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.

 

City Older Than Mohenjodaro Unearthed (2002)

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 06:14 PM
link   
A city dating back to 7500

INIDA, Feb 11 (VNN) — NEW DELHI: Indian scientists have made an archaeological find dating back to 7500 BC suggesting the world's oldest cities came up about 4,000 years earlier than is currently believed, a top government official said on Wednesday.

The scientists found pieces of wood, remains of pots, fossil bones and what appeared like construction material just off the coast of Surat, Science and Technology Minister Murli Manohar Joshi told a news conference.

"Some of these artefacts recovered by the NIOT (National Institute of Ocean Technology) from the site such as the log of wood date back to 7500 BC, which is indicative of a very ancient culture in the present Gulf of Cambay, that got submerged subsequently," Joshi said.

Current belief is that the first cities appeared around 3500 BC in the valley of Sumer, where Iraq now stands, a statement issued by the government said.

"We can safely say from the antiquities and the acoustic images of the geometric structures that there was human activity in the region more than 9,500 years ago (7500 BC)," S.N. Rajguru, an independent archaeologist, said.

The findings, if confirmed, will dislodge the Harappan Civilisation dating back to 2500 BC as India's oldest civilisation.




posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 07:04 PM
link   
this was debunked by outraged Indian archaeologists less than two months later
as it turns out Dr. Murli Manohar Joshi is the government official in charge of marine tourism in the area

www.hinduonnet.com...



Experts raised several objections to Dr. Joshi's claim that NIOT had discovered the remains of a 9,500-year-old urban settlement and civilisation. First, no marine archaeologist has seen the site and no mapping or underwater photography of the site has been undertaken. Secondly, the dating of the site was attempted on the basis of the age of a piece of wood found there. Thirdly, there was no conclusive proof that the perforations found in the artefacts were man-made. And, fourthly, there were deviations from the standard, accepted procedures of archaeology prior to going public with the findings.



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 07:27 PM
link   
Your external sources are soying that they are experts but the first one says:


I am not a specialist in this particular field. I have studied the Indus script and the Harappan civilisation and followed Indian archaeology over time. I am not a professional archaeologist, and least of all a specialist in marine archaeology or of the Neolithic period. I was interested in seeing the methods used and the materials found in Khambat.

He is not a specialist nor a proffessional archeologist



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 07:48 PM
link   
neither is anyone who made this announcement
wiki has a page on this
perhaps you should read it
en.wikipedia.org...
maybe save face for later when you see the follow up article that i will post shortly from hindu net if its needed


[edit on 30-1-2007 by Marduk]



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 08:00 PM
link   
From your wiki source:


The ruins, known as the Gulf of Khambat Cultural Complex (GKCC), are located on the seabed of a nine-kilometer stretch off the coast of Gujarat province at a depth of about 40 m. The site was discovered by a team from the National Institute of Ocean Technology (NIOT) in December 2000 and investigated for six months with acoustic techniques. The team identified city-like structures at the location, said to resemble those of major cities of the Indus Valley Civilisation, with regular geometric patterns representing a granary, a great bath and a citadel.


the artifacts may be a hoax, but the structures?
I am so anticipating to receive your next post...



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 08:08 PM
link   
ok shall we start with Dr. S. Kathiroli, Project Director, Mission III, Coastal and Environmental Engineering, NIOT, who headed the expedition that made the discovery




he was excited by the regularity of the images picked by the sonar on the NIOT's ship and reported the matter to his Ministry. He had no idea what the images were; nor was he familiar with the samples that were dredged out

ah well
I was going to go into some detail here grandstanding the list of eminent indian professionals who all stood up and said "crap" in one voice
but really
just read this article
its the follow up
www.hinduonnet.com...

imo
Professor K.V. Raman, former head of the Department of Archaeology, University of Madras, and former Superintending Archaeologist with the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) said it the best


"I am really sick of the politicisation of matters like this. It destroys the integrity of my profession."


Yes Professor it does
but only when people are stupid enough to blame archaeologists for lying to them about something that they never said when in reality the blame should fall on the shoulders of the politicians who lied about it to start with and then the pseudohistorians who tried to make it work for them
May 2001 this was first reported
six years later and you only just heard about it Dragonlike ?
arent you wondering why ?
its a total non event thats why




posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 08:34 PM
link   
Ok, i will be short in this...


the most important, objection to the Khambat claims is that those making them did not follow any of the accepted procedures of the discipline of archaeology before going public with their "discovery".


Here, the archeologist are right to raise objections. It's their vocation to find excavation sites and unearth them. If you want my opinion, these ones wanted to find it, as archeologists, not any politician.

Why don't you provide any link about failed excavations in the homonym site? So to prove me that the excavations have been done underwater and found nothing. Or still the excavation(?) haven't begun?
It seams that you have access to all sceptical pages so i would be glad to show me one...


six years later and you only just heard about it Dragonlike ?


Tell me what is so bad to this? No one has ever posted something similar and i find it inderesting to discuss it. I never find it hard to look back in past posts and learn from them.

To conclude, untill i learn what happened to the exavations underwater i will not rest...

PS:...and i said i would be short in this


Dragon



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 08:55 PM
link   


It seams that you have access to all sceptical pages so i would be glad to show me one...

every link I have posted so far has been a link to a sceptical Indian site featuring professional opinions
how did you miss that
and it has been discussed here before
use the search function eh



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 09:04 PM
link   

every link I have posted so far has been a link to a sceptical Indian site featuring professional opinions
how did you miss that

I didn't. I just asked if you can provide any link (from your sceptical sites) saying that excavations have already taken place and found nothing, which i doubt u will find anything


use the search function eh

I used it and i didn't found anything,
Don't bother telling i dunno know how to use it,
i used every possible title



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 09:05 PM
link   


every link I have posted so far has been a link to a sceptical Indian site featuring professional opinions


Are you softening your hardline image? I swear you said opinion there.



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 09:53 PM
link   


I didn't. I just asked if you can provide any link (from your sceptical sites) saying that excavations have already taken place and found nothing, which i doubt u will find anything

ah I see
you're missing the point
there has been no excavation
there will be no excavation
there is nothing to excavate
an anomalous side scan sonar image does not make a sunken city pop into existence
likewise artifacts (piece of wood, piece of broken pottery) found at the outflow mouth of a river in a country where it is traditional to throw broken things into the river (even people) does not add up to a sunken city
I do not have a list of sceptical sites
I have google


I think the search function is currently not working
i found two previous references earlier using "gulf of khambat" as a search string
wait a while and try it later



Are you softening your hardline image? I swear you said opinion there

ah yes sorry
I meant "statement of fact" of course



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 02:46 AM
link   
Perhaps you should check this out this one:
Existence of under-sea temple claimed

So? there r no under sea cities?

This time archeologist claim that not politicians


Visakhapatnam, July 03: Archaeologists in Visakhapatnam claim that a centuries-old temple exists two kilometers from Visakhapatnam coast, on the sea bed.

While the coastal city of Visakhapatnam is steeped in history, few know that there was a temple called “Visakeswara Temple” on the coast of the city. Many centuries ago this temple went under the sea due to geological adjustments.

According to Professor Gangadharam, who is working on facts regarding this temple, the temple existed centuries ago, but got submerged in the sea.

``From the research I did, I found out that the Buchca Rama Lingeshwara temple which right now exists on the coastline is in the same alignment with that of Visakeswara temple under the sea. I have spoken to many old people and fishermen who told me that their forefathers used to confirm that there is this temple under the sea.``

According to the priest of Buchcha Rama Lingeshwara temple, the Visakeswara temple existed before Kalyug.

``Yes, in Shastras and Puranas there`s a mention of this temple. It is believed that before the Kalyug began this temple was submerged into the sea.``

Professor Gangadharam`s further research, which involves under sea exploration, is on hold as he is looking for financial support in his quest to find the temple.


[edit on 31-1-2007 by Dragonlike]



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 03:03 AM
link   
Or this one:
Tsunami throws up India relics

The deadly tsunami could have uncovered the remains of an ancient port city off the coast in southern India.

Archaeologists say they have discovered some stone remains from the coast close to India's famous beachfront Mahabalipuram temple in Tamil Nadu state following the 26 December tsunami.

They believe that the "structures" could be the remains of an ancient and once-flourishing port city in the area housing the famous 1200-year-old rock-hewn temple.

Three pieces of remains, which include a granite lion, were found buried in the sand after the coastline receded in the area after the tsunami struck.

Undersea remains

"They could be part of the small seaport city which existed here before water engulfed them. They could be part of a temple or a building. We are investigating," says T Sathiamoorthy of Archaeological Survey of India (ASI).

Archaeologists say that the stone remains date back to 7th Century AD and are nearly 6ft tall.

They have elaborate engravings of the kind that are found in the Mahabalipuram temple.

The temple, which is a World Heritage site, represents some of the earliest-known examples of Dravidian architecture dating back to 7th Century AD.

The monument also has gigantic open air reliefs hewn out from granite.


The bronze Buddha which floated up the coast at Kalapakkam

The tsunami waves have also helped the archaeologists in desilting one such relief which had been covered with sand for ages.

A half-completed rock relief of an elephant got "naturally desilted" by the ferocious waves and is now drawing large crowds at this popular tourist destination.

For the past three years, archaeologists working with divers from India and England have found the remnants of the ancient port.

Archaeologists say they had done underwater surveys 1 km into the sea from the temple and found some undersea remains.


And none of these could found using boolean search



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 03:16 AM
link   
Very inderesting finds!
Good job Dragon

These confirm that some Indian cities are lying under the sea level



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 05:17 AM
link   
But 8,000 years seperate those ruins with anything purported by the OP! I see no connection whatsoever.

Rob.



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 05:18 AM
link   

May 2001 this was first reported
six years later and you only just heard about it Dragonlike ?
arent you wondering why ?
its a total non event thats why


Is archeology about the speed?

It took over 5 years for archeologist to chisel out Dikka, 3.3 million years old remains of the 3 year old baby.* What would you expect for some bigger finds, like this one?

Source: www7.nationalgeographic.com...



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 05:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by d60944
But 8,000 years seperate those ruins with anything purported by the OP! I see no connection whatsoever.

Rob.


Can you be more specific? what is OP?
thanks



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 05:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dragonlike

Originally posted by d60944
But 8,000 years seperate those ruins with anything purported by the OP! I see no connection whatsoever.

Rob.


Can you be more specific? what is OP?
thanks


OP = "Original post" or "Original poster"




posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 05:34 AM
link   
Thanks Rob,
To answer your question i posted the rest one to back up my theory:
That in India there are undersea cities

Notice that due to the Tsunami more relics came to surface from the bottom of the sea...



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 05:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dragonlike
Thanks Rob,
To answer your question i posted the rest one to back up my theory:
That in India there are undersea cities

Notice that due to the Tsunami more relics came to surface from the bottom of the sea...


I gathered that that is why you referenced it, but I maintain that the existence of a city now under water from 700AD has no bearing on the liklihood of one from 7500BC!

In the same way, we would not conclude that the existence of any modern city founded around 700AD had any bearing on cities in the same general land mass from 8000 years previously. Eg. the existence of Venice says nothing about the possibility or history of other European cities from 7500BC. Or even 0AD.

Cheers.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join