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.

 

Sodom and Gomorrah's ashen remains; Video

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 14 2008 @ 09:28 PM
link   
I happened on this video following a youtube link on another thread. I found it to be fascinating, to say the least. It's done professionaly ..imho
The shrunken sphinx and other geometrical deposits do look like "ashen" remains of wondrous monuments of Biblical times.

These sites he describes are all near the Dead Sea. ...and ...
The composition of the cooked "Brimstone" is also consistent with
a very hot fire. What do you guys think? Did God Nuke them?


www.youtube.com...




posted on May, 14 2008 @ 10:45 PM
link   
really interesting, imo the charcoal in the brimstone shows the best evidence for it being likely that there was a manmade structure there. I am the farthest thing from an expert though so i should say most convincing. nice find.



posted on May, 14 2008 @ 11:13 PM
link   
reply to post by DrPaulisENKI
 


Hello there,

Wish I could tell you something useful, but having dial-up makes video watching out of the question. Does the video give any names for these sites?

cormac



posted on May, 14 2008 @ 11:54 PM
link   
Howdy Enki and Cormac

I took a look at the first seven or so minutes

The exact locations of the cities are not known despite their claims. The pictures of what they called building are just sedimentary rock built up by the ancient lake/sea in the area known as Lake Gomarrah and the odd formations probably formed during times when the former seabed/lake bed was covered by an enlarged dead sea many milliions of years later.

Masada - yep those sites they saw from a distance were made by men - Romans, they were looking at part of the seige works and camps of the Roman beseigers during the Jewish war.

Sedimentary rock doesn't look like building stone - once you've walked around the middle east for few years you learn not to equal bulky shapes as "buildings".



posted on May, 15 2008 @ 12:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Hanslune
 


Hi Hans,

From what you've described sounds rather disappointing. Looks like Bab-ed-Dhra and Numeira will remain my current favorites, at least for now.

cormac



posted on May, 15 2008 @ 12:45 AM
link   
B and N are probably it but then expect a fist fight if people get into a discussion about it (amongst ME archies. What I think a lot of people don't reflect on is that the dead sea area looked somewhat like it did now back in biblical times. The dudes there tried to figure out why the place looked so nasty and they came up with the S & G story.

Terrain first then story to explain it not the story creating the terrain!

Have you been to Nebo?



posted on May, 15 2008 @ 01:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Hanslune
 





The dudes there tried to figure out why the place looked so nasty and they came up with the S & G story.


There is probably alot of truth to that and B and N were close enough to blame for it.




Have you been to Nebo?


Unfortunately, no. Being an Ex-Army brat and an Ex-Air Force NCO the only places I have been is England and Germany.

cormac



posted on May, 15 2008 @ 01:38 AM
link   
Ya poor bastard.

Long ago I worked with the 17/21st Lancers in their Kaserne in Germany.

Wait, if you're a Brit then you should be able to travel around being a lager lout!



posted on May, 15 2008 @ 01:45 AM
link   
All American here.

For me it was Darmstadt and Kaiserslautern, Germany in mid 60's and early 70's. RAF Fairford, England in the early 80's.

cormac



posted on May, 15 2008 @ 10:32 AM
link   
Baumholder, wild chicken and Graf



posted on May, 15 2008 @ 06:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Hanslune
 


Hi Hanslune ... I wish you would have finished the last 5 minutes or so. They analyze the sulfur "scientifically" and determined it was quite different from other sulfur phosphates in geo-thermal areas. It had the characteristics of a pressed powder that you might find in a furnace. ...... I think much more research needs to be done there before "jumping to conclusions' ... but i had never read about this find before and think it's interesting at least.

Watch the last 5 minutes



posted on May, 15 2008 @ 06:50 PM
link   
reply to post by cormac mac airt
 


Cormac ... I'll try to find some still images and articles about the site if i can later for you so you can jump in on the discussion. It's worth a watch though if you get some DSL going on ... The presenter is only maintaining the unique qualities of the area appear to be consistent with what you might find in an ancient city laid waste by one hell of a fire. No Bible thumping going on.



posted on May, 15 2008 @ 06:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Fibonacci11235
 


Greetings fib ..... Yes! Kind of amazing to imagine the magnitude of those sites and what they may have looked like before ...'the fire'. You know if you think about it ... it seems a reasonable place for ancients to settle. Near water ..... not drinking water! .. or was it at one time
When he was on the hill looking down the square features of the footprint the city may have been located in were also interesting.



posted on May, 15 2008 @ 07:03 PM
link   
reply to post by DrPaulisENKI
 


I'd appreciate any stills you can find. I've heard about sulfur balls, deposits and such found in the area, but without physical remains of a settlement to attach it too it really can't be equated with the remains of Sodom and Gomorrah. Still, it's interesting none the less.

cormac



posted on May, 15 2008 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by cormac mac airt
 


mac ... caught your reply before signing off. This is the first site that popped up in regards to the site. Ignore the Bible quotes if you like ... but check out the photo's and the analysis of the sulfur at the bottom of the page. What do you think?

users.netconnect.com.au...



posted on May, 15 2008 @ 08:36 PM
link   
reply to post by DrPaulisENKI
 


Hi ENKI,

Vaguely recognized the interpretation, it's been awhile. Got to where it mentioned Ron Wyatt, then it hit me. The only way to describe him is as a charlatan. He was a nurse anesthetist by trade, NO ARCHAEOLOGICAL OR SCIENTIFIC EXPERTISE WHATSOEVER. And he claims to have found just about EVERY biblical mystery known to man, while on his vacations no less.

He has even been seen "salting" the evidence to prove his claims. Refused to have scientific tests done on many of his "finds", only to have some of them be tested later and found to be something other than what he claimed.

I don't belittle the interest in the sulfur balls, etc. but there is just too much that is questionable to me. According to the article ALL of the structures of these alleged cities were turned to ash. In WWII we dropped bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The power of those two Atom Bombs DID NOT turn everything to ash. Remains of many structures were still standing. I see no evidence for cities here. I do see evidence for unusual sedimentary or chemical processes though.

cormac



posted on May, 15 2008 @ 09:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Hanslune
 



posted on May, 15 2008 @ 09:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune
Howdy Enki and Cormac

I took a look at the first seven or so minutes

The exact locations of the cities are not known despite their claims. The pictures of what they called building are just sedimentary rock built up by the ancient lake/sea in the area known as Lake Gomarrah and the odd formations probably formed during times when the former seabed/lake bed was covered by an enlarged dead sea many milliions of years later.

Masada - yep those sites they saw from a distance were made by men - Romans, they were looking at part of the seige works and camps of the Roman beseigers during the Jewish war.

Sedimentary rock doesn't look like building stone - once you've walked around the middle east for few years you learn not to equal bulky shapes as "buildings".


You are of course 100% correct. These are NOT cities or buildings at all - just sedementary rock formation. The is just psuedo-archeology at best...biblical propaganda at worst...

J.



posted on May, 15 2008 @ 09:46 PM
link   
The fire and sulfur from heaven were asteroids filled with purple sodium chloride (table salt) crystals. The following article says that the salt contained tiny droplets of salt water within it. It's interesting because there are those that speculate that the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah are beneath the Dead Sea. When Lot's wife turned to look at the city she was turned into a pillar of salt. In other words a small salty asteroid landed on top of her and it appeared that she turned into salt. The sodium chloride pillar just covered her body.

Purple Salt and Tiny Drops of Water in Meteorites

[edit on 15-5-2008 by lostinspace]



posted on May, 16 2008 @ 12:55 AM
link   
Howdy Jimbo

Welcome to the forum and your comments - are you a geologist by chance?

Lostinspace you never cease to amaze me. Keep that speculation coming.

Cormac, yep I didn't know the name of the guy but it was clearly creationist propangada. As soon as he stated the Roman camps were ancient cities I'd had enough. I use the teach the tactical and strategical aspect of the Masada battle within the context of the Jewish war and the writing of Josephus and am familar with that piece of terrain. I've also been to the Jordan side of the Dead Sea.


[edit on 16/5/08 by Hanslune]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join