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.

 

Was the poleshift more recent than claimed?

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 05:06 PM
link   
For starters I want to point out that I support the teories claimed by Von Däniken, JA West ang Giorgio A Tsoukalos in the matter of us not being the first advanced civilization walking this earth.
And I´ve also have thrown away my old historybook since it simply doesn´t add up to some unexplainable artefacts and historical sites.

Of course all in all we speculate, for solid proof we need a time machine...
If you´re interested in the subject just search for it and you´ll find it all!

But the maps do give food to the myth!

I´ve done a lot of research on the net and curious as I am I started to investigate how many old maps there actually are and what separates them from the view we have as of today.

I found out that all the odd and unexplainable maps points out that the world was of course different to what we´re used to but also seems to point out that the icecaps where a lot different. If you take a modern day description of he Scandinavian icecap it adds up to the letter.

The main problem is just that these maps are 500 years or older and "we" drew the coastline of Antarctica in 1958 f ex...so the timeline...

And these are just a few apetizers:

•Zeno Map: Drawn in 1380, accurately outlines coasts of Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, and Scotland, as well as the exact latitude and longitude of a certain number of islands- though the chronometer (necessary for longitude) was not invented until 1765. Also shows Greenland free of glaciers as it was prior to the Ice Age.

•Camerio Map: From 1502, uses spherical grid- though the middle age still believed the earth was flat.

•Andrea Benincasa Map: From 1508, indicates that Northern Europe was being covered by the Ice Age glaciation's furthest advance.

•Iehudi Ibn ben Zara map: From 1487, it has remnants of glaciers in Britain, and detailed profiles of islands in the Mediterranean and Aegean seas- the islands are still there, but now under water.

•Hamy King Chart: From 1502, it indicates norther Siberian rivers emptying into the Arctic Ocean, but are now under ice. The chart also shows glacial actions in the Baltic countries, and even shows an ancient Suez canal. It also shows what are today huge islands in southeast Asia, but joined to land.

•Ptolemy's Map of the North: Shows a glacial sheet advancing across south central Greenland, as well as glaciers retreating from Northern Germany and Southern Sweden.

•Gloreanus Map: From 1510, it shows the exact line of the Atlantic coast of America from Canada to Tierra del Fuego, as well as the whole length of the Pacific coast.

•King Jaime World Chart: From 1502, it shows the Sahara Desert as a fertile land with huge lakes, rivers, and cities. Of course, this was true- a very long time ago.

•Dulcert Map: From 1339, it traces from Ireland to the Don River of Eastern Europe.

The foremost explanation in the areas of alternative archeology to their existence is that there was a poleshift not to long ago.

And O yes the maps do excist even today! (as I´ve interpreted it)

We´ve probably heard of the Piri Reis map which is said to show Antarctica but many debunkers disagree until one shows them the maps of Bauche, Oronteus Fiaeus and Hadji Ahmed who sos the same thing,-Antarctica without an icecap.

img8.imageshack.us...

img30.imageshack.us...

img29.imageshack.us...

In these maps terra Australes is equal to Antarctica and not Australia.




posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 05:27 PM
link   
I've always found those maps to be really interesting. There is one my an admiral of a fleet from the 1300 (I think not at home so I can't look in my files) that shows the coast really accurately. In fact scientists claim it has been 100,000 years since antartica looked that way. Though we were supposed to be pre-tech 100,000 years ago.

SO either the climatologists are wrong or the historians are wrong... which one?



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by m4ng4n
The foremost explanation in the areas of alternative archeology to their existence is that there was a poleshift not to long ago.



Ive seen pictures of Australia here, where the Cape York peninsula curves around in a semi circle. Thats not an indication of pole shift at all. Its just that, they mapped it incorrectly, but to the best of their ability, with what they had at the time.

By the way, Antartica was at one stage in a temperate climate, but continental drift and tectonic activity ensured that it didnt stay that way. Not a complete pole shift.



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 07:27 PM
link   
reply to post by OzWeatherman
 


I totally agree with you in those sentences.
But still if you take Schoner’s 1515 map compared to NASA bathymetry map over your parts of the world one can´t stop wondering if...

Is the sealevel higher f ex?
And what caused it at that point?

[img=http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/8576/64443513.th.jpg]



[edit on 13-8-2009 by m4ng4n]



new topics

top topics
 
1

log in

join