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.

 

Forbidden Egyptology

page: 32
108
<< 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 02:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 





Helike (Greece): Archaeologists claimed, for the longest time, that it didnt exist. Even after extensive sea floor imaging they concluded that "there is no lost and sunken city here". This was eventually refuted when holes were drilled a bit more inland.


Really, I never read anything suggesting Helike didn't exist, just that its location was unknown. Eratosthenes knew where it was in his time. Interestingly, between 1988 and 1995, it was found with the use of a magnetometer.




Tamil Homeland: According to the Tamil of South India and Sri Lanka, they came from a "homeland" which is now submerged under the ocean. Mainstream archeaologists have, again,, for the longest time, claimed that the Tamil came from somewhere else (from lands north), ignoring the ancient texts as "legend and myth". As more and more underwater ruins are found off the coasts of India, this will have to be revised.


Interesting how the Tamil commentary claiming this was written only 1000 years ago. Also, along with archaeology, the genetics doesn't agree much either. Taken from the following:

si.wikipedia.org...




In 2002, geneticist Spencer Wells completed a study of human out-migrations from Africa utilizing the DNA of Bushmen of the Kalahari Desert who, according to Wells, have the oldest human DNA on earth. From analysis of DNA specimens collected in Tamil province, Wells concluded that the earliest significant wave of human emigration from Africa was that of San Bushmen to southern India and then along coastal routes to Australia (the Aborigines). Wells's findings are consistent with the conclusions of various forensic anthropologists, historians and oral historical accounts that classify the Tamils as Negroid or Australoid peoples.


cormac




posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Artifical structures off the coast of Japan/Taiwan, Cuba, Bimini, Cyprus, Ireland, India...theyve ALL been labelled "natural formations"...

...for no other reason than "they cant be artificial because when these places were above water, there were only hunter-gatherers around that couldnt build stuff like that".

No, it's because they have been found to be natural formations.

"No other reason" than that.

Besides, there's been no evidence of anything found off the coast of Cuba.

Your attributing some "mainstream explanation" to evidence that doesn't even exist only displays your lack of knowledge in these matters.


Originally posted by SkyfloatingId love for anyone to point out where else in nature straight lines, stairs, rectangles, perfect circles and speheres can be found.


In the example of Yonaguni Jima (the "off the coast of Japan" natural formation,) precisely the same sorts of "...straight lines, stairs, rectangles..." etc. can be found right there on the main island - on dry land. Pictures have been posted here at ATS in the past showing exactly this. I know this because I posted some of them.

Harte

[edit on 3/18/2008 by Harte]



posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Harte
 


You should have added: "And should underwater structures be found, they can be explained in mainstream terms". Right?



posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 03:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Harte
 


Are you stating with total certainty that no structures have been found off the coast of Cuba?


I am asking because I am operating from pure memory of what I read in a mainstream-mag about it.

[edit on 18-3-2008 by Skyfloating]



posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 04:42 PM
link   
Hello Skyfloating,

As reported by Reuters.

Lost City Ruins found off the Coast of Cuba.

I'm pretty sure you knew this was out there already. But just in case no one else did, it's now on record in this thread.


edit to add PS...These particular ruins are said to include large granite blocks stacked on top of each other and pyramid structures...

[edit on 18-3-2008 by PhotonEffect]



posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 06:10 PM
link   
I had read about this when it came out. Interesting to note that Paulina Zelitsky has been quoted as saying although she couldn't explain these ruins as natural phenomenon she also couldn't rule it out.

Also interesting is the fact that there have been no further updates on the progress of her investigations into these supposed ruins since 2002.

cormac



posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 06:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by cormac mac airt
I had read about this when it came out. Interesting to note that Paulina Zelitsky has been quoted as saying although she couldn't explain these ruins as natural phenomenon she also couldn't rule it out.

Also interesting is the fact that there have been no further updates on the progress of her investigations into these supposed ruins since 2002.

cormac



Even more interesting is how quickly Harte said "there is no evidence of anything found off the coast of Cuba", when in fact it cant be ruled out.



posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 06:41 PM
link   
Just because it can't be ruled out doesn't make it a point in your favor. In the least, you insinuated that it was artificial in nature. Care to retract that?

Interesting that the original discoverers haven't presented any proof one way or the other in the last 6 years. Not a glowing recommendation!

cormac



posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 06:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by cormac mac airt
Just because it can't be ruled out doesn't make it a point in your favor. In the least, you insinuated that it was artificial in nature. Care to retract that?

Interesting that the original discoverers haven't presented any proof one way or the other in the last 6 years. Not a glowing recommendation!



Between outright denial of anything being off the coast of Cuba and the enthusiasm for there being an artificial structure, the truth probably lies somewhere in the middle, of course. Time will tell.



posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 07:05 PM
link   
SkyFloating: u2u me an email and the pics are yours to see first. You may post or deny to post at your discretion. You need to see it with your own eyes, and take a couple days to digest what you learn.



posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 07:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Illahee
SkyFloating: u2u me an email and the pics are yours to see first. You may post or deny to post at your discretion. You need to see it with your own eyes, and take a couple days to digest what you learn.



Alright, excellent. Collaborative exploration



posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 09:03 PM
link   
Sorry for being late in replying

Skyfloating stated


Then lets talk about how things are lost overtime. Underground, underwater, eroded away, decayed away. I think people underestimate what a huge difference there is between 3000 B.C. and 10 000 B.C. Thats 7000 years difference and a lot can happen in 7000 years.


The problem is material does survive and did survive from 12,000 BP and even before. In that existing material no evidence can be found for an "advanced" civilization.

So Skyfloating, what criterial should we use to rationalize our not looking at what HAS been found from before 12k BP?

Pottery from Jomon - lots of pieces found, dated as far back as 12,000+ BCE, so if this pottery survived why not a single shard from any of the other civilizations? What did they store food in??

Jomon pottery

400,000 year old javelins, these are interesting as they survived more than one ICE age too. Why no tools from these boys?

400,000 year old wooden javelins


9,000 year old wine residue off Chinese pottery.

Wine residue




The dark section through the layer contains the grass bedding, thought to be the oldest evidence of sleeping quarters around a central hearth. An Upper Paleolithic camp, once submerged by the waters of the Sea of Galilee, has yielded theworld's oldest evidence of bedding, according to Israeli archaeologists. Known as Ohalo II, the site was abandoned by Stone Age fishermen and hunters nearly 23,000 years ago, following a flood.

Sorry the link for this is broken - will search and fix

So we can find beds, wine residue, pottery and wooden weapons but nothing, absolutely nothing from the early civilizations? We might find something in the future but until then it remains, sadly, unproven.

Again I would recommend you stop wasting your time on websites and go out and do something constructive that will lead to these sources being found.



posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 09:38 PM
link   
Sky floating is getting to see something few people in their life could ever imagine.

I'm dumbfounded thinking the whole concept through. How could we all have been so off the mark? Fables were truth and history and archeology are lies?

No wonder its forbidden.

[edit on 18-3-2008 by Illahee]



posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 11:34 PM
link   
[edit on 18/3/08 by Hanslune]



posted on Mar, 19 2008 @ 12:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by HarteBesides, there's been no evidence of anything found off the coast of Cuba.


To add to what you're saying:

In 2002, the "Russian-Canadian oceanographer Paulina Zelitsky" (I haven't checked her credentials) announced that she was going to be doing a joint filming project about the underwater structures off Cuba beginning October 2002. But there seems to be no record that this happened and there's no mention of it anywhere on the National Geographic site.
www.s8int.com...

Then Zelitsky announced a 2004 expedition, but this halted because of faulty equipment (an interesting conclusion since the team was supposedly "well equipped") although they never showed any maps or photos. Zelitsky was supposedly working on an "exclusive" for National Geographic and the expedition was supposed to go again in 2005:
www.s8int.com...

But, a little digging shows that perhaps there's a lot of misstatements there. Her credentials vary from site to site (as does her nationality), she is revealed to be an engineer and not an oceanographer, and later a "salvage engineer" -- and while there does seem to have been some sort of underwater camera exploration (judging from some photos I saw) associated with her, the National Geographic apparently didn't find the material convincing enough to buy it or support it.

The lack of consistency is interesting.

In any case, there's no record that any scientific expedition went there, that the site was identified and documented extensively, that a for-real geologist and archaeolgist ever saw the place, etc, etc.

And I find the case of her changing CV and nationality (as apparently presented by Zelitsky herself) rather suspicious. She certainly hasn't been silenced or been hidden... so where IS the material?

It doesn't take that long for a good find to be presented to the scholarly papers and to the press.



posted on Mar, 19 2008 @ 12:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune
The problem is material does survive and did survive from 12,000 BP and even before. In that existing material no evidence can be found for an "advanced" civilization.

(sniplet)
400,000 year old javelins, these are interesting as they survived more than one ICE age too. Why no tools from these boys?


You've hit the nail on the . -- so often Alternative History websites like to pretend that archaeologists only have material from the time of ancient Egypt forward (and that the documentation on Egypt isn't good.) While we *could* teach this in the public schools (go over the evidence and so forth in science), we don't.

Frankly, I think it's because the Christian lobbyists who are trying to cut evolution from the textbooks may be a big reason why this isn't taught. They tend to be politically active and many (as here in Texas) will raise a furor if you present material saying that humans lived longer than 4,000 BC. And the "Walking with Cavemen" series, while rather interesting, doesn't actually do a good job of presenting the technology and some of the more interesting evidence.

If we actually taught what we know in the public schools (that the earliest human-looking biped human ancestor) lived over 4.5 million years ago and that our human ancestors (homo erectus) were mass producing weapon technology (stone spears) and so on and so forth, there'd be a huge outcry.

I treasure my copy of Sprague de Camp's ANCIENT ENGINEERS

I do wish they taught this kind of thing in the schools today. Alas, we seem too concerned with not stepping on anyone's belief system and teaching for various national tests. Feh.

They need to be told about the real stuff that we know of that existed before 3500 BC -- like some of the material that I was documenting that dates from 7,000 BC.

[edit on 19-3-2008 by Byrd]



posted on Mar, 19 2008 @ 12:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Byrd
 





They need to be told about the real stuff that we know of that existed before 3500 BC -- like some of the material that I was documenting that dates from 7,000 BC.


Hi Byrd,

You've piqued my curiousity, what geographical area did the material above mentioned come from? Wondering if its somewhere new I haven't read about.

cormac



posted on Mar, 19 2008 @ 04:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 

"Are you stating with total certainty that no structures have been found off the coast of Cuba?"
You refferring to the short laconic news brief that quickly died,, about a large pryamid like structure off the coast of Cuba with its capstone still in tact?



posted on Mar, 19 2008 @ 04:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Byrd
 

It was about this time that the news of these underwater structures hit an old conspiracy forum (still running but stagnant). Research done at that time for the source turned up empty and all news articles seem to drop out of circulation. Was the last I heard of it.



posted on Mar, 19 2008 @ 04:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Illahee
 


"Years ago, I inherited a temple flame"
Any chance for a picture of this thing?




top topics



 
108
<< 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

log in

join