It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The first world war 7000 years ago?

page: 7
90
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 22 2017 @ 04:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: The3murph

originally posted by: fleabit
So we can find man-made tools over 1 million years old, but we can't find any remnants of what had to have been a civilization at least as advanced as ours, from 7000 years ago? No screws, lawnmowers, rubber or plastics, no weapons, bullets, rotors or engines or any of 10s of thousands of man-made objects that would be simple to find in droves (let alone structures and buildings and highways and such), if such a civilization every existed?

They must have had a heck of a recycling plan, that's all I know!


I grew up in a city that has been fought over since its founding in 1670. We spent our leave time from The Citadel with metal detectors on the battlefields outside of the city searching for relics. The buttons, bullets, belt buckles etc that we found from the Rev War were and are much more degraded than the things we found from The War For Southern Independence. I don't know if you realize that over thousands or millions of years all evidence would be degraded.

Then what the heck are we talking about here?
If "all evidence would be degraded," why assume that it ever existed in the first place?

There was once a colony of beavers that built a rocketship to the moon, but all evidence has degraded....

Harte




posted on May, 22 2017 @ 04:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
I dont buy these ancient epoch tales of todays tech. We'd have unearthed endless bits of milled stainless steel, titanium, etc, by now. I would have myself even!


Actually that assessment would be wrong. Metals that would be in the open would decay easily by the ravages of nature, meanwhile stone would last far longer for tens of thousands of years. In fact, stone would be the only surviving proof of such civilizations after thousands, or tens of thousands of years, because metals would have rusted, decayed and the winds would have carried away most of the rusted metal dust.

Really? Because here's a piece of copper that dates to the time period being discussed - 7k ybp, around the time when this so-called "destroyed city" (which is still standing) was flourishing.

Also, what makes wood more resistant to decay that metal? I mean, these wooden spears are around 400,000 years old. That's older than Homo Sapiens. We found [I]them[/I], didn't we?

Harte



posted on May, 22 2017 @ 04:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: The3murph

originally posted by: WhyDidIJoin
a reply to: anonentity

It must've been an extremely small and lesser civilization, because there's not really much for evidence in terms of what it would take to sustain a technologically advanced civilization, we've mined the hell out of this planet, doesn't look like anyone else did.


Extremely old gold mines have been discovered in South Africa. Maybe as old as 100,000 years...

That's a bogus claim created to make money. The oldest mine ever found dates to 20k ybp and was an ochre mine.

Harte



posted on May, 22 2017 @ 04:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: scraedtosleep


Ok none of this will go main stream simply because most historians and anthropologist are payed not to shake the tree.

Believe any idiocy you prefer, but the statement above is the exact opposite of the truth.

The REAL money and fame to be made in Anthropology is by turning the field on it's head with a stunning new find.
I think we can all agree that the topic of this thread would fit that bill entirely.

Harte



posted on May, 22 2017 @ 04:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: ElectricUniverse


At least we have some official archeological digs, in the Azores which have found Pyramids and artifacts.Thats a long way from their were "no people"
on the Azores before the Portuguese found the place.


From 2013 and they have yet to establish these so-called pyramids as predating the Portuguese.
That, of course, doesn't mean that the Azores were never populated before then.
It just means we have no real evidence of population before then.

Harte



posted on May, 22 2017 @ 04:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: toysforadults
Not a cosmic event?


That's what I wonder too. Isn't there anything native to the universe that generates the same signatures as a nuclear blast?

If mankind had not invented a nuclear bomb, how would we interpret these ancient explosion(s) evidence?

There is no ancient nuclear evidence to interpret.
None.

So, we interpret it as BS, which is what it is.

Harte



posted on May, 22 2017 @ 04:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: JoshuaCox


Most people wouldn't believe an ancient stainless steel tool if it was put in their hand. Here is a latest find, which seems to prove pre dynastic Egypt had iron tools.These are dated at about 7000 years ago, but they cant be because it wasn't even the bronze age!!!!



It is quite well known among interested parties - by that I mean people interested enough to bother to learn - that many ancient cultures had iron before the Iron age.

And why not? The stuff falls right out of the sky after all.

Harte



posted on May, 22 2017 @ 04:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: scraedtosleep


Only that the Portuguese Navy was going to investigate the site.

The submerged Azores pyramid was a hoax.


originally posted by: anonentityDuring the last ice age a country the size of Great Britain existed around the Azores archipelago, which might push the accepted version of civilisation to the point of severe shakiness.


Here's a map of the last glacial maximum -link.
Somehow I'm not surprised that there's no sign of your supposed huge land mass.
Care to explain, or is it just scientists keeping secrets for no known reason?

Harte
edit on 5/22/2017 by Harte because: of the wonderful things he does!



posted on May, 22 2017 @ 04:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: jeep3r

originally posted by: saudi
a reply to: jeep3r

Looks like I have some reading to do.
I see that the Mahabharata has over 5000 pages..this should be interesting.


If the quote exists, it should be possible to find the passage without reading the entire pamphlet:
www.sacred-texts.com...

A site search via Google is available directly in the right sidebar of the site. Alternatively, the texts could be scanned for keywords via the browser search function (usually strg + F) when the full text is loaded into your browser window.

Apologies if I'm just pointing out the obvious.

The passage isn't there, as I explained.

There was once a poster here I held in high esteem named Donner. Donner posted about this - and linked to the section you're interested in - in this post link

Jason Colavito lays out the history of this bull crap claim quite well in one of his blog entries - "The Case of the False Quotes - How Ancient Astronaut Theorists Faked a Hindu Nuclear Explosion." Link

Obviously, this won't change a thing for most of the chronically astonished breathless wonders pontificating here on this baldfaced lie, but you and the guy you responded to (at least) seemed to be interested enough to want to know the facts, so there they are.

Harte
edit on 5/22/2017 by Harte because: (no reason given)

edit on 5/22/2017 by Harte because: of the wonderful things he does!



posted on May, 22 2017 @ 05:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: ClovenSky

originally posted by: babybunnies

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
I dont buy these ancient epoch tales of todays tech. We'd have unearthed endless bits of milled stainless steel, titanium, etc, by now. I would have myself even!


Actually, one of the biggest coverups in the world, IMHO, is the cover up among the archaeological community of artifacts that don't match the official timeline of human history. Do a search online about it, there's a ton of stuff out there on this.


So, do you think the ancient Sumerian tablets are correct then? People know and they are covering this up?

Maybe to protect scaligar's chronology of history?

Sometimes it seems the tablets are too perfect, could they be fakes? That means they have kept This secret for a long time now.

This thing may blow wide open yet.


Sumerian tablets seem real enough. They were found in a basement archive of the royal buildings in a city that had been raised to the ground. Buried and lost in the desert.



posted on May, 22 2017 @ 05:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: stormcell
Humans with brain capacity identical to modern day humans have been around 40,000 years. We only know what happened back to 4500 years with Sumerian culture, and perhaps China. We know there was an ice age around 12,000 years ago, and that there is evidence for a major radiological event like a nearby supernova that was enough to blast the North American continent with high-energy particles.



It is possible that there was an explosion outside earth, whether on mars or a space station, which swept over the earth.



posted on May, 22 2017 @ 05:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
I dont buy these ancient epoch tales of todays tech. We'd have unearthed endless bits of milled stainless steel, titanium, etc, by now. I would have myself even!


Actually that assessment would be wrong. Metals that would be in the open would decay easily by the ravages of nature, meanwhile stone would last far longer for tens of thousands of years. In fact, stone would be the only surviving proof of such civilizations after thousands, or tens of thousands of years, because metals would have rusted, decayed and the winds would have carried away most of the rusted metal dust.

Really? Because here's a piece of copper that dates to the time period being discussed - 7k ybp, around the time when this so-called "destroyed city" (which is still standing) was flourishing.

Also, what makes wood more resistant to decay that metal? I mean, these wooden spears are around 400,000 years old. That's older than Homo Sapiens. We found [I]them[/I], didn't we?

Harte


What about the synthetics required..

Diamond drills, tungsten steel and all the random composite and ceramic stuff..

Could we have had multiple early Bronze Age civilizations?? Absolutely..

But one as or more advanced than us??

No chance



posted on May, 22 2017 @ 05:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
I dont buy these ancient epoch tales of todays tech. We'd have unearthed endless bits of milled stainless steel, titanium, etc, by now. I would have myself even!


Actually that assessment would be wrong. Metals that would be in the open would decay easily by the ravages of nature, meanwhile stone would last far longer for tens of thousands of years. In fact, stone would be the only surviving proof of such civilizations after thousands, or tens of thousands of years, because metals would have rusted, decayed and the winds would have carried away most of the rusted metal dust.

Really? Because here's a piece of copper that dates to the time period being discussed - 7k ybp, around the time when this so-called "destroyed city" (which is still standing) was flourishing.

Also, what makes wood more resistant to decay that metal? I mean, these wooden spears are around 400,000 years old. That's older than Homo Sapiens. We found [I]them[/I], didn't we?

Harte


What about the synthetics required..

Diamond drills, tungsten steel and all the random composite and ceramic stuff..

Could we have had multiple early Bronze Age civilizations?? Absolutely..

But one as or more advanced than us??

No chance


What diamond drill and tungsten steel would this be?



posted on May, 22 2017 @ 05:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: JoshuaCox


Most people wouldn't believe an ancient stainless steel tool if it was put in their hand. Here is a latest find, which seems to prove pre dynastic Egypt had iron tools.These are dated at about 7000 years ago, but they cant be because it wasn't even the bronze age!!!!



It is quite well known among interested parties - by that I mean people interested enough to bother to learn - that many ancient cultures had iron before the Iron age.

And why not? The stuff falls right out of the sky after all.

Harte


Oh yea the concept that there was a time when the best swords/knives/spears on the planet were the only ones made of iron in the Bronze Age.. and the only way to process iron in the Bronze Age is meteors..

So literally the best weapons on the planet were made from shooting stars..



posted on May, 22 2017 @ 05:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: stormcell

After 500 years, all metals would have rusted away, and wood, paper, leather would have decomposed. The only things left standing would be stone carvings and clay tablets.



Exactly. The remains of the global civilisation's early days, long before it grew technologically advanced. Evidence of space ships in the form of carvings, etc. may have been from lesser evolved societies or races who idolised the much more advanced society/-ies.



posted on May, 22 2017 @ 05:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: punkinworks10

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
I dont buy these ancient epoch tales of todays tech. We'd have unearthed endless bits of milled stainless steel, titanium, etc, by now. I would have myself even!


Actually that assessment would be wrong. Metals that would be in the open would decay easily by the ravages of nature, meanwhile stone would last far longer for tens of thousands of years. In fact, stone would be the only surviving proof of such civilizations after thousands, or tens of thousands of years, because metals would have rusted, decayed and the winds would have carried away most of the rusted metal dust.

Really? Because here's a piece of copper that dates to the time period being discussed - 7k ybp, around the time when this so-called "destroyed city" (which is still standing) was flourishing.

Also, what makes wood more resistant to decay that metal? I mean, these wooden spears are around 400,000 years old. That's older than Homo Sapiens. We found [I]them[/I], didn't we?

Harte


What about the synthetics required..

Diamond drills, tungsten steel and all the random composite and ceramic stuff..

Could we have had multiple early Bronze Age civilizations?? Absolutely..

But one as or more advanced than us??

No chance


What diamond drill and tungsten steel would this be?

He's talking about things that would be used by this mythical advanced society that would remain to this day, and he's right.
I took the simple route - he's on the complicated one.
If wood can last for 400,000 years, I think glass/metal etc. can.
BTW, today's skyscrapers have foundations of thousands and thousands of cubic yards of concrete. That we would certainly find a million years from now.

Of course, skyscrapers are particularly vulnerable to atomic blasts, especially ancient atomic blasts, so maybe they didn't build them for that reason, or anything else that required any foundation. LOL

Harte



posted on May, 22 2017 @ 06:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: anonentity

Why couldn't the explosion have been large clay pots full of gunpowder. China had gunpowder in the 9th century, who's to say other cultures did not have it. There are a lot of things that happened in the past that we will never find proof of.


Why couldn't the explosion have been a grain silo or something of the like?

There are several possibilities. Im unsure how much rubble has been carried off over the ages, but a silo exploding would leave a mark.



posted on May, 22 2017 @ 06:57 PM
link   
was already posted once

edit on 12017MondayfAmerica/Chicago5141 by Wolfenz because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 22 2017 @ 07:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Harte


He's not alone in his theories according to him fellow scientists agree.www.dailymail.co.uk... rence.html



posted on May, 22 2017 @ 07:24 PM
link   
a reply to: LoneCloudHopper2


As long as we remember that we were the monkeys, it makes sense.



new topics

top topics



 
90
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join