a reply to: AdmireTheDistance
I agree that these are man made and being used as dams/reservoirs today.
Here is a screenshot of the page I linked from the Google Free Library. (Page 19 of this
Here is a sketch from C.W. Babbage's sketchbook, made from an expedition in 1858 (source
mentioning proximity to square water holes.
While I don't know the history of modern industrial Australia as well as some, It would seem that many of the were already there and being exploited
(and quite possibly imitated) by modern people. I doubt that there was enough modern activity to account for all of them (at least as of the early
19th century.) I also agree that people will always have a need to exploit and retain water resources in a dry climate no matter what time period. But
that explanation, while simple, fails to account for a few important things:
Why such a uniform shape and scale? There seem to be several varieties, but the larger ones are on par with the WTC reflecting pools in NYC (about 75
meters or so on each side.) Retention ponds, while generally rectangular, don't have to be so similar over an entire continent; they only have to be
built to meet the needs of their specific location. Their uniform shape (despite many sites being severely eroded and barely recognizable) suggests to
me a more rigid and precise standard for construction with a modern adaptation to save time building your own.
As I stated in my opening post, these basins clearly correspond to rivers, not just where they flow today, but rivers which appear to have long since
dried up (though I admit I don't know how long that is.)
However, I would argue that the damning evidence for their age is, aside from their advanced erosion, the fact that their layout extends beyond
current shorelines and into the shallow seas north of Australia proper. This is the best example I could find (with coordinates) but there are many
The last part was my opinion. Just a feeling, which I can't prove. I'm speculating, which is all I can do after a point. For now I'm just trying to
point out the similarities between clearly artificial formations in different places. If you have Google Earth, study their relationships to rivers in
the desert (where they're the most clearly visible) and you'll be able to infer traces of them elsewhere. Just try not to let pareidolia get the best
of you. I'd suggest using one type of placemark for possible sites vs. ones you're more certain about, as these run the full gamut, especially outside
of Australia. Apparently traces of the element mercury have also been found under
pyramids in China
. Until recently the accepted theory was
that pyramid-building was just a natural phase for separate cultures to go through.
But why is it ridiculous to think that an ancient people could have been scientifically advanced, but in a different way than us? Not every rise to
the stars will be marked on an Apple Watch. But if there was an advanced culture here that we can't trace our modern progress back to, it suggests
something catastrophic occurred and we had to start over. Oral traditions from indigenous people all over the world speak of fire in the sky, then a
flood, then having to flee their drowned homeland and begin again.
It's almost easier to stomach the "aliens" argument than to think of nature being that cruel.
edit on 30-4-2015 by
johnsequitur1221 because: Morgan Freeman
edit on 30-4-2015 by johnsequitur1221 because: grammar and reply tag