CretumOrbis
a reply to: Hanslune

Most of our cities are along the coast, as they've been throughout recorded history - raising the sea level by 200 feet or so sounds like a 'world destroying flood' to me, even if it isn't literally the entire world.

Someday we might be searching for New York the way we search for Atlantis now, that's why I mention it.

Comment; our cities have not been along the coast in the distant past - I think it was Hancock who made that up, the first cities arose along rivers where the water was needed for agriculture. Population of the coast is a fairly recent event in human history, unless the city, like Eridu or Lagash was on both a river and next to the sea.

Thanks for the reply.

a reply to: Hanslune

That's how it would look if sea levels rose today. The coastal cities would be gone but there would still be other cities, mostly along rivers. With the sand and sediment that water would bring you'd be hard pressed to find such former coastal cities even if you had gps pointing you to it. You'd most likely find nothing but oddly-shaped seafloor...

originally posted by: CretumOrbis
a reply to: Hanslune

That's how it would look if sea levels rose today. The coastal cities would be gone but there would still be other cities, mostly along rivers. With the sand and sediment that water would bring you'd be hard pressed to find such former coastal cities even if you had gps pointing you to it. You'd most likely find nothing but oddly-shaped seafloor...

Yes, it would look like that today.
Today, cities on rivers were (almost every one) established when rivers were important transportation routes.

In antiquity, cities did arise along rivers and not on the sea, and for a very good reason. If you think about it for a minute, I bet you'll realize this.

I'd like to note that, once again at ATS, sunken cities are accounted for here by rising sea levels. Nobody ever considers that, although it's true that the sea rises, it's also true that the ground sinks.

That's happening along the coast of India, and that accounts for ALL the sunken lands offshore there that have ever been located.

Just because a city is underwater, you can't simply assume that Ice Age melt off is the cause.

Harte

originally posted by: CretumOrbis
a reply to: Hanslune

That's how it would look if sea levels rose today. The coastal cities would be gone but there would still be other cities, mostly along rivers. With the sand and sediment that water would bring you'd be hard pressed to find such former coastal cities even if you had gps pointing you to it. You'd most likely find nothing but oddly-shaped seafloor...

They wouldn't have disappeared the people would have just moved back, as people have done since they started living near water. The water rose slowly so why don't we see cities stretching away from the coast? Simple that didn't happen.

Cities under water are fairly easy to find because of the resources they use and the debris people used would lay around them, you get 'scatter' patterns of use around them, no such patterns exist as far as I know. Take a look at the cities lost in historic times, they are fairly easy to find unless there is a heavy sediment inflow over them.

How long do you think it took for the sea to rise?

does any on know where to got sonar images found potential cool location to check out -17.911248, 65.980958

a reply to: Murgatroid

Are you joking? Science never offers proof?

All science ever does is offer proof - a theory is proposed and then tested before a conclusion is reached - and then the results are published so that other scientists (or whoever fancies trying) can have a crack themselves to test the hypothesis. It is ever evolving "proof".

And guess what? If something is found to be wrong then those results are also published and corrections made to any theory affected.

Be fair now. Random fringe sites do not follow any of these procedures. They simply make a claim and then stick fingers in their ears to any possible explanation. It can be very entertaining but it is isn't even slightly accurate, which is even funnier when you consider the accusations these sites fling at the scientific approach. Hypocrisy much?

a reply to: Flavian

Science offers no proof because they HAVE none.

But then again they don't NEED proof because the religion of Scientific fundamentalism is a blind faith.

Just like false Religion, Science is a VERY effective form of mind control.

Also just like Religion, hiding the truth is the real agenda behind it.

"...the Illuminati eventually controlled the science departments in all colleges and institutions of higher learning. The plan was to stifle scientific knowledge and then twist what was left to fit the science they wanted the people to believe.

Science - The Illuminati Religion and Mind Control Tool for the Masses

"Throughout recorded history, the Illuminati has successfully withheld from humankind major aspects of history and science in order to subjugate the masses"

Secrets of Suppressed Science and History

originally posted by: Flavian
a reply to: Murgatroid

Are you joking? Science never offers proof?

All science ever does is offer proof - a theory is proposed and then tested before a conclusion is reached - and then the results are published so that other scientists (or whoever fancies trying) can have a crack themselves to test the hypothesis. It is ever evolving "proof".

And guess what? If something is found to be wrong then those results are also published and corrections made to any theory affected.

Be fair now. Random fringe sites do not follow any of these procedures. They simply make a claim and then stick fingers in their ears to any possible explanation. It can be very entertaining but it is isn't even slightly accurate, which is even funnier when you consider the accusations these sites fling at the scientific approach. Hypocrisy much?

Even a blind squirrel finds a nut every now and then, and through this truism Murgatroid is correct that there is no "proof" in science.

There are only theories. For a theory to be accepted, one of the things necessary is that it explains the data (evidence) in a verifiable and repeatable way.

Any theory is subject to the trash bin if new evidence arises. The concept of "proof" entails finality. So, there's no proof.

The only place you can ever find proof is in mathematics. All else is evidence.

The rest of Murgatroid's post (and his subsequent one) is pure blather.

The blind squirrel only found one nut, in other words.

Harte