Forbidden archeology Flood myth

a reply to: AndyMayhew

Aye. In 5,000 years time will tales of the Boxing Day tsnuami, Japanese tsunamim Haitian earthquake, Pakistan earthquake and Hurricane Katrina, for example, all be thought to be accounts of the same event? Especially given that they all occurred about the same time .....

There you go.

I wonder what tales they will tell of Mans inhumanity to Man via nuclear weapons and modern warfare. That could include WWI, II, and the current endless war cycle.

a reply to: punkinworks10

Thanks for the insight. Coyotes 'brushy tale' and comets.

I heard the same thing about tales of Chinese dragons.

The recent Russian meteor, considering what we know about the science of meteors, is easy for us to understand. To ancient peoples that would have been 'end of the world' type stuff.

a reply to: intrptr

Flying snakes, feathered serpents, dragons, great flying worms that dive into the sea, all good metaphorical candidates for observing large meteors or comets.
And its here that you statement about several different events being rolled into one common mythology, starts to bear fruit, mainly in meso america, where the bronze age encounters that gave rise to the featherd serpent motif, were confabulated with much earlier traditions of the end of previous worlds, to form the creation traditions we know today.
The biblical flood story fits this bill perfectly.

originally posted by: punkinworks10
a reply to: intrptr

Flying snakes, feathered serpents, dragons, great flying worms that dive into the sea, all good metaphorical candidates for observing large meteors or comets.
And its here that you statement about several different events being rolled into one common mythology, starts to bear fruit, mainly in meso america, where the bronze age encounters that gave rise to the featherd serpent motif, were confabulated with much earlier traditions of the end of previous worlds, to form the creation traditions we know today.
The biblical flood story fits this bill perfectly.

Oh I believe in creation (intelligent design), but not the 'traditional' biblical kind.

The people that made those stories up didn't know Meteors from DNA, i.e. never looked thru a telescope or microscope, the most primitive of earthbound technologies.

I think they struggled like they did with foreseeing the future, they had no idea what modern technology was, is.

As far a floods and what we call Tsunamis, we didn't know how they played out until Indonesia and Japan quakes.

A Tsunami, were the whole ocean slowly comes ashore is 'like' a flood.

a reply to: intrptr

Thanks for the link to the Tsunami footage....it brought me back to the first time I saw it when I understood the design parameters of the Ark.....IMHO it was designed to be able to absorb impacts with different materials of specific sizes in a specific fluid environment full of junk.More like a Tsunamis sweeping scraping action than a rain caused flood.

originally posted by: one4all
a reply to: intrptr

Thanks for the link to the Tsunami footage....it brought me back to the first time I saw it when I understood the design parameters of the Ark.....IMHO it was designed to be able to absorb impacts with different materials of specific sizes in a specific fluid environment full of junk.More like a Tsunamis sweeping scraping action than a rain caused flood.

Granted, narrative does say the waters 'rose'. That describes flooding action more than crashing waves, although depending on location and shoreline, could be both.

Theres one other such slow flood video from Japan. If you ever have the time, this is the most apocalyptic sort of developing scenario, especially towards the end when night falls and, as far as the eye can see, there is nothing but flood water, fire and stranded masses of people.

Any flood can have dramatic footage of inundation (as in Japan), with masses of debris pushed ahead of the wave front, this is particularly disturbing because it is so far inland, miles up a river channel.

a reply to: punkinworks10

the number 7 keeps popping up because it relates to the planetary bodies

in hamlets mill they discuss this subject its a great book and definitely worth a read if you are interested in creation myth and astronomy

Im beginning to think that all of mans creation myths are really just accounts of initiation and if read and understood one could find information on how to achieve higher states of consciousness or new ways of thinking.

a reply to: sapien82

en.wikipedia.org...

Myths are a byproduct of legitimate oral history transfer that morphed into oral traditions and storytelling......Myths are timeline dependant......what if our myths are not old at all.....what if our timeline is incorrect...what if they are only a few thousand years old?At what point do we abandon the word Myth and credit these stories as being accurate oral history?

a reply to: one4all

Humans love to talk about themselves and also like to tell stories , so I do believe myths are real in a sense
in the idealist sense of the world

originally posted by: one4all
a reply to: intrptr

Thanks for the link to the Tsunami footage....it brought me back to the first time I saw it when I understood the design parameters of the Ark.....IMHO it was designed to be able to absorb impacts with different materials of specific sizes in a specific fluid environment full of junk.More like a Tsunamis sweeping scraping action than a rain caused flood.

It was just a big, square, wooden box ....

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

originally posted by: one4all
a reply to: intrptr

Thanks for the link to the Tsunami footage....it brought me back to the first time I saw it when I understood the design parameters of the Ark.....IMHO it was designed to be able to absorb impacts with different materials of specific sizes in a specific fluid environment full of junk.More like a Tsunamis sweeping scraping action than a rain caused flood.

It was just a big, square, wooden box ....

Made of gopher wood, so the gophers on board wouldn't starve.

Harte

a reply to: AndyMayhew

Thank you for the lead-in.

Methinks ...it was a purposemade Survival Ark specificlly designed to IMHO function during a Global Continental Displacement Wave....it was a one of a kind wonder.....much better than a SuperCarrier or anything else afloat....you can measure the parametrs of these Continental Displacement Waves...size...speed...direction...and repeatability provides a baseline and knowing this allows you to concieve of Ark specifications....even the placement of the Ark was sympathetic to survival as per the Global Continental Displacement Wave models template .

One must keep in mind that the keystone issue with surviving this event is ....location location location....and had the Ark been built in an area without the exact parameters history records it would have been destroyed...simply having an Ark is just not enough ...like simply building a D.U.M.B is just not enough.

answersingenesis.org...

I personally liked the navigational method used by the Ark....again perfectly designed for optimal function during a GCDW Event.

a reply to: Harte

I prefer the kopher-wood interpretation.

en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: one4all
a reply to: Harte

I prefer the kopher-wood interpretation.

en.wikipedia.org...

You gopher-starver!

Harte

a reply to: Harte

www.youtube.com...

originally posted by: one4all
a reply to: AndyMayhew

Thank you for the lead-in.

Methinks ...it was a purposemade Survival Ark specificlly designed to IMHO function during a Global Continental Displacement Wave...

An awfully small wonder, then, and actually not capable of surviving a global disaster. According to the Bible, it's 450 × 75 × 45 ft (the site you linked tends to fudge things...by quite a bit. You can look this answer up in the Bible, however, and calculate the measurements (use the standard cubit used by Hebrews; not the royal cubit of the Egyptians.)

It's smaller than the Titanic, about five (and a bit) times the size of the Mayflower, and less than 1/4th the size of the big cruise ships of today. The Empire State Building is 1454.16 feet high, 187 feet wide and 424 feet long - so the Ark is considerably smaller than that. The Ark is roughly the size of four Greek triremes. The building at the Ark Encounters park (built by Ken Hamm) is not exactly the dimensions in the Bible.

So... it's not going to survive much of a real disaster.

a reply to: Byrd

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

Well,methinks it would survive a specific type of disaster.

It was built in a sheilded protected area which helped out....watch 2012...the Arks were built up high to give them a chance to catch the crest of the water at a specific time.

Covered,difficult to capsize in wavy xtreme seas,can be navigated without power using the wind and stone anchors, ect ect ect.

You are entering a proxy debate about the cubit.....so build one using both cubits.....lol......use the bigger one if you like try them both scaled down and go with the best one ,the models have been built and tested .

I think there were multiple Arks.

a reply to: jamespond

If I'm not mistaken that's the one Robert Schoch said was "natural." It becomes ridiculous when one says something is natural just because it cannot be explained scientifically. I'm not so sure that was his dilemma regarding this formation but I see that a lot in my research.

a reply to: Aboom

Except that Schoch doesn't just say it's unexplainable therefore it must be manmade. Likewise, it's equally ludicrous to say "we have no idea how this could have been made so it must be some lost, advanced technology and modern humans are devolving " which is a frequent byline used on ATS regarding the personal incredulousness of some posters who die to innate confirmation biases refuseto even look st the possibility that they could be wrong.

This is what Dr. Schoch said about Yonaguni (the site off of Southern Japan)

As difficult as it may be for some to believe, after carefully studying the Yonaguni Monument I have to report that I do not believe it is an artificial, human-made structure. It is indeed an absolutely incredible structure, and well worth seeing, but I must conclude that, based on all of the evidence, it is primarily a natural structure. The rocks of the region break out neatly, both along horizontal and vertical planes, and naturally form the step-like appearance. This is seen both underwater and on the surface of Yonaguni.

However, if I simply state that the Yonaguni Monument is natural, I leave out part of the story. On the island is evidence of very ancient human habitation, including tombs and other structures artificially carved from the bedrock (see the accompanying photo) that I am convinced mimic, and were stylistically inspired by, the natural features of the island, including the step-like features now submerged by the ocean. Indeed, I believe that even though the Yonaguni Monument may be primarily natural (say, over 95% natural), parts may have been "touched up" by ancient humans and the ancient inhabitants of the island may have both admired and utilized the Yonaguni Monument. Analogously, we can consider the famous prehistoric cave paintings of Europe. The caves themselves are natural (although in a few places perhaps artificially enlarged), but the caves were utilized by ancient humans and the paintings on their walls and ceilings are clearly artificial productions by early humans. Although, disappointingly, the Yonaguni Monument is natural, the island itself attests to habitation by an early human population.

As far as Bet Dearka off of NW India, it is indeed a real archaeological site. It is not however a pre LGM site dated to 12 Ka or 32 Ka as I see dates being ascribed to it online. There is good evidence that it is a site closely related to Harappa or st least had trade with them and also trade with Rome so it's the result of pretty recent, in geological terms, natural activities that submerged parts of the island much like several Greek and egyptian sites of known provenance in the Mediterranean.

a reply to: peter vlar

Humans are absolutely devolving....geneticlly....humans are regressing back towards the mean....which to me is is defined as the natural state humanities dna had normally evolved to prior to being "tweaked"/Advanced.....IMHO more evolved homo-sapiens introduced their own evolved and doctored or programmed DNA into us.........and as we speak Mother Nature is doing what she does best what makes her win EVERY TIME.....finding a way......to create a tilted playing field which is aimed at finding the balanced mean...Mother Nature is slowly erasing the genetic upgrades and as she does she regresses us or brings us BACKWARDS towards the mean.