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.
Originally posted by Phage
Apparently the on site carbon dating as done with charcoal found at the site but I can't find anything other than what wiki says about it.
Originally posted by zorgon
Oh well I guess they have the PhD... so they must know what they are doing
Originally posted by punkinworks
So to get across these waters man had to be able to build boats by the time mungo's people made it to australia.
Not that much of a stretch,
but then what does this have to do with sunken indian cities?
Originally posted by Phage
So...
That's our job?
Originally posted by coodeytar At the academic level, no one is doing that, nor does there seem to be any inclination to do so, which I find stupefying.
Originally posted by coodeytar
At the academic level, no one is doing that, nor does there seem to be any inclination to do so, which I find stupefying.
Originally posted by Hanslune
Originally posted by coodeytar
At the academic level, no one is doing that, nor does there seem to be any inclination to do so, which I find stupefying.
That is an odd comment since such collaboration is very common, standard procedure actually, in Archaelogy where a team is needed to handle all the diverse analysis of finds from a site. However I will admit that few if any archaeological teams employ astrologers or phrenologists to check out the excavated skulls!
More seriously what do you base that opinion on? Multidisciplinary teams have been the standard for many decades. Perhaps I should ask what specialization do you figure are needed on those teams that they now lack?
Originally posted by Unity_99
The meltdowns and the ice ages are cyclical and there are a many other factors involved. This is the kind of disaster we are looking at now, with the potential of polar meldowns. This process is going quite quickly in the North pole and greenland area, but its antartical that will determine this. And our map will change drastically again. In this process there are also magnetic pole reversals, and magnetism is one of the forces that works on gravity, and gravity is one of the forces that keeps things near the equator instead of spread out since gravity works like a force that goes straight down and would keep things near the equator.
I think there are many cyclical reasons why whole civilizations may have fallen and been buried in the past. I also think we should be paying attention to this in a large way.
edit to add: If a meltdown does occur, initially the ocean levels would raise significantly by hundreds of feet or meters. But then the belt would stop and a rapid ice age would probably follow and earth would renew herself. We are in these times again. Both the meltdown and the magnetic pole shift have begun.
[edit on 6-9-2009 by Unity_99]
The whole problem in my opinion, with academia, is that it has become so specialised. Specialism most certainly has it's place, we require expertise, but that should not preclude a more holistic approach to all those factors that contribute to natural history, such as chemistry, geology, biology etc etc in order to fully appreciate how events have effected our development and the development of the planet etc.
I have worked within the university sector since I myself graduated, my father is an Associate Professor, and it is, surprisingly very closed minded with very little interdisciplinary interaction, certainly very little research is conducted that radically crosses disciplines, and any that is, is likely commercially backed, in the UK, blue skies is virtually none existent.
Originally posted by Unity_99
Many are discounting the significance of the pole reversal,
With the pole melt coming down at the same time, the next few decades are ones we ourselves should be careful of.
Originally posted by zorgon
Well the poles can melt all they want and it won't raise sea level at all. Because ICE expands when water freezes so when it melts sea level remain the same as the water fills in the displacement left by the ice...
Only if all the ice on land melts would it make a difference
Originally posted by SLAYER69
Originally posted by zorgon
Well the poles can melt all they want and it won't raise sea level at all. Because ICE expands when water freezes so when it melts sea level remain the same as the water fills in the displacement left by the ice...
Only if all the ice on land melts would it make a difference
You just contracted yourself here.
Most of the south poles ice is on land.
If that all melted we would be running for the hills.