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.

 

6,500 Year Old Anchor Stones in FLorida

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 09:25 AM
link   
For amature and armchair archeologists one of the obtacles is just getting people to listen to your theories and to view your evidence openmindedly. Here's a good example in today's Tampa Tribune.

A local man has identified what he believes to me massive mooring stones scattered around Florida and he struggles in vain to get someone established in archeology to examine them. Because he has out of the norm theories as to the Garden of Eden and Atlantis being located in Florida his identification of the stones is ignored. He finally finds a willing ear in Archeologist Bill Donato.

Here is a segment of the article:


There, wedged deep in the grass of the median on Dailey Lane, about 150 yards from the Pithlachascotee River, sits a massive stone with two holes, both 17 1/2 inches in diameter.

Donato said it clearly was an artificial formation with distinct rope grooves running through both holes and other properties that show it may have been used as an anchor or mooring stone.

"The size is astounding,” Donato said, “far bigger than anything I’ve seen. It may have been a mooring stone. The Romans used circles set this way. It’s a similar shape to Carthaginian findings.


from:
STEVEN ISBITTS
The Tampa Tribune

In the article the reporter makes the comment that Saxer, who found the stones, was "homeless for much of 2004". Seems reporters can't mention an out of the mainstream theory with out trying to find something that would discredit the man or label him a crackpot.

tboblogs.com...
edited for format

[edit on 26-6-2006 by rollinoffset]

[edit on 26-6-2006 by rollinoffset]

[edit on 26-6-2006 by rollinoffset]




posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 09:51 AM
link   
that picture on the link you've provided

the combined position of the 2 holes, the light & shadows of the stone
leaning against the tree...gives me a mental image of a Owls head

maybe it wasn't an anchor at all, but a bas relief object representing
an Owl...whose those guys, the Bohemian Grove, that idolize owls?

if it were an anchor of some sort, it sure is unwieldly looking
and i think there would be evidence of chipped & broken edges
from use...who do you suppose braided 17" dia. ropes
at around 4,500 BCE



posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 01:05 PM
link   

"I don’t believe any of the Garden of Eden theories, or most of John’s views of Atlantis, which I did my master’s thesis on,” Donato said before his trip here. “I’m interested because the pictures are similar to anchors found at Bimini last year and to [5,000-year-old] finds in the Middle East."


Here are some images of the anchor stones that have been found in the middle east, as Donato says.



Then there is the stone from Florida, the one in question here:


I'm not exactly an archaeologist, but I'm not really seeing the similarities here, aside from the fact that this stone has large holes in it. Look at how irregular they are in comparison to those in the images above. Look also at the size of the stones. Ancient ships utilized these stone in quantity. They needed several to maintain the proper balance. Can you imagine the sheer size of the ship that would require anchor stones such as this. Wouldn't you think we would have at least some kind of archaeological record of something that large in the Americas?



posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by rollinoffset
...A local man has identified what he believes to me massive mooring stones scattered around Florida and he struggles in vain to get someone established in archeology to examine them. Because he has out of the norm theories as to the Garden of Eden and Atlantis being located in Florida his identification of the stones is ignored. He finally finds a willing ear in Archeologist Bill Donato.

Here is a segment of the article:


...Donato said it clearly was an artificial formation with distinct rope grooves running through both holes and other properties that show it may have been used as an anchor or mooring stone.

"The size is astounding,” Donato said, “far bigger than anything I’ve seen. It may have been a mooring stone. The Romans used circles set this way. It’s a similar shape to Carthaginian findings...

Typically, I prefer a more ordinary source for information than somebody's blog. Also, I'm certainly not surprised that this fellow has found an avid listener in Donato, an "archaeologist" whose sole post graduate work has involved the Bimini "Harbor." That was the subject of his Thesis ("A re-examination of the Atlantis Theory") that earned him his Master's degree (he has no PhD.)

As far as publishing his research, he's got several articles in Ancient American Archaeology Magazine. Their mission:

It is the magazine's purpose to show readers just how, when, and why these once powerful societies arose to great heights of cultural splendor and fell into deep obscurity as dramatic object lessons for our time. No rehash of well-worn theories, Ancient American offers up-to-the-moment news about ongoing discoveries and original perspectives, bringing to light a surprising abundance of fresh material that is seriously challenging entrenched conceptions of our past.

As such, our staff and contributing reporters believe they are writing a New History of our nation by convincingly offering research that, in the coming century, will amount to virtually a total revision of American antiquity. Because of its revolutionary potential, Ancient American, although authoritatively written, is not a scholarly journal. It is a popular science publication specifically aimed at attracting the broadest possible general readership, while refusing to compromise its scientific credibility.


He's also been featured in Atlantis Rising (like the above Ancient American Magazine, Atlantis Rising is also "not a scholarly journal.")

So if you want an Atlantis in America guy, he's probably your man. I suspect he's funded primarily, if not solely, by Edgar Cayce's A.R.E. Foundation.

Regarding the stones pictured, my guess is they are natural.

Harte



posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 05:46 PM
link   
I might not know mooring stones or anchors, but I know people. The holes were likely carved into the rock by some local chief, who then put the heads of lawbreakers or captives in them for general amusement and possible death.




posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 08:00 PM
link   
Enkidu, LOL. I like that idea. Maybe it was an early native basketball goal?



posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 08:06 PM
link   
Rollinoffset,
This is completely off subject, but would your username happen to correspond to pipe bending?



posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 08:41 PM
link   
Good guess, Pipefitting is my normal trade.



posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 09:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by rollinoffset
Good guess, Pipefitting is my normal trade.

not so much of a guess really. I was an electrician for a long time. Bent pipe everyday. It's more of an art form than people generally give it credit for. It's been a long time, but even now I find myself staring up at the ceiling everytime I go into a new building. "That's shoddy work", or "Not too bad." It's a pretty sad, pathetic way to live.....



posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 11:25 PM
link   
A few comments... first being that the size of those "large anchors" indicates weights of a ton or more. Anchor stones had to be thrown overboard to stop a ship... and it's gonna be a problem to get enough crewmen on a narrow boat to heft a 1 ton weight and toss it overboard.

Now... if they did... consider the impact that has on a small 20 person ship when a 1 ton weight suddenly is shifted to one side (with the help of, say, 10 men which adds another 1,000 lbs or more) in preparation to tossing it over the side.

Now consider (if it doesn't capsize) what happens to the ship when the 1 ton weight drops off it.

Modern anchors do weigh 1,000 lbs and more. But you don't put a 1,000 lb anchor on a fishing barge or a yacht (ancient boats were not that large.)

One reader commented that ancient anchors were used as ballast in the 1700's... and this is true... and they're found many places.

Rock isn't easily dated, so we have no evidence there. Dating carved surfaces is still harder and not excessively accurate (accurate to, I think, 100 years or so.)

The "found far from water" is another clue... the last time water rose that high was before the last ice age ... and possibly up to 1 million years ago (from the chart duplicated on Wikipedia): en.wikipedia.org...

I don't think they'll find much evidence (particularly since I think many of the stones have been moved).



posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 11:35 PM
link   
In the middle of a highway, huh?

Both are perfectly cicular and 17 1/2 inches in diameter, huh?

I'll bet you that those are associated with the road building project somehow.



posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 11:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd

consider the impact that has on a small 20 person ship when a 1 ton weight suddenly is shifted to one side (with the help of, say, 10 men which adds another 1,000 lbs or more) in preparation to tossing it over the side.


Byrd, you make the assumption that the ship using a one ton anchor weight would be a small ship. I don't know, off hand, the size or weight of a ship that would typically use an anchor of that weight but I would hazard a guess that it would be a fairly large vessel.



posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 11:36 PM
link   
First of all this guy is wasting his time going to an academic for help... just go out there and find them and catalogue them and put them on the web.

Secondly I do agree that they are not likely to be anchors. They could be some kind of support or receptacle??



posted on Jun, 26 2006 @ 11:44 PM
link   
Several good points have been brought up concerning these stones and Saxer's theories. I'm leaning towards the "some other use" catagory.

But allow me to clarify my opening position:


For amature and armchair archeologists one of the obtacles is just getting people to listen to your theories and to view your evidence openmindedly


My starting point was that we, who often bring up some very qustionable theories, have a hard time getting people to listen. That's why this board is here, so we can throw out our "crackpot" ideas to a group of open minded individuals.



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 12:18 AM
link   
No one has eliminated the most obvious, that these holes are "artifacts" of the road building process.



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 01:42 AM
link   
Here is the picture yet again:

Now, I've never been to this place, but from the slope of the road in the background it does look to me like the area where this stone is situated is somewhat elevated. What are the odds that this stone was used as a pagan ritual marker noting perhaps the Solstices, or maybe even something a bit simpler, like marking certain times of the day as the rays of the sun pass through the holes? Granted, pagan rituals were not as abundant in the States as they would have been abroad, but were present nonetheless. They can still be observed today in certain sects.
As Byrd has said, it is difficult to date stone. It is not, however, difficult to look back at records of road construction and engineering logs. Was the road already established before modern paving and local dwelling construction? If so, if the stone was already there, one would think someone would have made a note of it as they built around it. Either way, the likelihood of it being an anchor is far-fetched to say the least.



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 11:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by denythestatusquo
First of all this guy is wasting his time going to an academic for help... just go out there and find them and catalogue them and put them on the web.

Secondly I do agree that they are not likely to be anchors. They could be some kind of support or receptacle??


I find it extremely amusing that you would refer to Donato as an "academic."


Visit the links I provided to see why.


Harte



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 12:46 PM
link   
Anyone read 1421-The Year China Discovered The World?

From the accounts of the author, Gavin Menzies, and that quoted in your link that such similar stones have been found as far afield as Bimini and other far-flung locations, it would sound like these carved stones could be either sea-anchors or ballast from the Chinese Junks of Emperor Zhou Di's treasure-fleet which has been suggested as having charted all the continents and circumnavigated the globe decades...even centuries before the Olde-European Naval Powers. Is there any information on any remains of hardwood/teak timbered vessels found on the Florida shoreline, or accounts from Native historical traditions of strange looking people landing in that part of the Americas?? Also, have any geo-chemical analysis been performed on the stones to determine their geological origin??



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by timski
Anyone read 1421-The Year China Discovered The World?
From the accounts of the author, Gavin Menzies, and that quoted in your link that such similar stones have been found as far afield as Bimini and other far-flung locations, it would sound like these carved stones could be either sea-anchors or ballast from the Chinese Junks of Emperor Zhou Di's treasure-fleet which has been suggested as having charted all the continents and circumnavigated the globe decades...even centuries before the Olde-European Naval Powers. Is there any information on any remains of hardwood/teak timbered vessels found on the Florida shoreline, or accounts from Native historical traditions of strange looking people landing in that part of the Americas?? Also, have any geo-chemical analysis been performed on the stones to determine their geological origin??

Have you seen the size of the stone in question? As has been stated before, what do you think would happen to a Chinese Junk ship with this thing hoisted over the side?

Classic junks were built of softwoods – though in Guangdong in teak with multiple compartments accessed by separate hatches and ladders: similar in structure to the interior stem of bamboo. These were not watertight, as is commonly believed, all wrecks so far recovered having limber holes at the base of each bulkhead. The largest junks were built for world exploration in the 1400s, and were around 120 meters in length

Source
That's four hundred feet people, and the width would have been close to 150 ft. This is a huge ship, granted, but the weight of this stone it still a bit much. There is even some speculation as to whether or not ships of this size could even have sailed. There are records of Chinese Emperors building things such as Portal Stones for their tombs that could not even be moved upon their death. Seems the Chinese were adept at biting off more than they could chew. Medieval Howard Hughes.

How did the Chinese shipbuilders construct and operate wooden ships that were 40 percent longer and 65 percent wider than the largest wooden ships known to have been built at any time anywhere else? Since no special construction techniques such as iron strapping for supporting the wooden hulls of these treasure ships were reported, there is something inherently improbable about the claims made for them in the Ming texts. Perhaps these texts only describe a grandiose dream and the overseas trading voyages of the early Ming Dynasty were, in fact, accomplished with large numbers of smaller ships. Or perhaps one or more ships of this kind were built at the Longjiang shipyard outside Nanjing but never sailed.

Source



posted on Jun, 27 2006 @ 04:46 PM
link   
Here's something else I forgot to put in the last post. The Chinese didn't employ anchor stones like this during the timeframe mentioned for these abnormally large ships. They used anchors made of iron.

Most of the drydocks at Longjiang were 90 to 120 feet wide, but two of them were 2 10 feet wide, big enough to accommodate a ship 160 to 166 feet wide. The treasure ships were quite wide for their length, but, like typical fuchuan, they were "balanced like a scale¹ with stability created by the V- shaped hull, the long keel, and the heavy ballast. The keel consisted of long pieces of wood bound together with iron hoops. In rough weather, holes in the prow would Œpartially fill with water when the ships pitched forward, lessening the violent rocking motion of the waves. Floating anchors cast off the side of the ship also increased stability in turbulent seas. In the stem were two eight-foot iron anchors, weighing over a thousand pounds each, for mooring offshore. Each anchor had four flukes set at a sharp angle against the main shaft, a shape characteristic of Chinese anchors since the beginning of the Christian era.

Source

They would have been a bit larger, but this is roughly what they looked like.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join