Atlantis and Classified Archaeology

Originally posted by Chakotay
Just found another reason digs could go black. This one gives me the creeps. Page 245 of Imagining Atlantis by Ellis:

Alexander Langmuir of Johns Hopkins, the epidemiologist who (with his colleagues) proposed the name "Thucydides syndrome," suggested influenza complicated by toxic shock as the cause of the Athenian plague...

Yikes. If one digs up the wrong mummy on the wrong day, all heck could break out.

Actually, no. Germs have a limited shelf life.

"Thucydides syndrome" is a name for something that they think they have identified (with no real "smoking gun")
assets.cambridge.org...

Many ancient diseases faded as populations evolved that could more effectively resist the effects of the diseases. You're more likely to come down with someting from recent molds growing in a tomb than you are from an ancient disease.


Nice pics, OTS...

Originally posted by Byrd Got a source on this one?

On the Ballard and the dig, no I do not. They were documentaries, the dig was about two genetecists interested in optaining dna samples of of all phoenician skeletal finds as they are attempting to identify same with the Lebanese. Included were several meetings with the female who unearthed the site, and who disclosed her loss of same along with her on-going attempt to be placed back on the dig. I recall no names. The Ballard find was also a documentary, one of many on his voyages and finds. Knowledege does not begin and end with the internet, I am sure if you are interested you could research Ballard.

Because it was in Egypt's territorial waters. The Egyptians (after centuries of dealing with the problem) are tired of folks coming in and digging up their ancient sites and looting them. There's a number of rules to be followed (including, I think, hiring Egyptians) and only a limited number of licenses granted.

That is a bit of a leap, they had no problem with allowing him to search the waters for a Phoenician ship, just with the find.

...and Somewhere, how did you miss the translations of the Dead Sea Scrolls? And the display of them? I think photos/scans of the text are also available online in addition to the translations listed here:
ccat.sas.upenn.edu...

Oh I have missed them all have I Byrd? Every single last have have been translated and made public have they? Please say yes, so I can ask you a question in return.

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween
On the Ballard and the dig, no I do not. They were documentaries, the dig was about two genetecists interested in optaining dna samples of of all phoenician skeletal finds as they are attempting to identify same with the Lebanese.

Mmmkay. After hunting up some sources on Ballard, I can see why he might have problems since he's an oceanographer and not an archaeologist. But on his own website and on other sites, he doesn't mention the incident.

.Oh I have missed them all have I Byrd? Every single last have have been translated and made public have they? Please say yes, so I can ask you a question in return.

As far as I know, the originals have been translated (with some debate about badly fragmented pieces.) I'm not aware of any new finds since the 1990's... so... whatcha got?

Originally posted by Byrd
Actually, no. Germs have a limited shelf life.

Actually, they don't. Especially viruses and prions. This article deals with frozen bacteria; spores, nanobacteria, viruses and prions can also have extremely long viability timelines under dry conditions. We do not know everything about microbial hibernation yet, and caution needs to be exercised.

And while you may be immune to Thucydides Syndrome if your bloodline comes from the Greeks (assuming it was not Ebola, which has been suggested in the literature), you may not be immune to whatever the Archaic people were carrying centuries ago in the locale where you are digging, if you have not inherited their immunity.

There is yet another modern hazard in digging- like your modern fungus example, there are many other organisms that plague farmers, construction workers and others who break open the Earth. Like archaeologists.

Remember when it was fun to dig a hole in the ground? Be careful out there.

[edit on 7-3-2005 by Chakotay]

Did anyone even go to the link I provided in my first post?

Originally posted by ByrdMmmkay. After hunting up some sources on Ballard, I can see why he might have problems since he's an oceanographer and not an archaeologist. But on his own website and on other sites, he doesn't mention the incident.

Oceanographer, archaeologist...semantics really is it not? one digs up dirt the other dredges ocean silt. His documentary was produced unless you would like to accuse me of either lying or hallucinating.

.Oh I have missed them all have I Byrd? Every single last have have been translated and made public have they? Please say yes, so I can ask you a question in return.

As far as I know, the originals have been translated (with some debate about badly fragmented pieces.) I'm not aware of any new finds since the 1990's... so... whatcha got?

For starters and In short, 7Q20 and 7Q21. Where are they?

[edit on 3/7/05 by SomewhereinBetween]

[edit on 3/7/05 by SomewhereinBetween]

Originally posted by National Security Agency
Did anyone even go to the link I provided in my first post?

Yes saw it. There is another post related to those pieces of archeology posted on ATS. Though some of these items are interesting and mysterious, those aren't black, we already know about them.

The topic of black archeology is interesting to me and I do believe it does and has existed. I believe the Catholic Church has bought, stolen, or confiscated many artifacts and writings over hundreds of years in an effort to control (I'm Catholic) their belief system. Though many of the Dead Sea scrolls were released, the church tried tirelessly to obtain them first. In addition, you can believe that they have many things that nobody, including their own cardinals, will ever get to see.

[edit on 3/7/2005 by infinite8]

Very very interesting topic, guys. Cheers!

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween
Oceanographer, archaeologist...semantics really is it not? one digs up dirt the other dredges ocean silt.

No, they're two very different disciplines. There ARE underwater archaeologists but he's not one and they aren't oceanographers. There are a lot of treasure hunters who aren't oceanographers or archaeologists (and who can damage valuable sites in the search for treasure.)

His documentary was produced unless you would like to accuse me of either lying or hallucinating.

Niether. I just observed that I didn't find it on his site. I saw his documentaries reviewed on other sites, but there's no mention of the material you cited. That doesn't mean anything... only that there isn't a source around to see exactly what he said.

For starters and In short, 7Q20 and 7Q21. Where are they?

I don't see much material on this in the web, and the one site with a lot of material around says that they may not exist. If the fragments exist, they seem to contain only a few letters and not a whole book. So, if you'll forgive me, I fail to see what significance you find in this. Perhaps you can explain?

Originally posted by ByrdNo, they're two very different disciplines. There ARE underwater archaeologists but he's not one and they aren't oceanographers. There are a lot of treasure hunters who aren't oceanographers or archaeologists (and who can damage valuable sites in the search for treasure.)

Don't try and bamboozle me Byrd. An archaeologist will dig through the dirt for artifacts or remains of past life; an oceanographer such as Ballard dredges the ocean floor for artifacts and whatever remains of life happens to come with it. They are both after the same end product; facts; what happened; why; history; evidence. ballard is hardly a treasure hunter searching to find a Phoenician longship in waters under the control of foreign governments.

For starters and In short, 7Q20 and 7Q21. Where are they?
I don't see much material on this in the web, and the one site with a lot of material around says that they may not exist. If the fragments exist, they seem to contain only a few letters and not a whole book. So, if you'll forgive me, I fail to see what significance you find in this. Perhaps you can explain?

The significance is this; Cave 7 is described as containing Greek texts only, however, Ernest Munro, no stranger to Revue Biblique, noted the IAA endowed Fr. De Vaux in his contribution to DJDIII made the mistake of publishing alongside the supposedly Greek only find, two fragments written in either Hebrew or Aramaic, I don't recall which. They have since vanished. The question then is how is it possible a) for these extra-Greek fragments to be found in a greek only manuscript cave and b) where have they disappeared to since the picture publication of the two in 1962?

Further, Cave 9 was found surprisingly with only one fragment. Indeed! While the world still awaits of the hundreds entrusted to the venerable J.T. Milik, his translation of the Son of God fragment. This is a rather controversial piece where the only known transcription was provided elsewhere, and we have no idea if the text used is complete.

Once more, Israel held jurisdiction of these scrolls for decades before losing the embargo because of pictures that were released. We have absolutely no idea if we have them all, they certainly had time to secret that they did not wish to be known and publish only those exposed in the 50,000 pictures. 7Q20 & 21 suggests just that, where C9 with only one lone fragment, certainly raises an eyebrow or two.

Being a geologist myself I'm quite interested in this "Black geology" mentioned earlier. Any links? Just what exactly is black geology?
As far as I'm concerned, geology is a science that is made up as it goes along. The duluge - plate tectonics to possible pole shifting.

BoB, have you ever worked for USGS? What most 'outsiders' don't realize is that USGS handles classified information. Within established security protocols. Take Mt. St. Helens. Ever read that its ash plume has radioactive content? Sure its public in the journals now, maybe a few news reporters put it in a few dailies as a one-paragraph filler in the 1980's.

But before you could have read it there, President Carter was briefed orally using embargoed data, not-for-public-release.

There is more on and under the planets than we are allowed to know. Yet.

Originally posted by BattleofBatoche
Being a geologist myself I'm quite interested in this "Black geology" mentioned earlier. Any links? Just what exactly is black geology?
As far as I'm concerned, geology is a science that is made up as it goes along. The duluge - plate tectonics to possible pole shifting.

Are you SURE you're a geologist?

Perhaps you're just a hobbyist?

I"ve taken a couple of courses. Nobody believe in a "duluge" (it's spelled deluge and there is no evidence of one) and it's surprising that you don't know about geomagnetic shifting and so forth.

Now, I would know a gneiss from a llanite, and can identify Cretaceous formations here in Texas, including the major uplifts. In doing archaeology, I need to know a lot of geology, including soils and so forth. Your message is certainly startling from someone who is supposed to be a geologist.

Originally posted by Chakotay
Actually, they don't. Especially viruses and prions. This article deals with frozen bacteria; spores, nanobacteria, viruses and prions can also have extremely long viability timelines

Granted... but what's not being dealt with is changes in both diseases and populations over time. And spores and all do die off, even if slowly. I haven't read of anyone coming down deathly ill from an ancient germ.

I could be wrong, mind you... but I haven't seen any evidence.

And while you may be immune to Thucydides Syndrome if your bloodline comes from the Greeks (assuming it was not Ebola, which has been suggested in the literature), you may not be immune to whatever the Archaic people were carrying centuries ago in the locale where you are digging, if you have not inherited their immunity.

The survival was under "ideal, dry conditions." Let me assure you that between all the climate changes and just normal ol' Texas climate, those germs don't have a chance. They are drenched, roasted, frozen, stomped on by critters, dug up by critters and insects, and moved all around. Soil creep redistributes stuff, too.

(one of many pages about soil moement www.arcl.ed.ac.uk...)

There is yet another modern hazard in digging- like your modern fungus example, there are many other organisms that plague farmers, construction workers and others who break open the Earth. Like archaeologists.

Remember when it was fun to dig a hole in the ground? Be careful out there.

Eh, those were always there. Just see if a lil' germ stops me!

(I'm doing a road trip this week for petroglyphs!! Woohoo!!!)

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween
Don't try and bamboozle me Byrd. An archaeologist will dig through the dirt for artifacts or remains of past life; an oceanographer such as Ballard dredges the ocean floor for artifacts and whatever remains of life happens to come with it. They are both after the same end product; facts; what happened; why; history; evidence. ballard is hardly a treasure hunter searching to find a Phoenician longship in waters under the control of foreign governments.

Maybe in "common parlance" they are the same, but in academic circles (and at universites) they are VERY different. Here's what we mean by each:
Archaeologists learn about the past from material remains, which could be anything from fragments of bone to buried cities.

Excavations (called 'digs') are only part of the work - a lot more time is spent planning, before the excavation takes place, and analysing and recording finds afterwards.

Archaeologists also use investigative techniques such as:

Fieldwalking - searching ploughed fields for artefacts such as pieces of pottery or Roman coins.
Aerial photography - this can show up bumps or depressions in the ground that are characteristic of ancient settlements.
Laboratory tests, such as radio carbon dating.
www.connexions.gov.uk...

Oceanographer:
Oceanographers study the oceans, observing and measuring currents, tides and circulation, rocks under the sea, plants and animals, and examine the interaction between the sea and the atmosphere.
They usually specialise in physical or chemical oceanography, marine geology, marine biology, surveying and cartography or computer modelling.
They spend some time each year in fieldwork - working in small boats or on large research vessels. The rest of their time is spent running experiments or analysing data on computers
www.connexions.gov.uk...

Very different jobs.

A MARINE ARCHAEOLOGIST is an archaeologist who specializes in underwater archaeology. Here's the web page of a Marine Archaeologst... you can see how their job differs from the Oceanographer:
oceanexplorer.noaa.gov...

]The significance is this; Cave 7 is described as containing Greek texts only, however, Ernest Munro, no stranger to Revue Biblique, noted the IAA endowed Fr. De Vaux in his contribution to DJDIII made the mistake of publishing alongside the supposedly Greek only find, two fragments written in either Hebrew or Aramaic, I don't recall which. They have since vanished. The question then is how is it possible a) for these extra-Greek fragments to be found in a greek only manuscript cave and b) where have they disappeared to since the picture publication of the two in 1962?

I'm interested. Do you have original sources for this? I find nothing about it elsewhere and am curious.

7Q20 & 21 suggests just that, where C9 with only one lone fragment, certainly raises an eyebrow or two.

Mkay... one thing I'd wonder about is site contamination or the possible existance of another jar that was damaged and removed/destroyed (by anything, including goats.)

Interesting stuff, but I don't see a clear conspiracy yet. And if I'm not mistaken, none of the books found has greatly overturned any religion.

Originally posted by Byrd

]The significance is this; Cave 7 is described as containing Greek texts only, however, Ernest Munro, no stranger to Revue Biblique, noted the IAA endowed Fr. De Vaux in his contribution to DJDIII made the mistake of publishing alongside the supposedly Greek only find, two fragments written in either Hebrew or Aramaic, I don't recall which. They have since vanished. The question then is how is it possible a) for these extra-Greek fragments to be found in a greek only manuscript cave and b) where have they disappeared to since the picture publication of the two in 1962?

I'm interested. Do you have original sources for this? I find nothing about it elsewhere and am curious.

Provided as per the bolded and especially the underlined text.

7Q20 & 21 suggests just that, where C9 with only one lone fragment, certainly raises an eyebrow or two.

Mkay... one thing I'd wonder about is site contamination or the possible existance of another jar that was damaged and removed/destroyed (by anything, including goats.

You might wonder about that, some like me wonder what it is about that one piece the goats did not like. Or what other reasons there might be to contribute to only one lone fragment.

And thank you for the precise definitions.

For the past 48 hours the 280-foot (85-meter) oceanographic research vessel Knorr, temporary if not harmonious home to some 30 engineers, scientists, and academics, as well as a rotating roster of friends and financial supporters, has been lashed to a pier in the northern Turkish city of Sinop, kept from its appointed mission by the lack of research visas. The American ship and crew have come to the Black Sea to investigate ancient shipwrecks, but the local media are skeptical. During the day packs of journalists scramble up and down the stone dock, aiming their cameras and questions at anyone on the deck within earshot...

Ballard's original itinerary called for testing his machines on a series of Greek and Byzantine wrecks off Bulgaria and Turkey before moving on to a pair of 2,700-year-old Phoenician wrecks off Egypt. But weeks earlier, just before the Knorr left its home port at Woods Hole, Massachusetts, complications in his negotiations with the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences forced Ballard to scuttle that leg of the cruise for now. Later, after the expedition was under way, Ballard would also get word that Egyptian security had denied him permission to explore the Phoenician ships.

For Ballard, a restless, 61-year-old oceanographer ...This is the summer Ballard intended to plant the flag for a new multidisciplinary approach in which the worlds of maritime archaeology and oceanography would merge. Ballard's plan calls for remotely controlled vehicles to carry out the careful excavation of deep-sea wrecks, and for their activities to be broadcast live via satellite to scholars and students back on the beach over Internet2, the next-generation network not yet available to the public. Once the kinks are worked out, research vessels laden with ROVs would begin systematically searching the deep for wrecks of antiquity.
magma.nationalgeographic.com...

Originally posted by Byrd
(I'm doing a road trip this week for petroglyphs!! Woohoo!!!)

I don't know if it is still accepted practice, but in the old days we used to dust the glyphs with aluminum powder with a camel hair brush for photographing. The powder washes off in the first rain.

And no, I didn't draw in the alien spacemen