Ancient Human Metropolis Found in Africa, page 5

privacy

Pages: << 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 137 times

reply posted on 3-11-2009 @ 11:49 AM by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by ChemBreather

I think very few people understand that a panel of Peer's are all in the same consensus on how things 'should' and 'must' be in order for things to work !

I think you're a little mistaken here, First off, 'peer' presumes an panel of his equals...so Eden would be up against Hancock, Lear, Stichen, ad nauseum. I'm sure he'd find a bobble head chorus.

If you are inferring that this piece couldn't withstand scientific scrutiny, and that is because of academic bias, I refer you to L'ans Aux Meadows and Monte Verde. Two paradigm shifts that actually prove you are wrong.

Just cuz it takes a high standard of evidence to change what the world 'knows', doesn't mean that there is a conspiracy against new thought. Careers are made from new discoveries. They are the holy grail. But they gotta be right.

reply posted on 3-11-2009 @ 11:50 AM by Shadowflux

reply to post by ChemBreather

Well, I suppose you and I differ on the fact that I tend to lean towards the idea that the more logical explanation is probably closer to the truth than the explanation which seems to SEVERELY contradict all known archeology. They are trying to say that these ruins are many times older than all of human civilization and are not offering much by way of evidence to back up their claim.

If I am to consider the the two ideas, one being that this is 200,000 years old and the other being that it is probably contemporary to other structures to which it is similar in form and purpose and for which there is much archeological record, I'm going to go with the latter.

If I wasn't into questioning things I wouldn't be here, but I'm certainly not going to make myself look like a fool by believing every highly improbably theory that someone comes up with to back up their previous agendas.

reply posted on 3-11-2009 @ 11:53 AM by TruthxIsxInxThexMist

reply to post by ChemBreather

Are you sure they aren't trying to distract us from the belief in Aliens and Sumerians? (I gotta admit that i don't know much about these Sumerians, only what i've read on this site)

Are you sure they aren't trying to get us to believe in what the Bible says about Adam & Eve? Dating this find to between 160,000 & 250,000 years ago?

Think about it for a while....

I'm not saying Adam & Eve didn't exist, i'm just saying that this seems to be coming at a time when we (the free thinkers) are gaining more insight into our past!

[edit on 3-11-2009 by TruthxIsxInxThexMist]

reply posted on 3-11-2009 @ 11:55 AM by win 52

Yes, thanks for the info.

We will eventually figure it out. Just a matter of time now, as the return of (nibiru) the punnisher is at hand.

I have seen too many educated experts spit on things that shake their theories. It seems they go to great lengths to try and continue their particular illusion.

We want to know the truth of the matter, not what you think happened.

Most historical theories of our evolution are fabricated without facts and evidence. The truth is hard to swallow, for many.

reply posted on 3-11-2009 @ 12:00 PM by nunya13

reply to post by DoomsdayRex

Right, cuz we all know what happened when Copernicus' work was peer reviewed.

edit to add: I'm just making a sarcastic point, not contradicting you.

[edit on 3-11-2009 by nunya13]

reply posted on 3-11-2009 @ 12:16 PM by ChemBreather

Originally posted by TruthxIsxInxThexMist
reply to post by ChemBreather

Are you sure they aren't trying to distract us from the belief in Aliens and Sumerians? (I gotta admit that i don't know much about these Sumerians, only what i've read on this site)

Are you sure they aren't trying to get us to believe in what the Bible says about Adam & Eve? Dating this find to between 160,000 & 250,000 years ago?

Think about it for a while....

I'm not saying Adam & Eve didn't exist, i'm just saying that this seems to be coming at a time when we (the free thinkers) are gaining more insight into our past!

[edit on 3-11-2009 by TruthxIsxInxThexMist]

Ocourse I have thought about that, they have to make that scenario real if they ei. plans an false flag Alien Invision to trick people into one World Govt. Or else the Aliesn will punish us etc... Lots of possibilities !!

reply posted on 3-11-2009 @ 12:22 PM by ChemBreather

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by ChemBreather

I think very few people understand that a panel of Peer's are all in the same consensus on how things 'should' and 'must' be in order for things to work !

I think you're a little mistaken here, First off, 'peer' presumes an panel of his equals...so Eden would be up against Hancock, Lear, Stichen, ad nauseum. I'm sure he'd find a bobble head chorus.

If you are inferring that this piece couldn't withstand scientific scrutiny, and that is because of academic bias, I refer you to L'ans Aux Meadows and Monte Verde. Two paradigm shifts that actually prove you are wrong.

Just cuz it takes a high standard of evidence to change what the world 'knows', doesn't mean that there is a conspiracy against new thought. Careers are made from new discoveries. They are the holy grail. But they gotta be right.

Thanks for clearing that up , I can make mistakes too, Im just like you guys.

I do not say it IS that old, I am not satisfied with the ammount of profe on the 'dating' and such, but I see that it goes along the lines of wht so many other say and most of all Where it is found, is where sitchin and the likes say it may have accured, and as long physical eveidence pop up and people want to stamp it with a 'date' that fits the other history 'facts' , I get abit upset..

There really is not much that is correct about our world, and I have the notion that very few people are aware of that...

reply posted on 3-11-2009 @ 12:23 PM by djusdjus

a) you can only radio carbon date organic materials. Not rocks

b) there are no actual archaeologists at this site?

c) there are no reports on this site other than just the one and this discussion?

why is above top secret turning into a festival of positive reaction to these pretty wild claims? Are we so desperate for something mysterious in our lives?

these kinds of threads make the whole site turn into a soup of nonsense.
people making these claims need more than a youtube movie and a google earth co-ordinate showing agriculture methods from non-arable lands.

cripes. read my signature, but don't take it to heart. lol

reply posted on 3-11-2009 @ 12:26 PM by Qwenn

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic

Originally posted by dallas18
This i thought was pretty cool, it near the far right location, it looks like a face in the circle possible kissing something else. Wonder what it is! It's only about 2300ft wide:

It's called Center-pivot irrigation, and is one of the most common bigscale ways of watering farmland.

You'll find those all over the world where they plant stuff. Artificial irrigation, they put a pivot in the middle and a long pole with holes in it which is fed with water, being moved around by an engine.

For more info, check out: en.wikipedia.org...

This may be irrigation, or not, but it still looks like two heads kissing, one perhaps male and the other female, Adam and Eve ?

reply posted on 3-11-2009 @ 01:01 PM by Soylent Green Is People

Originally posted by NoJoker13
I think this just might solidify a theory that humans (or something of the sort) have lived here much earlier or before anything we could imagine. The population was probably whiped out and had to restart and thats why we have no records for thousands and thousands of years. GREAT FIND! Also the person who asked about how they dated the civilization: RAdio Carbon

Thats a website for you take a look, AM I THE ONLY ONE WHOS HEARD OF RADIOCARBON DATING>?

Carbon dating only works on thinks that were once living (plants and animals). Therefore, the person doing the dating would need to have a sample of something like charred firewood or a bone that he KNEW FOR A FACT was part of that civilization before he could date that civilization.

As far as I know, the people making the claim about this civilization do not have that. A stone wall cannot be Carbon dated.

There's a lot of very "iffy" archeological investigating being done here, so I'm far from being ready to believe the claims made by this person.

[edit on 11/3/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]

reply posted on 3-11-2009 @ 01:08 PM by Raider of Truth

HOLY COW!

that is immense!

Also the date if true.. the evidence of Anunnaki(spelling?) involved in human evolution and advancement has just grown..big time. this would also blow away the evolution theory, i seriously doubt a bunch of monkey's/monkey men with spears could make something of that size.

also the thread about a rift opening in a large chunk of africa to begin the formation of a new ocean/sea is interesting.. great timing aswell

reply posted on 3-11-2009 @ 01:13 PM by odyseusz

reply to post by Qwenn

No, it doesn't. It look just like some part of grain was cut of or run dry. It's pretty, ordinary. The rest is only imagination.

I don't see any evidence of any city on marked area. There weren't any
archaeological proof shown. I expect we talk about nothing.

[edit on 3-11-2009 by odyseusz]

[edit on 3-11-2009 by odyseusz]

Mod Note: Excessive Quoting – Please Review This Link

[edit on Tue Nov 3 2009 by Jbird]

reply posted on 3-11-2009 @ 01:14 PM by Telos

While I'm not rushing into any conclusion or getting to exited about this 'discovery', never stops to amaze me the way some people react in this kind of threads. What if this site is proven to be that old? Why do you dismiss the remote possibility that this can be true? I mean, isn't science making every day a new discovery so to speak? Aren't the old boundaries of knowledge being broken all the time? Why do you tend to ignore all the new things that come up even when they are slightly accompanied with proves? Why always your effort goes into debunking, ignoring, bashing and mocking new possibilities and not trying to find something that not necessary can fit in the so called paradigm and can still go side by side with the new idea? I don't mean to offend anybody, is just something that keeps on showing up always in threads like that and makes one wonder why this people tend to be in denial all the time.

reply posted on 3-11-2009 @ 01:19 PM by Zeta Reticuli

regardless of you in-the-closet CIA agents who signed up on this website with false info for the sole purpose of debunking our "wild" claims and paint us "crazy" for believing in the truth, i still believe this site perfectly corresponds to the luvly ancient sumerians text tablets.

the truth is coming! but if 2012 is real, then i guess it doesnt make a difference!

reply posted on 3-11-2009 @ 01:21 PM by Raider of Truth

reply to post by m4ng4n

Holy crap! that's a "Piece of Eden"! it's what is at the center of the bible myths and legendary wars and gods an illusion for mankind.
so says Assassins Creed... if you havent played that game it's clear the developers have checked ATS out and are linking NWO and aliens along with 2012 into the franchise.. it's an amazing story which makes sense.

reply posted on 3-11-2009 @ 01:22 PM by Fedge

After 5 pages no one posted some pics ? Well i believe its what we are talking about, otherwise dont hesitate to lapidate me. xD

edit : here you go odyseusz !

[edit on 3-11-2009 by Fedge]

reply posted on 3-11-2009 @ 01:23 PM by Soylent Green Is People

reply to post by Telos

I'm personally not dismissing anything. I am open to the idea of a 150,000+ civilization, but nothing the article in the OP has made me think that this IS IN FACT one of those civilizations.

They have very shaky dating evidence:
(1)There is no reason to believe that those stones marked Orion's belt as it was horizontal on the horizon. Why jump to the conclusion that they were aligned this way? Even stipulating that the stones DID mark Orion's belt, the belt is straight enough an bright enough for the stars' locations to be marked by ancient people even if they were NOT level with the horizon.

(2) The dolerite could have been naturally exposed to the elements for thousands of years before they were used used in that "henge".

This hypothesis needs to stand up to logical scrutiny. Scrutinizing the hypothesis is not the same as saying that a person is close-minded about the possibility of the hypothesis being valid. Scrutiny is an important part of the process of discovery.

[edit on 11/3/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]

reply posted on 3-11-2009 @ 01:25 PM by nikiano

Originally posted by Lunatyx
I found this article yesterday and thought I would post it here to see what you all think. I did a search here on ATS but couldn't find anything related so...

ARTICLE LINK

Source Link

Something amazing has been discovered in an area of South Africa, about 150 miles inland, west of the port of Maputo. It is the remains of a huge metropolis that measures, in conservative estimates, about 1500 square miles. It's part of an even larger community that is about 10,000 square miles and appears to have been constructed -- are you ready -- from 160,000 to 200,000 BCE!

And Google Earth coordinates :

Carolina -- 25 55' 53.28" S / 30 16' 13.13" E
Badplaas -- 25 47' 33.45" S / 30 40' 38.76" E
Waterval -- 25 38' 07.82" S / 30 21' 18.79" E
Machadodorp -- 25 39' 22.42" S / 30 17' 03.25" E

I took a look myself and found some quite interesting formations and ruines...

Holy cow, great find! Star and flag.

More evidence to support that there were many other civilizations before our current one. More evidence to support the work done by Z. Stitchen, and others like him.

I can't wait to read it.....

reply posted on 3-11-2009 @ 01:25 PM by odyseusz