Past Civilisations - Convince me WHY they didn't exist

page: 2
6
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 12 2007 @ 08:53 PM
link   
I recommend a book that will give you an idea just how quickly a civilization can vanish especially if you add in if it was caused by some MAJOR catastrophy (yea I know I misspelled so shoot me).
This is the link to the website about it. I recommend you pick it up.
The World Without Us.




posted on Nov, 12 2007 @ 09:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by kerkinana walsky
the nine layers of Mohenjodaro are what has been excavated already, there are not nine more layers still underneath. They are down to the untouched soil now.


fair enough - my bad. i'm not to proud to admit when i'm wrong, but it was simply one example i tried to show.

My point was that, even as you said, there are cities and ruins which have been discovered which have layers of civilisation which have not been excavated. (Even the pyramids of Giza are suspected to have been built on top of extremely ancient ruins....) These layers would undoubtley date certain sites beyond the acceptable 7,000 year barrier.

Now if multiple layers can be found under ancient cities, then doesnt it stand to reason that past civilisations are so old that we cannot even be aware of their existence due to being buried so deep beneath the surface? Like when a city has been underwater for at least 10,000 years?

It takes a rare case, such as at Yonaguni off the southern coast of Japan, to find ruins not buried under thousands of years of silt.

I mean those ruins are recognised to be 12,000 years old - so who the heck built them if we had no civilisation past 7,000 years ago!!?



posted on Nov, 12 2007 @ 09:11 PM
link   
reply to post by srsen
 


They ever look deeper at those possible ruins under the sea near Cuba?



posted on Nov, 12 2007 @ 09:12 PM
link   
Additionally, check out this thread by our resident pro Scott Creighton - which offers "compelling evidence" of a past civilisation.

www.abovetopsecret.com...'



posted on Nov, 12 2007 @ 09:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by WraothAscendant
reply to post by srsen
 


They ever look deeper at those possible ruins under the sea near Cuba?


My information on that is that A.R.E (Edgar Cayce's Association for Research and Enlightenment) were investigating the Turtle Grass which ONLY grew over a massive octagonal shape under the water.

I'm not sure of the outcome though. I know they found massive machined stone cubes in the area which formed a huge J shape and roads:



To me this looks like an ancient protective wall or barrier from the sea. Would make sense that it was built during a time when other continents were being sunk by massive tsunamis and other cataclysms.

The land this wall would have sat on is on land which looks to have once been above sea level....

EDIT TO ADD: Here is the latest update from September this year
edgarcayce.org...

[edit on 12-11-2007 by srsen]



posted on Nov, 12 2007 @ 09:47 PM
link   
1. The pyramids are built on bedrock
2. scott creightons theory has more holes in it than a colander
3. Yonaguni is not 12,000 years old and has been dated by experts to the known Jomon culture. the only people claiming otherwise are all making money from it.
3. Edgar Cayce is not a valid source for information about anything.

[edit on 12-11-2007 by kerkinana walsky]



posted on Nov, 12 2007 @ 10:18 PM
link   
the stubborn refusal to even acknowledge the possibility of previous lost civilizations is one of mt pet peeves as well. there is quite a lot of compelling evidence that there were civilizations prior to sumeria. unfortunately i have to admit none of it is definitive, but the amount of circumstantial evidence should be enough, in my opinion, to at least acknowledge the possibility. just the time scales (as currently accepted) is pretty compelling to me. its accepted that fully modern man (homo sapiens - and dont get me started on that homo sapiens sapiens garbage) has been around for around 200,000 to 500,000 years. and we expected to believe that modern humans, with our drive to explore and create, just dawdled around stupidly for hundreds of thousands of years until one day they up and decided "oh, hey, i know, lets become civilized!"? i dont find that very likely.

another pet peeve of mine (to go somewhat off topic) is how anytime any piece of evidence of a lost civilization is discovered, people always jump up and down and start screaming "atlantis!" like thats the only possible thing it could be. i think its much more likely that if atlantis (or any other analogous "advanced" civilization in our distant past) existed, it was probably one nation (or the equivilant) in a plethora of other concurrent civilizations of various stages of advancement, quite like the world is today and, for the most part, always has been throughout human history.

anyway, thats what i think. also, this is my first post. been lurking for a while and this thread finally got me to sign up. if theres an "introductions" thread somewhere in the labyrinth of this board, please point me in that direction. and hello, all.



posted on Nov, 12 2007 @ 10:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by kerkinana walsky
1. The pyramids are built on bedrock
2. scott creightons theory has more holes in it than a colander
3. Yonaguni is not 12,000 years old and has been dated by experts to the known Jomon culture. the only people claiming otherwise are all making money from it.
3. Edgar Cayce is not a valid source for information about anything.
[edit on 12-11-2007 by kerkinana walsky]


1. Then how do you explain the myriad tunnels and chambers yet (officially) unexplored underneath the Giza complex?

It is suggested that the current pyramid is built on VERY ancient foundations. It has been said that an even older pyramid, which has since broken down over time, is literally under the Great Pyramid.



Notice how a subtle mound is drawn in there and the descending passage passes way below it? The idea is that the descending passage is MUCH more ancient then the rest of the Pyramid and that the little mound type thing drawn in would correspond with the ancient mound. I'm pretty sure I read this in Hancock and Bauval's 'The Message of the Sphinx'. They have all the good evidence which I can't recall right now.

2. Have you put them to Scott? What did he say?

3. The land on which Yonaguni was built would have only been above sea level approx 12,000 years ago.

4. Edgar Cayce has been correct the majority of times, BBBUUUTTT A.R.E's explorations of the Carribean area have NOTHING to do with Cayce himself. They are purely following up on his leads. Just because he suggested the location doesn't mean it is a pointless search.



posted on Nov, 12 2007 @ 10:30 PM
link   
You can say the flipside all you want.
My point was simple.
Not all that is laughed at is wrong.



posted on Nov, 12 2007 @ 10:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by frumpwallow
the stubborn refusal to even acknowledge the possibility of previous lost civilizations is one of mt pet peeves as well. there is quite a lot of compelling evidence that there were civilizations prior to sumeria. unfortunately i have to admit none of it is definitive, but the amount of circumstantial evidence should be enough, in my opinion, to at least acknowledge the possibility.

Science is based on the same kind of evidence that a court requires for a conviction. Would you convict someone on circumstantial evidence that is not definitive. Historian do acknowledge the possibility but they require evidence to come up with at least a hypothesis. If there had been a lost civilisation then there would be lots more evidence than there is. Civilisations do not exist in a vacuum. pretty much every known civilisation appears in the records of every other known civilisation that they were trading with and its trade more than anything else that builds that type of society.


Originally posted by frumpwallow
just the time scales (as currently accepted) is pretty compelling to me. its accepted that fully modern man (homo sapiens - and dont get me started on that homo sapiens sapiens garbage) has been around for around 200,000 to 500,000 years. and we expected to believe that modern humans, with our drive to explore and create, just dawdled around stupidly for hundreds of thousands of years until one day they up and decided "oh, hey, i know, lets become civilized!"? i dont find that very likely.


DNA evidence indicates that modern humans originated in Africa about 200,000 years ago

en.wikipedia.org...
how many people make a civilisation ?
are you supposing that right from the start there were 6.6 billion people around to build these lost civilisations. 10,000 years ago there were less than 2 million people around. the numbers before that decrease rapidly. to give you an idea of what that represents the current population of London is around 6 1/2 million.



posted on Nov, 12 2007 @ 10:47 PM
link   
reply to post by kerkinana walsky
 




Science is based on the same kind of evidence that a court requires for a conviction.


Yet an innocent man can go to deathrow by mistake and a criminal can go free. Let me guess you worship the all-mighty science.



posted on Nov, 12 2007 @ 11:03 PM
link   
reply to post by frumpwallow
 


Welcome Frumpwallow!

First post in and I agree whole-heartedly with you.

That whole "we've discovered Atlantis!!" gets to me as well. It'd be like in 10,000 years discovering the Statue of Liberty and assuming they discovered Australia because both countries are white and speak English or something….

There's probably a better example but I hear ya man!



posted on Nov, 12 2007 @ 11:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by srsen
1. Then how do you explain the myriad tunnels and chambers yet (officially) unexplored underneath the Giza complex?

I don't know where you're getting your information from but its incorrect. the only tunnel I heard about is the one that links The Kings chamber of the Great pyramid to Zahi Hawass's office in Cairo so he can secretly conduct his satanic midnight mass unobserved


Originally posted by srsen
It is suggested that the current pyramid is built on VERY ancient foundations. It has been said that an even older pyramid, which has since broken down over time, is literally under the Great Pyramid.

if that were the case then the Great pyramid would have collapsed a long time ago. It is still there because it is built directly onto the bedrock which had to be made level first with the use of a specially tailored blocks. perhaps this is what you are claiming is the remains of a pyramid beneath it. the descending passage is cut into the bedrock and was not there before the pyramid was built. the message of the sphinx is not a good source and was written by a journalist who has never studied Egypt and who's theories on the whole were debunked decades ago. this is why he is now writing fictional books.

Originally posted by srsen
2. Have you put them to Scott? What did he say?

he refused to answer or used circular reasoning because he has no answer. Scott has never studied Egypt and has no academic support for any of his theories. His normal method of answering is to link to a nonsensical flahs presentation that would only fool someone else who doesn't know much about the subject either. He does have a book out all about it though


Originally posted by srsen
3. The land on which Yonaguni was built would have only been above sea level approx 12,000 years ago.

this is complete fiction. Yonaguni is at a depth of 80 feet or if you prefer approx



posted on Nov, 12 2007 @ 11:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by kerkinana walsky
If there had been a lost civilisation then there would be lots more evidence than there is. Civilisations do not exist in a vacuum.


But there IS evidence, its just not considered reliable by the scientists who write the text books. But it IS there.

When was the last time you recall seeing earthquakes, tidal waves, meteor impacts and volcanoes all happening at once on earth? Obviously your answer is that you don’t.

So how do we know the type of devastation civilisation-ending cataclysms would cause?

Look at the Boxing Day tsunami, it wiped parts of the Bay of Bengal off the map - and it was tiny in comparison to the types of catastrophe's described to destroy so many past civilisations! It is highly plausible that whatever series of events destroyed Mu and Atlantis left no traces of their existence. We cant confirm or deny this.


Originally posted by kerkinana walsky
how many people make a civilisation ?


If I understand you correctly then you are saying that there weren't enough people to populate these past civilisations - but I'm saying that all these people died. Some suggest Mu had upwards of 64 million inhabitants who mostly all perished.

The other way you may have meant that comment makes me think you should have re-phrased your question to, how many MODERN people make a modern civilisation.

It kinda comes down to what we are capable of now compared to in our distance past. There is NO DOUBT in my mind we, as a general collective, have completely lost touch with our source and with our true abilities.

Modern monks claim to be able to levitate objects through sound waves and vibrational frequencies, this is being further investigated and proven through the Hutchison Effect (youtube it).

It would take very few men who could routinely levitate stones to create a masterpiece as epic as even the Pyramids of Giza.

Our consciousness has been completely neglected also. We can achieve so much with our consciousness yet most of us forget that its even a tool to be used.

If we remembered all our true abilities, we would find out very quickly how fewer people could craft magnificent civilisations.



posted on Nov, 13 2007 @ 12:14 AM
link   
so basically you're saying there is no evidence at all and you still believe it

belief is faith based
science is evidence based

they are mutually exclusive.



This "Hutchison Effect" has been claimed for years, without any independent verification — ever. In fact, its originator can't even replicate it on demand. This has been investigated more than once, been part of documentaries on The Discovery Channel, but still never seems to pass critical muster. This is in the category of folklore. In general, the "American Antigravity" web site caters to such folklore and its enthusiasts.


furthermore the Egyptians did not levitate the blocks into place. graves of the builders have been excavated and they showed signs of excessive labour. there are pictures of Egyptians dragging pyramid blocks and larger monuments on sledges. The sledges are also now in museums.


Originally posted by srsen

When was the last time you recall seeing earthquakes, tidal waves, meteor impacts and volcanoes all happening at once on earth? Obviously your answer is that you don’t.

my answer would be this week, don't you read the news ?
www.bangkokpost.com...
www.kutv.com...
www.itwire.com.au...
news.xinhuanet.com...

Originally posted by srsen
If I understand you correctly then you are saying that there weren't enough people to populate these past civilisations - but I'm saying that all these people died. Some suggest Mu had upwards of 64 million inhabitants who mostly all perished.

some suggest ?
who suggests
how did they arrive at those figures did someone take a census shortly before the destruction ?
if that figure is correct and you are placing the destruction at around 10,000bce then there were more than 30 times the amount of people living on Mu than were alive on the rest of the planet
thats so funny I won't bother to take it seriously



In future if you are going to discuss this sort of topic and claim that the orthodox theories are wrong at least try to find out what the orthodox theories are first. It would assist your posting credability no end



[edit on 13-11-2007 by kerkinana walsky]



posted on Nov, 13 2007 @ 12:53 AM
link   
It is all because ancient advanced civilizations were advanced civilizations.

They were a lot more advanced than us so they didn’t leave any remainings…

To most of the peiople today, the term “remainings of advanced civilization” would mean a skyscrapper, plastic, machinery, road, factory, huge industry or basically anything artificial, un-natural, synthetic, unorganic, advanced-materialistic bla bla...

However, this is not what defines advanced civilization.

The real advanced civilization is highly spiritual, environmentally friendly, with only basic consumerist and materialistic needs. They were what we would call today organic and humble.

They existed for thousands of years but didn’t engrave their pressence deeply into earth like we did in only couple of hundred of years

They did have technology far more advanced than ours but then again, it didn’t leave any traces because it was biodegradable and non polluting.

The real advanced civilization from long time a go will only leave some stone ruins because everything else they had was easily swallowed and recycled by nature.

This is highly unbelivable to any of today’s materialistc-consumerist-scientific mind.

To us, all of those remainings were from yet another pre-historic, pre-intelligent human, forms of primitive life…

Until we change ourselves, no one will ever figure this out…



posted on Nov, 13 2007 @ 02:26 AM
link   
reply to post by zhuzha
 


That is just opinion not facts.

I doubt any advanced civilization wouldn't explore the more 'technical' side of things. If they did they they should have left their mark in space somewhere.



posted on Nov, 13 2007 @ 02:29 AM
link   
reply to post by AncientVoid
 




I recommend a book that will give you an idea just how quickly a civilization can vanish especially if you add in if it was caused by some MAJOR catastrophy (yea I know I misspelled so shoot me).
This is the link to the website about it. I recommend you pick it up.
The World Without Us.



posted on Nov, 13 2007 @ 02:39 AM
link   
reply to post by WraothAscendant
 


What MAJOR catastrophe would get rid of every trace of us being here?
There must be a master restart button


[edit on 13-11-2007 by AncientVoid]



posted on Nov, 13 2007 @ 02:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by frumpwallow
its accepted that fully modern man (homo sapiens - and dont get me started on that homo sapiens sapiens garbage) has been around for around 200,000 to 500,000 years. and we expected to believe that modern humans, with our drive to explore and create, just dawdled around stupidly for hundreds of thousands of years until one day they up and decided "oh, hey, i know, lets become civilized!"? i dont find that very likely.


I absolutely agree, I allways think about this too. It is outrageous to think those people were ape like morons, unable to communicate wearing rough furr and throwing bones at each other.

If a civilisation befor ours existed, their remains got destroyed by mother nature (Glaciers, weather, etc) and what was left got salvaged by the survivors.

One of the best examples is this ship graveyard at the indian coast. You see old Super Tanker being dragged to the shore, and then hundreds of men take that ship apart sometimes with the most primitive tools. In no time, there is not a screw left, everything has been salvaged...





new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join