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.
So this island in the Azores has risen above sea level since the Pleistocene. I thought the place sank?
originally posted by: bluesfreak
So this island in the Azores has risen above sea level since the Pleistocene. I thought the place sank?
Yes Harte, evidence has already been presented to you in this thread that vertical movement exists/has existed ‘several’ times in its past.
Does this surprise you now? Not read anything thus far presented?
The evidence you present simply tallies with mine in proving vertical isostatic mechanisms exist at the Azores Plateau-
tick 1 for Plato, then? The Plateau CAN rise and lower ABOVE and BELOW sea level.
originally posted by: bluesfreakTick 2- it’s where he said it was
Tick 3- volcanic evidence from the late Pleistocene shows a different shoreline and that the magma event occurred at SEA LEVEL (far lower than today) . The event is also postulated to have been a water/magma event, suggesting a sidewall collapse? We all know what that means for volcanic islands, don’t we?
Except there's no evidence it has been above sea level within the last several million years, and plenty showing that the islands were actually lower, perhaps even covered by the sea, during the Pleistocene.
You'll need a lot more than one volcanic event because seamounts can rise and sink without the plateau even moving - and some those seamounts have been shown to have never been above sea level in the last 2 or 3 million years. If all you have is the seamounts, then: Tick - it's not what Plato described. I've tried to provide the evidence that causes the mainstream not to invest in this idea. If I hadn't, you certainly wouldn't have.
This power came forth out of the Atlantic Ocean, for in those days the Atlantic was navigable; and there was an island situated in front of the straits which are by you called the Pillars of Heracles; the island was larger than Libya and Asia put together, and was the way to other islands, and from these you might pass to the whole of the opposite continent which surrounded the true ocean;
I've tried to provide the evidence that causes the mainstream not to invest in this idea. If I hadn't, you certainly wouldn't have.
originally posted by: bluesfreak
"Clear headshot"
...no an unloaded and missing rifle You can always find 'possibility' and pile possibility on top of other possibilities. In the end Plato's story falls apart due to: No ancient Sais or Athenian or even Greece existing in the time frame asserted. No archaeological evidence for Atlantean existence in the Med - or anywhere for that matter. Those two are real 'killers' and simply cannot be ignored no amount of 'possibilities' can out weigh them. Possibilities are not reality. The present orthodox position is based on a clear lack of evidence for Atlantis. The big bad science community isn't being mean to you.You are quite free to raise the millions needed to explore said under sea geological structures with maritime drones or dredging. But the fringe community won't perhaps you should concentrate on why that is happening? However, it would be cheaper to conduct numerous archaeological excavations in/find new sites around the MED. to find Atlantean artefactsyou might also want to review the archaeological record of Athens and Sais). People have been beating this to death for 150 years+ and they will go on doing so for another 150 more years because they want Atlantis to exist and in their minds the "possibilities" overrides the lack of evidence. They will argue it over and over again but NEVER take the steps to find the necessary evidence.
originally posted by: bluesfreak
It’s not about ‘wanting ‘ Atlantis to exist , as you are so sure of, it’s now become testing Plato against hard data.
By lumping ‘Atlantis’ in with the ‘crystal antigrav’ brigade you can heartily scoff away to your hearts content, looking deep into Harte’s eyes, however, as I’ve stated before , when the geological processes that exist at the Plateau are examined , it’s not so laughable . It’s just that YOU don’t ‘want’ to believe it as you are so closed minded.
If you haven’t read the evidence presented so far, at least tag in with something decent.
I used to think it was the Azores. But that doesn't fit with the "Greater than Libya and Asia combined" part
The Earth was hit by a fragmented comet around 13,000 years ago at the end of the Pleistocene Era and scientists are now starting to agree.
A new research paper has been published in Scientific Reports regarding an ancient civilisation in what is modern-day Syria that was wiped out by the cataclysm, as academics finally come round to the idea that yes this event did happen.
Even the sceptic Michael Shermer, who famously debated Graham Hancock on the Joe Rogan podcast has tweeted Graham saying:
“Ok Graham, I shall adjust my priors in light of more research like this, and modify my credence about your theory.”
originally posted by: kloejen
The Earth was hit by a fragmented comet around 13,000 years ago at the end of the Pleistocene Era and scientists are now starting to agree.
A new research paper has been published in Scientific Reports regarding an ancient civilisation in what is modern-day Syria that was wiped out by the cataclysm, as academics finally come round to the idea that yes this event did happen.
Even the sceptic Michael Shermer, who famously debated Graham Hancock on the Joe Rogan podcast has tweeted Graham saying:
“Ok Graham, I shall adjust my priors in light of more research like this, and modify my credence about your theory.”
Full Article
So a science writer (Shermer) is convinced by a writer (Hancock) about a Younger Dryas impact event. I would like to see some actual paleontologists and archaeologists weigh in
originally posted by: bluesfreak
So a science writer (Shermer) is convinced by a writer (Hancock) about a Younger Dryas impact event. I would like to see some actual paleontologists and archaeologists weigh in
Shirmer’s decision on this is based on the science of the impact proxies, where they were found , and under what circumstances.
Forgive me, as I don’t intend to be rude by any means, but what could an archaeologist add to these results apart from confirming the layers in which they were found?
It seems these proxies are found in the same layer, worldwide, in a similar manner to the proxies that sealed the debate on the KT event . The proxies infer ET related bolides, as did the KT event to a single bolide.
It also seems to me that these results, and future results from this layer, may force a change on the whole of archaeology , geology, paleo studies.
Ps- I feel the term ‘writer’ is a little Harsh on poor old Hancock- lets give him a little credit; he is a researcher, even though the mainstream hate to call him that .
Why have none weighed in? Or have we just missed it?
so that if they didn't know (for instance) about the pattern of tree ring growth during an event they can reach out to colleagues and have the answer (and a discussion and opinion) within a matter of hours via email.
originally posted by: bluesfreak
Hi Byrd,
Thanks for your illuminating response.its much appreciated - Id love to know some of the stories from that Alaskan trip, sounds awesome. Tell us all some of the stories , then ??!?!
I understand your point about phd level stuff, and agree entirely , but strangely , that’s what drew me to the work of the Comet Research Group , 15 phds involved in the research, some serious minds Indeed.
I read the wiki link you posted, some new info which was very interesting , but some also where I’ve read counter refutations of many of those (valid) criticisms , it’s a total back and forth minefield !!! But a fascinating one.
Is Herodotus dating of 25 years correct for the construction of the Great Pyramid? Is that the accepted timeframe ?
Are there any written surviving AE records that give a different length of time for construction.
Is Herodotus the only source?
Do we believe him, but don’t believe Plato? a reply to: Byrd
No. We have the logbook of Merer, but that's just the record of one load. There's actually no records of how long it took to build anything in ancient Egypt. Pharaohs would order things built or buildings and complexes repaired and expanded, but if they kept detailed construction records, they didn't preserve those... any more that we preserved the architectural notes or details of building of the Roman Colosseum, Windsor Castle, Lindenhof Castle, etc, etc.
Sort of. He's unreliable... but he does record what they thought at the time when he lived. So the facts can be wrong but his statements about these untruths they believed are correct.