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.

 

Civilization on this Planet

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 23 2006 @ 04:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by snafu7700
first of all, if you actually read my post reference the map, you'll find that i've already anticipated and addressed your exact response. furthermore, google will only give you a representation of ice covered antarctica, not it's actual land mass. second, this is skunk works.....there is no "debunking" here. feel free to discuss the theories i've presented, but dont attempt to tear them apart.


OK, my idea of a discussion, apparently, does not apply here, so, I'm out of this.




posted on Nov, 23 2006 @ 10:16 PM
link   
You realize of course that most of the greatest Chess players are quite insane.
Obsessing over the permutations and combinations of where pieces might be in 10 moves time creates a very strange mindset.



posted on Nov, 23 2006 @ 11:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by emjoi
You realize of course that most of the greatest Chess players are quite insane.
Obsessing over the permutations and combinations of where pieces might be in 10 moves time creates a very strange mindset.


you realize of course that regardless of marduk's lies, this thread was not based upon that article?

did you have something to add to the thread?



posted on Nov, 23 2006 @ 11:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by snafu7700
you realize of course that regardless of marduk's lies, this thread was not based upon that article?
did you have something to add to the thread?

No, no. Just floating around, putting in my 2 cents wherever it takes my fancy.

Okay....
One thought is that each iteration of Civilization would find it harder to advance that the previous ones. We use up fossil fuels, mine out precious minerals and so on, and so the Next Civilization in the far future will have to rise up without these easy sources of materials. They may look back at us and marvel at our achievements, perhaps thinking that they were only possible with the assistance of Aliens. And so it may be for the Civilizations of the distant past. They had access to resources that are now long exhausted.

But then that's not quite on topic either....



posted on Nov, 24 2006 @ 12:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by emjoi

Originally posted by snafu7700
you realize of course that regardless of marduk's lies, this thread was not based upon that article?
did you have something to add to the thread?

No, no. Just floating around, putting in my 2 cents wherever it takes my fancy.

Okay....
One thought is that each iteration of Civilization would find it harder to advance that the previous ones. We use up fossil fuels, mine out precious minerals and so on, and so the Next Civilization in the far future will have to rise up without these easy sources of materials. They may look back at us and marvel at our achievements, perhaps thinking that they were only possible with the assistance of Aliens. And so it may be for the Civilizations of the distant past. They had access to resources that are now long exhausted.

But then that's not quite on topic either....


sure it is....you bring out some interesting aspects. however, mother earth has a unique ability to revitalize herself. by definition, a cataclismic event of the magnitude required to wipe out civilization as we know it, would mean that only a very small percentage of today's world would survive. so logically, we would cease to be a drain on her resources. if my theory is correct, then it must take tens to hundreds of thousands of years for us to once again reach the apex......plenty of time for mother earth to rejuvenate herself. besides, the whole point is that the time in between each apex would be so great and the previous destruction so large that we would have lost all knowledge of our previous selves. so we would be ignorant of the past great works (and of course, convinced of our own great works as being the greatest this world has ever seen, as we are now), that we wouldnt be wondering about how they came to be so advanced a civilization. because we wouldnt know of them. too much rambling, or does that make sense?



posted on Nov, 24 2006 @ 01:12 AM
link   
more on these anomalous artifacts (spelled it right that time):


bluemoonnews.com
The common accepted scientific view of evolution in the Cenozoic Era shows human beings appearing on the earth about 1.6 million years ago, and human civilization just 10,000 years ago. Yet the anomalous scientific finds shown below present a very disturbing and alternate reality. This is considered "Forbidden Archeology" and not ever brought up in polite science circles. It would be akin to saying you enjoyed the taste of blood to support such theories. But the proof is there. So we can only suppose that the fear of having all those fancy degrees turn worthless brought them to the conclusion that it's much easier to treat us like mushrooms.


very interesting out of place artifacts.

this next one touches on the possibility of archeological finds that do not fit into mainstream sciences thinking being intentionally covered up:


mondovista.com
We were just about to form an expedition to the site when another huge foundation was located nearby. Some symbols, possibly First Tongue, were described on one of the stones. But, sadly, the site was abruptly shut down and the excavations were bulldozed with earth by some arm of our own government. An informed source close to the family that owns the land reported that the family was threatened with harm if they allowed anyone to dig on their land in the future. They were told to forget what they saw.



posted on Nov, 24 2006 @ 01:16 AM
link   
whoa man.....i finally hit the motherload with my google searching. this article i am about to reference is so close to my original post its scary. however, it is a much better rendition than i could ever do. a must read for everyone:


thothweb
Archaeology is constantly being faced with artifacts and ruins that it struggles to explain. In addition to this, mythology is annoyingly consistent across the world, especially in relation to stories of a great flood. We also know that the ancients seemed to possess a level of mathematical and astronomical knowledge beyond our expectations, suggesting they may have inherited that knowledge from somewhere or someone else. There is much to suggest that our understanding of the earth’s history is curiously incomplete.


as much as i would love to post the whole article, the mods would go nuts. so please check out the link....it's worth the read!



posted on Nov, 24 2006 @ 02:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Marduk
1) every historian who's ever lived has got the entire history of civilisation incorrect


I would just like to point out here that we might not want to discount that idea so quickly. The thing about history, and science in general, is that for the study to evolve, one must use and build upon what was discovered prior.

To that end, anything that was discovered by someone before is taken as gospel, when it should simply be held out as a theorem until proven. Now I know that most will say that this isn't so, but there have been numerous times throughout history where negligent people took what scientists said, and made grandiose statements using said "knowledge", when they knew nothing of the subject of which they were speaking. How much of this has seeped into the history that we currently have? I can't say, nor can anyone else.

Scientific laws are fine, but to become a law, it must meet and shatter any and all criticisms, no matter how wonky they may be. For example, it was widely believed that the Earth was the center of the universe, until Copernicus shattered that myth with his genius. People died because they believed that, and it was the truth. Now we know that old myth to be just what it is, and that the universe is so expansive that we have no good estimate as to it's true size.

History is just the same as the case mentioned above. People are all too eager to just willingly accept what they've had drilled into their heads for 2.5 decades, because they don't want to feel as though their's lives were all a waste. The thing that those people don't understand is that they weren't a waste. The time was well spent teaching these people how to critically think well enough to LEARN from the mistakes of their predecessors, and surpass them with new knowledge that will lead us into the next phase of our evolution, not to sit idly on their butts believing everything they were told by their teachers.

I think scientists, and people in general, have lost sight of what was intended by the learning process. The whole point in learning is to validate and expound upon those things that were given to us before by those that gave us said knowledge.

Yes, it is our duty to preserve the "knowledge" passed down to us by those before, but it's also our duty to keep a wary eye on it, because at any moment, said "knowledge" could turn out to be a mere falsehood. Don't just accept what's been taught to you by those that taught it. Learn what you can, and expound upon it, as that's the only way to truly make headway in science.

Now, as to how this pertains to the topic at hand, well it's very simple. Science isn't perfect. It's a study of the universe around us, and it's the ever-growing quest to learn how and why we came to be. Throughout this journey, we learn some things, and think we've learned others. As time passes, some of the things we thought we'd learned turn out to be false, while some things we thought to be false are really true. That's the way of science. The catch is in keeping an open mind to the possibility that you may very well be wrong in anything that you "think" you "know".

TheBorg



posted on Nov, 24 2006 @ 03:36 AM
link   
Well I believe there were, what we would term 'advanced', civilizations prior to our own that we do not know about. The pyramids and other artifacts are evidence alone of that. I do not believe the egyptians built them because, most anything that is egyptian has hierglyphics on it. The pyramids are completely devoid of any hieroglyphs. The fact that pyramids are transatlantic alone tells you there is more to the story than we know. I think the pyramids and the sphinx are remnants of an advanced civilization that disappeared quite recently, but before our modern era. The oldest texts we have of our history are 4 to 5 thousand years old at most. This barely coincides with the buidings of the pyramids according to the current accepted historical model.

What is most chilling is that the mahabarta, an indian text and one of the oldest in the world, describes what could only be a nuclear explosion. There are also deposits of Uranium in India that appear to have been used in some sort of reactor. These facts seem to coincide with the story of the mahabarta.

I do believe there were previous advanced civilizations that, for one reason or another, were completely obliterated.

The only way our current model of history will change is if we find a repository of information or a time capsule and it isnt supressed by the governments of the world. Of course, translating any documents found that date to a time before we modern written language maybe extremely difficult, unless we have derived at least a few of our modern languages from a civilization that existed prior. Even then that poses some difficulty.

well, unless a group of humans from elsewhere in the galaxy shows up one day and says "hey, we came from you guys." Which is unlikey, but you never know.

We may never know the true extent of our history or what secrets are burried in time.



posted on Nov, 24 2006 @ 08:21 AM
link   
As this is in skunkworks, I won't attempt any debunking


But I will urge caution and suggest you check all sources carefully before accepting any possible evidence.

With regards the Pir Re'is map, for example, one shoud be aware of alternative explanations.

xoomer.alice.it...

Only if the 'ice free Antarctic' explanation seems the most plausible should it be used


With regards nuclear explosions in Vedic text - check out the exact translations. Some authors have been known to be somewhat liberal in their interpretations
And again, ensure your interpretation is the most plausible one.



posted on Nov, 24 2006 @ 10:02 AM
link   
Very interesting area.

Though has been pointed out that the Earth slowly resupplies herself (thru cataclysm
)...

As long as some of us are issuing cautions, might I point out that the unquestionability that 'science' attempts to cloth itself, is simply NOT the bulkhead (or foundation
) that it pretends to be...

Though it seems to be the favorite child of the global warming folks... The concept that petroleum is the melange of ground up dinosaurs and vegetative plant life from eons past... (And is teetering on the verge of being exhausted
)

is PURE bogus!

It is a somewhat self-replenishing process going on CONTINUOUSLY in the Earths core.

Another VERY interesting piece of the puzzle is distribution of these mineral resources... It's like there appears to be a systematic pattern to it. (I saw that on a known mineral resource map in a book on dowsing.
)

Anyone that has every looked at a map showing human population densities... Will, of course, see that humans have a tendency to accumulate along bodies of water, that there is a cyclical rise and fall to the Earths oceans is self-evident... ('Ice Ages' are numerous AND cyclical
)

As the huge number of ruins found just below sea level.

One more thing... About some pushing the point of view that there is no real evidence of past civilizations...

One has to look NO further than the 'myth' of Troy.


If it wasn't for the totally over the top efforts of a very wealthy man (Heinrich Schliemann
)...

It would probably STILL only be a myth.

Who is to say what evidence is truly out there... Waiting for the next wacko... ah... Schliemann... to bring to our attention.

Might I point out that Schliemann was quite the linguist.

Apparently, it would seem that cross-culture exposure seems to inspire some type of out of the box type thinking needed in this area of research.




posted on Nov, 24 2006 @ 10:18 AM
link   
an interesting read essan, but alot of the info can be interpreted either way....and his was is decidedly biased towards mainstream thought.

this quote really struck me:



So nobody should take as absolutely creditable the cartographic evidence of the ancient navigation maps dated before 16th century. Maps that were written up before the discovery of a precise way to calculate the longitude. Discovery that happened in the 17th century. The geographic maps designed until that period were based on symbolic systems of representation such as Jerusalem as the center of the world, inverted north/south orientation, or different scales for different nations and so on.


discovery of the 17th century, or a re-discovery?


Antikythera mechanism
Price advanced the theory that the Antikythera mechanism was a device for calculating the motions of stars and planets, which would make the device the first known analog computer.


although the time periods i'm referring to in my original post are much larger, i also believe that there is knowledge that we have lost just over the last 2000 years as well. the dark ages were very dark indeed, and rome, in her apex, even had surgeons who were very accomplished even compared to todays standards....and they had begun using alcohol as a cleansing agent (info from a history channel segment seen last year....i'll look for a reference). but i digress....

yes, the piri reis map was drawn from many different sources. and, it was drawn freehand, without the use of calculating equipment, because it wasnt available at the time of its drawing. my contention is that the map he copied from that showed the outline of an icefree antarctica was from a much earlier time, and a time when it is quite possible that accurate measuring equipment was still in use.

while i respect the author of the link in question's opinion essan (as i do yours), i would tend to believe the us air force cartographers who agreed that this is most likely a representation of antarctica without ice.

i know that many of the links i provide call mainstream scientists ignorant, and claim that they are intentionally hiding the truth. please dont think that i subscribe to that theory. i simply believe that they have a pre-conceived notion of what is historically accurate that is ingrained in them from the first moment that they set foot in college. they are also ridiculed if they step outside of the accepted box, an act that effectively ends their careers.....so i understand why they refuse to do so, although i disagree with it. IOW, i dont think that mainstream scholars keep an open enough mind as to what might be the truth before they delve into new information.....and this method is completely contrary to the accepted scientific method. one of the reasons that i dont quote graham hancock is that i have read his book, and i know that he went into it with a pre-coneived notion of what he was expecting to find.....which makes him just as guilty as the mainstream scientists. i hope, with all of my rambling, that i was able to get my point across.




posted on Nov, 24 2006 @ 10:39 AM
link   
I would love to know why that US Naval Officer thought the Piri Re'is map depicted Queen Maud Land .......
However, I consider it to be as correct an assessment of the map as the contention that the Moon is made of green cheese.

Notwithstanding which, at the time the map was drawn, Piri Re'is shouldn't have had access to any map showing Tierra del Fuego either ....... So yes, there is an unsolved mystery here. Just not the one some people want it to be.



posted on Nov, 24 2006 @ 10:49 AM
link   
lol, well, i guess we'll just have to agree that there is a mystery here, and agree to disagree on what exactly that mystery is.



posted on Nov, 24 2006 @ 09:24 PM
link   
Things are looking up!

Judging by the shrillness of the global warming folks, the ice will probably all be gone by next week...

So lets just wait a few days and we'll find out what the coast of Antartica really looks like!



Very eloquent description of your neutralitity vis-a-vis 'scientists' Snafu.


You identified the key factor in what could arguably be described as a herd mentality... I qualify it more as the need to conform irregardless...

The bottom line is... INCOMPETENCE.

Science is SUPPOSED to be about truth... As practiced... it's mostly about everything but the truth.

Let's take a case in point... and talk about the so-called woolly mammoths.

It's alway presented as a cold weather animal... the artists concepts usually show it with a snow backdrop... more like the tundra.


I'm sorry... that just doesn't pass the snicker test... no matter how clever the lines of the cartoon character in Ice Age movie happens to be.



Elephants are WARM WEATHER creatures.

The so called frozen elephants were recovered because they basically froze in place...

Trapped by a sudden and devastating change in the weather... I would speculate trapped by huge and sudden snow falls... where warm, moist are turned into freezing conditions in probably less than a few hours.

When the poles 'reversed' or 'flipped' or whatever. (I think a better description of the most recent pole movement, could probably be coined based on what transposition/shift actually occurred.
).

Relevance? Relevance to 'Piri Re'is map'?



Where did the prior alignment place Antartica? What climatic zone?

The are other prior events (substantiated
). Such as when Crater Lake was created by the explosion by Mt. Mazama. The ash clouds were so substantial that entire herds of animals were buried in their tracks some more than a thousand miles away.

To bolster their theories, practioneers of this theory want to see it happened very quickly, but that's a twist that simply isn't needed. Many of these animals were buried by the fallout of the plumes from the volcano and could have easily occurred over several days (if not weeks
). It's not like those herds could board the bus to relocate...

Anyone that has had ANY exposure to these type events would speculate that the animals actually died from some type of pulmonary implosion, then were buried.

So there you have two different types of cataclysmic events that would as outlined here would trap animals as they were actually found.

Both types of events would have devastating effects on climate and weather.

If these polar shifts happened suddenly imagine the insane weather that must have occurred.

The devastating effects (read: cooling) that occurs as a result of sudden volcanic eruptions are quite well documented. The realitively mild impact from Mt St Helens and the big nasty Krakatoa explosion in 1883 which basically extinguished the following summer.



[edit on 24-11-2006 by golemina]



posted on Nov, 24 2006 @ 09:32 PM
link   
The only part I actualy have an opinion on is if adam and eve were the only humans on earth wouldent we all be extinct? I mean interbreading that many times would cause severe genetic defects in further and further ofspring to the point that it would just be too gross to imagine. Just my thought on the subject.



posted on Nov, 24 2006 @ 09:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by snafu7700
whoa man.....i finally hit the motherload with my google searching. this article i am about to reference is so close to my original post its scary.


You've pulled up some interesting sites there.
What keywords are you using? I'd like to see what else can be found.



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 04:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by golemina

Let's take a case in point... and talk about the so-called woolly mammoths.

It's alway presented as a cold weather animal... the artists concepts usually show it with a snow backdrop... more like the tundra.


I agree, the snowy background is inaccurate - woolly mammoths actually lived primarily on steppes - which were cold and dry and where snow would not have been a common faeture. Think Gobi Desert.


Elephants are WARM WEATHER creatures.


So are tigers. So how come tigers live in Siberia?


The so called frozen elephants were recovered because they basically froze in place...

Trapped by a sudden and devastating change in the weather... I would speculate trapped by huge and sudden snow falls... where warm, moist are turned into freezing conditions in probably less than a few hours.


I take it you've not actually read any reports of recent excavations of mammoths any other animals in Siberia. You'll find in most cases that the evidence is extrememly compelling towards an explanation of falling into, of being swept away whilst fording, large, icey cold, rivers. Just like you get in Siberia.



Where did the prior alignment place Antartica? What climatic zone?


Well, 12,000 years ago it was colder and icier than today in Antarctica....


The are other prior events (substantiated
). Such as when Crater Lake was created by the explosion by Mt. Mazama. The ash clouds were so substantial that entire herds of animals were buried in their tracks some more than a thousand miles away.


Yes, in this you are quite correct. many large assemblages of fossils are found in association with volcanic eruptions. Of course, these range in date over about 100,000,000 years.



So there you have two different types of cataclysmic events that would as outlined here would trap animals as they were actually found.


One of which we know happens, one of which (sudden shift in climatic zones) we know doesn't happen - opr rather, we have no evidence that it happens and no explanation why, if it does happen, there is no evidence



PS I know I'm debunking ...... but how else do I put out inaccuracies and errors?

You can't develop a theory based on misunderstandings. You need to establish a firm base on which to build it.



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 07:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by whatukno
The only part I actualy have an opinion on is if adam and eve were the only humans on earth wouldent we all be extinct? I mean interbreading that many times would cause severe genetic defects in further and further ofspring to the point that it would just be too gross to imagine. Just my thought on the subject.


Well, if we take the Biblical account to be accurate, then they weren't the only ones here. At the time that Adam and Eve were banished from the Garden, God sent Cain "to dwell in the Land of Nod, where he found himself a wife". To me, this can mean only one thing: others were here at the same time. There's no other way around it. Besides that, if God's firmly against incest, then why would he force it on those that he banished from His Garden?

Too many questions, and not enough answers, unless we believe it the way that I do; that there were others here. Now the big question is: Who the heck are these people? And where did THEY come from?

Very interesting, this is turning out to be.

TheBorg



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 08:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by whatukno
The only part I actualy have an opinion on is if adam and eve were the only humans on earth wouldent we all be extinct?


i would agree. that is why i dont think they were the first humans, but simply one group of survivors who were the first to think of themselves as God's chosen people.


Originally posted by ShadowEyes

You've pulled up some interesting sites there.
What keywords are you using? I'd like to see what else can be found.


"anomalous artifacts" and variations thereof.


Originally posted by Essan

So are tigers. So how come tigers live in Siberia?


some being the key word here. have you ever read any of louis lamour's novels? several times, especially in the sackett books, he touches on indian legends of mammoths in north america....well after the time they were supposedly extinct, and well south of latitudes they were supposed to be common to. i know lamour is a fiction writer, but he is very good about using historical facts and sourcing them.



I take it you've not actually read any reports of recent excavations of mammoths any other animals in Siberia. You'll find in most cases that the evidence is extrememly compelling towards an explanation of falling into, of being swept away whilst fording, large, icey cold, rivers. Just like you get in Siberia.


well, what about mammoths that were found frozen with warm climate vegetation is their stomachs (i'll look for the source, but i've read it several times)?




Well, 12,000 years ago it was colder and icier than today in Antarctica....


depending upon who's timeline you believe.



PS I know I'm debunking ...... but how else do I put out inaccuracies and errors?

You can't develop a theory based on misunderstandings. You need to establish a firm base on which to build it.


no, marduk and byrd were debunking....it seems to me that you are discussing the information being presented in a reasonable manner.


Originally posted by TheBorg
Well, if we take the Biblical account to be accurate, then they weren't the only ones here. At the time that Adam and Eve were banished from the Garden, God sent Cain "to dwell in the Land of Nod, where he found himself a wife". To me, this can mean only one thing: others were here at the same time. There's no other way around it. Besides that, if God's firmly against incest, then why would he force it on those that he banished from His Garden?


exactly my point.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join