Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Proof! Of previous Civilizations and Cataclysms!

page: 2
10
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 03:20 PM
link   
number 3 is far too close to the mid ocean ridge to be a ancient city. because the see floor spreads out from the ridge and it moves at the rate of around 80mm per year.




posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 03:24 PM
link   
Here's a link containing a list of different programs similar to GE: en.wikipedia.org...

I don't know which ones may be better, but I do know GE itself isn't a good one.

The Atlantis myth actually states that Atlantis turned into a unnavigable mud flat, not that it sunk.
Also, keep in mind there were a number of civilizations in the part of the world lato lived in that were, in one manner or another, destroyed by the sea.



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 03:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by shade454
By "compelling" I didn't mean that based on these images I now believe Earth was inhabited by aliens who lived underwater. I just meant that some of these images, especially the first one, look like they could have been a city or some structure in the past.


I really doubt they are cities thousands of feet underwater that haven't seen the sun in millions of years. That's just to far of a stretch for me to consider as compelling.


Originally posted by Seiko
reply to post by sirnex
 


There are many ancient tales of floods and the very legend of Atlantis mentions it's sinking.

The first one does look like a road lay out, but I think it's too modern to be from an ancient civilization. I'd like if the op or others could get some screen caps in here, and perhaps a couple arrows done in them to help point out what they mean.


I don't know of a single myth that talks about ancient cities sunk to the very bottom of the ocean. If I'm not mistaken, hasn't that first layout already been debunked?



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 03:30 PM
link   
reply to post by RuneSpider
 





But at a later time there occurred portentous earthquakes and floods, and one grievous day and night befell them, when the whole body of your warriors was swallowed up by the earth, and the island of Atlantis in like manner was swallowed up by the sea and vanished; wherefore also the ocean at that spot has now become impassable and unsearchable, being blocked up by the shoal mud which the island created as it settled down


Maybe it did both, sank and became a mudflat.



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 03:49 PM
link   
There is much evidence of Earthly Cataclysms, and Folk tales from around the world tell of them.

"When the Earth Nearly Died
Compelling Evidence of A Catastrophic World Change 9,500 BC

When the Earth Nearly Died carefully documents the fascinating story - which has never been told before in such detail - of how this Golden Age of peaceful conditions and equable climates ended traumatically in a tremendous catastrophe about 11,500 years ago. This was part of a cataclysm which disturbed the whole solar system, destroyed at least one sizable planet and its satellite, and also severely devastated Mars and Earth.

Among the fundamental geophysical effects experienced by Earth were a massive fracturing of the crust, a realignment of Earth's axis, elevation of new mountains, and widespread rearrangement of land and sea. These changes were accompanied by an appalling global conflagration, a gigantic flood, and what has been described as 'collapsed sky' conditions. A bombardment by debris from the disintegrated satellite of the destroyed planet added to the worldwide chaos."

when earth nearly died

Do not assume that present day Ocean Bottoms have always been there.
Earth is expanding. The evidence is abundant and scientific.

expanding Earth

"There are other reasons to doubt the validity of subduction. One is the illogical question of why the East Pacific Rise (EPR) should generate ~80 to ~160 mm/yr (~3-1/4 to ~6-1/2 in/yr) of new ocean seafloor—right in the middle of the supposed subduction area, and simultaneously subduct a greater amount elsewhere around its perimeter, leaves one puzzled. This EPR growth is four times greater than seafloor growth anywhere else on the planet and this large amount of new oceanic seafloor does not appear to be accounted for in the VLBI measurements. Where are measurements showing the Pacific Ocean basin DECREASING IN WIDTH?

Also unaccounted for are the vast amounts of new N-S seafloor being added circum-Antarctica that are causing Antarctica to INCREASE IN TOTAL SURFACE AREA AND EXPAND RADIALLY OUTWARD FROM THE PLANET’S CENTER."

Subduction Flaw

This excerpt is re Pacific spreading, but they also talk about Atlantic spreading.



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by OhZone
 


I don't know, I read the sites and I just can't buy it. Especially the second like when they say stuff like "Is further evidence needed? Not really." Did we live with dinosaurs too and rode them around?



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 02:35 AM
link   
This is really quite an interesting study in sociology.

Some will never accept what is happening on this planet, natural selection most probably. And in the long run we as a species will be better off for it.

Have a look at this; neic.usgs.gov... this shows the activity globally.

The Earth is expanding we know this because of the data that shows it to be so. Ancient cultures did exist, we know this because of what they left behind, Angkor Watt, the pyramids, moai of Easter Island.

Regarding picture #1, it sits in a more sheltered location as opposed to the others. And therefore is less susceptible to oceanic currents and the resulting hydraulic erosion. Additionally the location certainly has a higher degree of silt throughout the entire basin, that could also resemble mud flats, and is located where Plato said it was.

The ones along the Atlantic ridge while less well defined show intelligent patterning, and because of their location are more eroded and likely older.

Over in the Pacific more intelligent patterning, and just north of Easter Island again home to the moai.

If you scan closely most of the highly sedimented sub sea areas you will see patterns and evidence of habitation. A cataclysmic surge event as it destroys an inhabited area creates a flotsam debris field that then settles rots and turns into sediment, those with more current activity will level that sediment layer out thus obscuring more definition.

For those of us that have found accepted theories and explanations lacking, have studied alternatives with an open mind as well as using the brain tissue in our heart know that what we are seeing is representative of habitation.


Also due to evidence of sea life throughout all of the now dry continents, which shows us that at one time they were under water.

And just how do you think that the tightly packed sedimentary layers that are currently being excavated from "Prehistoric" sites got there?

But please don't let the facts obfuscate your denial.

If you choose not to believe that is your choice, But I can assure you that due to the methods used to generate these pictures they can only be what they are. And fit in precisely with most other alternative history, so much so that it is mathematically improbable that they are aberrations in the data or anything other than what they are.

Weighed against an historical record that leaves us seeking alternative explanations. One has to be willing to accept where it may lead.

If the idea of prior advanced civilizations and cataclysms causes discomfort, it would benefit all if you would take the time to find out why that is.

Otherwise this thread is certainly not for you.






[edit on 8-11-2009 by PaulKCA]

[edit on 8-11-2009 by PaulKCA]

[edit on 8-11-2009 by PaulKCA]



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 03:46 AM
link   
reply to post by PaulKCA
 


Hi PaulKCA.
Here are the pics corresponding to the first location you gave : amazing !






I'll try the others ...



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 04:04 AM
link   
Orkson, Thank you! For posting them and appreciating them!



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 04:08 AM
link   
reply to post by PaulKCA
 


Here other locations.
I chose #5 & #6 : the others are not significant IMO.








posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 04:55 AM
link   
reply to post by PaulKCA
 


I'm pretty sure number one has proven to be an error in Google Earth, but if you note the Sea Mounts directly next to those coordinates, yeah, that was my personal position for Atlantis back when I cared to research it. Why? Because supposedly a vessel in the 1800s approached those areas and found an island had risen from the sea where none had been before, supposedly they found all sorts of artifacts on it. I gave up on the idea though because all the artifacts were said to have disappeared the the ship's log burnt in a fire so their was no evidence of it, and also because the sea mounts have been studied by scientists and they never found anything suspicious.

Most of these are either fault lines or your imagination trying to make order where none appears. Remember we're looking for a land mass so we're expecting it to be at far higher elevation than the sea floor around it. I don't think Atlantis and Lemuria were real, I think they are stories that entered folklore and are based upon older traditions that date back to when Sea Levels worldwide rose drastically and covered much of the habitable land we humans called home at the end of the last ice age. This also flooded many land bridges leaving people isolated from each other where before they had easy contact. This idea of a time when a great flood or cataclysm scattered humanity and destroyed civilizations is a common story and may be based on fact but there are a lot of elements that become fictionalized especially if the events in question took place before written language.

Edit to Add: It was The Sun, the tabloid that sometimes passes as a thread source here on ATS, that posted a pic of your first set of coordinates some time back. It turned out to be nothing at all.

The Sun - Atlantis

Here is an article regarding what you are actually seeing, an artifact of data collection.

Atlantis Discovery on Google Earth Debunked

[edit on 8-11-2009 by Titen-Sxull]



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 05:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Titen-Sxull
 



Alas, a Google spokeswoman has since killed the buzz: "It's true that many amazing discoveries have been made in Google Earth ... In this case, however, what users are seeing is an artifact of the data collection process."


So, these words should be enough to "debunk" the picture ?

How do you explain the "hills" beeing cut by the "roads" and the roads beeing covered by sediments ?



... "an artifact of the data collection process" ?



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 06:09 AM
link   
reply to post by PaulKCA
 


Hi, paulKCA.
In order to encourage readers of your thread, feel free to edit your original post with an image of mine :

Right click on an image then "copy image"
Go to Paint : paste
Then "save as" ... the name you want.
Then go to ATS "member tools" : "my pictures"
Do "upload image", browse toward you image. OK
Then, in your album, click on the image.
This should give you the link to copy then paste into your post (at the right place) in order to embed the image.

Courage ! You can do it ...



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 06:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Titen-Sxull
 


I guess it's a matter of who are you going to believe?

Google, or your own lying eyes?

I've processed a lot of images, never saw an artifact like that. I'd like an explanation of what algorithms produce such an artifact. It's okay to get technical, I can probably follow.



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 07:18 AM
link   
reply to post by orkson
 


I would imagine that our own common sense should be enough to debunk all of these photos. Unless these are mermaid cities and mankind evolved from mermaids, then there is no possibility that these are cities thousands of feet under the ocean that haven't seen the sun in millions of years. If we can't utilize a tiny amount of common sense, then yes... they are super secret underwater mermaid/alien hybrid ocean cities.



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 08:03 AM
link   
reply to post by sirnex
 


Hi, sirnex.
Makes me think of ...
Quite fifty years ago, a friend of mine told me : "you will see : within a few years, there will be calculators as tiny as match-boxes"
I answered to him : "Hey, you are out of yours shoes ! common sense should tell you that one will never be able to build such tiny things for this goal" ...

"Common sense" ...

Common sense will tell you that it is "IMPOSSIBLE" that a few thousands of years ago ...

- what is now thousands of meters high in the Everest, was several thousands of meters BELOW the actual sea level.

- what is now the greatest desert in the world (SAHARA), was a great sea, with blooming islands and green forests.

- what is now the frozen Antartica was as friendly a country as actual Australia ...

etc ... etc ...

You should read more books on those topics.
They will proove to you how much the "common sense" is questionable.



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 01:22 PM
link   
reply to post by orkson
 


What those are, is the boats pulling sonar equipment that I mentioned earlier.
If you run a search for sonar tracks and Google Earth you'lll get a large number of hits in reference to it.
This thread on their forums had a good run over of it:
bbs.keyhole.com...



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 02:27 PM
link   
For those of you who would believe the debunkers, please move along there is nothing here for you!

Within several years you will experience similar events personally at that time you will think back to this and be faced with your choice.

For those of us that have taken the time to study the data surrounding this evidence, know the truth when we see it.

If you need someone to validate your beliefs you will always cede control!



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 02:34 PM
link   
reply to post by RuneSpider
 


Instead of speaking about it, why don't you go and look at actual data received from sonar tracking surveys and the according overlays in GE.

While you are at it, learn how this bathymetric data for the planet was acquired. That should help enlighten as to why this is not errant data.



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 02:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by orkson
reply to post by Titen-Sxull
 



Alas, a Google spokeswoman has since killed the buzz: "It's true that many amazing discoveries have been made in Google Earth ... In this case, however, what users are seeing is an artifact of the data collection process."


So, these words should be enough to "debunk" the picture ?

How do you explain the "hills" beeing cut by the "roads" and the roads beeing covered by sediments ?



... "an artifact of the data collection process" ?





What your seeing is underwater soundings done by ship.The lines are accurate representations of the ocean bottom as the ship doing the survey crossed that area. Those lines don't exist they simply show on the map because that data is more accurate then the surrounding area. Sorry guys its not Atlantis.





new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join