Another researcher who has the answer on ancient Civilizations

Ancient civilizations

These are collections of material by a gentleman named Michael Ellis

I'll make no comments as to what I think of these materials except to note that he seems to like to use capital letters.


He identifies is as an artifact of a lost civilization - is it?



Mr. Ellis also declares on his page about Egyptian artifacts in West Virginia

Ihave been collecting these artifacts for 5 years. In the first year I took my first 2 metal artifacts into the local archaeology office and I was told they were not artifacts but slag and this was without any examination.

Each year I contacted the West Virginia Historical Society and The West Virginia Cultural & History Center also The American History Museum and asked them to look at my new and latest discoveries posted on the web.Each year they said slag and stones were Geofacts.

I was determined to collect enough artifact PROOF! that they could not deny so last year I took a disc of artifacts to West Virginia History Day but they never contacted me back and the same with Mr Rodriquez at the American History Museum. What has made me even more determined to bring this discovery to the world is I CONTACTED SAVE AMERICAS TREASURES and after a few days wait they contacted me and said the exact same words SLAG & GEOFACTS.

I believe there is a organized effort to suppress this discovery and artifacts.

[edit on 20/11/08 by Hanslune]

Here's the main problem I have with this person's discoveries: In not being a real archaeologist and more than likely not practicing proper excavation techniques, there is no way to identify what strata these "artifacts" came from. I mean, without a soil analysis there is no way to determine what time period we're dealing with (assuming he actually dug this stuff up); therefore, how is one supposed to know whether or not he just picked this stuff up off the ground somewhere? If these artifacts are as old as he suspects, then there probably would've been some digging involved.

However, I know firsthand how archaeologists tend to dismiss artifacts as "unimportant rocks" after only a fleeting glance! Still, seeing how there is a lot more to archaeology than just digging, I would tend to side with the professionals in reference to this guy's claim.

looks like geofacts.

The "artifact" with the mini etchings looks like an old greek coin I had that I tried to remove the earth with a knife rather than electrolisis.

It left little marks all over just like that one of his.

I'd say no ancient artifact that were made before the continent split.

The website is called Pangea. Pangea is a old flat earth type of theory.

Too bad pseudo intellects and pseudo historians embrace such idiotic theories and regurgitate such nonesense as if it were fact.

As far as the relics. It is quite possible that they are really old. The evidence shows that man has been on earth for over 1 million years easy. It would be extremely stupid to think that in the last 6000 years is when we became civilized.

Hansulane, Your beliefs and what you call proof can be pulled out of any elementary school book from the late 70's. We all know your views because we were all taught this in grade 3.

People believed in the flat earth theory and other people where ridiculed for proving how stupid flat earthers were hundreds of years ago. Who gets the last laugh now?

ok while most of his finds on this page (www.pangeawv.com...) seem like nothing, several do show symmetrical angles which nature could not produce.

This reminds me of the building foundations in Arizona that were destroyed after an archaeologist reported his findings to the state. will have to google as I forget which site it was from.



another site I find interesting is this guy
www.consumertronics.net...



[edit on 21-11-2008 by warrenb]

Originally posted by warrenb
ok while most of his finds on this page (www.pangeawv.com...) seem like nothing, several do show symmetrical angles which nature could not produce.

That's because they're slag from an industrial process. The glass, too, is modern.

This reminds me of the building foundations in Arizona that were destroyed after an archaeologist reported his findings to the state. will have to google as I forget which site it was from.

That may have been one of those situations that aggravates the dickens out of archaeologists. Surveyors who are going to put in a road or some modern structure find traces of a building or a burial. They have to pause while someone investigates. If it's a burial, the proper authorities have to take care of removing and reburial. If it's a building, the archaeologist has to find out the period and details and then it is either razed, removed to another location, or buried.

If it's valuable, they move as much as they can, because the road won't veer for an archaeological dig. If it's trivial (foundations of a 1930's house) then it'll be buried or razed.

If it's an ancient civilization (Anasazi, for instance) then if it's just one building they'll do a massive dig and move everything. If it's a whole village, the land may be bought, turned into a state park (one of the state parks in Arkansas did this with an old mound from the Mississippian period) or something similar.

Hansulane, Your beliefs and what you call proof can be pulled out of any elementary school book from the late 70's. We all know your views because we were all taught this in grade 3.

More personnal attacks huh Ivanzana. All future attacks will be forwarded to the moderators

I posted Michael Ellis's material to give a view of "alternative thinking". It also is a good example of someone overly committed to his ideas and having the a closed mind to outside suggestions.

If you look hard enough you can find evidence anywhere - the problem is - is it valid? Or is imagination forcing the data to where the viewer wants it to go.

Scientist of all types fall victim to this problem too.

Originally posted by Hanslune

Hansulane, Your beliefs and what you call proof can be pulled out of any elementary school book from the late 70's. We all know your views because we were all taught this in grade 3.

More personnal attacks huh Ivanzana. All future attacks will be forwarded to the moderators

I am sorry you took that so personally. I am just stating that the information you present is already know as the common belief. Most people come here to overstep that common belief and to explore it further without the common thought trumping its horn all the time.


Just the idea of a history of man in north america 30,000+ b.c is a mind orgasm for me, i dont know about you. The possibilities seem to present itself on a daily basis. The idea of Atlantis being in the Bahama/florida are is extremely intruiging.


I feel that some people fear this information because it will shatter their belief system which in most cases is the backbone of their ego. If any of theories presented are correct, that would mean that the bible was partially right, the indians were partially right, edgar cayce has super humans powers, etc, all of which science cannot explain.

[edit on 21-11-2008 by IvanZana]

I am sorry you took that so personally. I am just stating that the information you present is already know as the common belief. Most people come here to overstep that common belief and to explore it further without the common thought trumping its horn all the time.

Hans: Maybe the use of my name followed by insults and lies made me take it personally. What a concept. Evidence isn't "common thought", its evidence and its doesn't matter how old it is. Until better evidence comes along it stands.

Just the idea of a history of man in north america 30,000+ b.c is a mind orgasm for me, i dont know about you. The possibilities seem to present itself on a daily basis. The idea of Atlantis being in the Bahama/florida are is extremely intruiging.

Hans: I too am am interested in those subjects, however you state them has proven concept instead of the unproven speculation they are. You also attack anyone who does agree with your personal belief

I feel that some people fear this information because it will shatter their belief system which in most cases is the backbone of their ego. If any of theories presented are correct, that would mean that the bible was partially right, the indians were partially right, edgar cayce has super humans powers, etc, all of which science cannot explain.

Hans: Evidence based belief systems don't suffer from "the type of fear" you seem to think exists. Those with with purely belief based system ARE subject to such fears. Find the evidence and I have no problem adjusting my understanding of a subject, and I have done so repeatedly for decades.