Previously undiscovered ancient city found on Caribbean sea floor

hmmm.... this sounds a little fishy >>> >>>

why would the project leader want to be anonymous at this point?

is funding gonna be an issue...?

or maybe INFOSEC?

or just because its only speculation at this point?

Thanks!

second line!

reply to post by mars1


Without even looking at the pictures im not buying it. Why guard the location????

reply to post by WorldObserver

So given that NY has a population of around 20 million, then this picture has to be absolute CRAP! There were not even close to that many people in the entire world pre-ancient Egypt.

Needless to say, you were there and did a head count ?

We can only speculate as to what was going on before the end of the lat ice age.

ok, so these are the pics from this herald de paris article....

www.heralddeparis.com...

Here's a zoomed in section of the fifth picture....

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/00a79a2d47f8.jpg[/atsimg]

Here's a zoomed in section of the second picture. I had it rotated 180 degrees, but it won't work on here, so you gotta rotate it your selves....

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/7ae823edbfc1.jpg[/atsimg]

put em next to each other you can see the same structures.

this one just looked like a sphere shining in the sun....

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/c927f956993f.jpg[/atsimg]

I hope this thread worked. Rotate that picture and compare.

This looks like photoshop to me, if this was real it would be getting reported on all round the globe,

Mispost. I apologize. I'm looking forward to seeing what comes of this thread.

Cheers,
Strype



[edit on 16-12-2009 by Strype]

There are several different types of “satellite imagery”, such as radar, visual, infra-red, or combinations of them. The article doesn’t say which one was used. So there’s no way to guess how realistic the images are.

Originally posted by Strype
Mispost. I apologize. I'm looking forward to seeing what comes of this thread.

Cheers,
Strype



[edit on 16-12-2009 by Strype]

I see what you did there!


I'm glad you went back and read the OP.

Mispost indeed.

Edgar Cayce said something about Atlantis being found in the caribbean.

Though the pictures look inconclusive at the very best, I hope somebody funds them and they check it out!

Graham Hancock is salivating at the moment

Actually, I do wonder if he knows of this...

You get a star and flag for the find. Can not say one way or another if this is a hoax, having no back ground in imaging.

Originally posted by JTWalkinfingaz2
ok, so these are the pics from this herald de paris article....

www.heralddeparis.com...

Here's a zoomed in section of the fifth picture....

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/00a79a2d47f8.jpg[/atsimg]

Here's a zoomed in section of the second picture. I had it rotated 180 degrees, but it won't work on here, so you gotta rotate it your selves....

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/7ae823edbfc1.jpg[/atsimg]

put em next to each other you can see the same structures.

this one just looked like a sphere shining in the sun....

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/c927f956993f.jpg[/atsimg]

I hope this thread worked. Rotate that picture and compare.

Of Course its a hoax. This guy I've just quoted joined up specifically to try and lend credbility to it as well. He's part of it.

Here's a link to a 2001 story that got buried into the annals of time.
David Wilcock is on record about having spoke to a woman who was working on a National Geographic documentary that was investigating this urban spanse however, the documentary got pulled as soon as this information came to light. This story if true confirms David Wilcock

BBC riday, 7 December, 2001, 10:01 GMT 'Lost city' found beneath Cuban waters

A team of explorers working off the western coast of Cuba say they have discovered what they think are the ruins of a submerged city built thousands of years ago.

Researchers from a Canadian company used sophisticated sonar equipment to find and film stone structures more than 2,000 feet (650 metres) below the sea's surface.

Link to origional news story from 2001 news.bbc.co.uk...

I Personally hope it's true and if so it rewrites history and also sheds an awful lot of light onto the question of how an urban area the size of LA is now 650m below sea level and could this happen again?
It also confirms the legend of atlantis sinking into the sea and the elite fleeing to Egypt...

Originally posted by JayinAR
This has to be bunk.
No offense or anything, but I don't buy this for a second.

That "Atlantis" looks like LA.


[edit on 15-12-2009 by JayinAR]

I agree, Atlantis could not have had the primitive, ruthless built-in segregation of LA's design.

If we found Atlantis chose keep their poor far away from the rich in such an unsophisticated, barbaric manner it would be very depressing.

Perhaps Atlantis had a state funded private police to enforce this segregation, not unlike the Beverly Hills Police? Perhaps the Atlantis Hills Police highest responsibility was to ensure the peasants didn't walk on their patch. If this really does resemble LA, then i suggest we look for wealthy neighborhoods without sidewalks.

A similarity to LA would perhaps explain Atlantis' ultimate demise.

I've done a lot of traveling and in terms of hypocrisy, inequity and plain wrongness, in my experience, no two cities in the world are more closely twinned than LA & Bombay (now Mumbai). In both the ruthless cast system thrives and are manifest in law and mortar. So i sincerely hope that if this is indeed Atlantis it bares no resemblance to the primitive LA. That would be just another portent of our own ultimate doom.

Hmmm I think I am going to go with the compression effect on this one. Either that or the effect of the wake of the boat on radar scanning in water. It has been proven to create straight lines when there are none

"Atlantis, like the continent of Mu, did exist and was situated in the northern hemisphere, in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean. It was attached to Europe, and linked to America by an isthmus and to Africa by another isthmus at about the latitude of the Canary Islands.

Its area was slightly greater than that of Australia.It was inhabited by the people of Mu, approximately 30 000 years ago - in fact, it was a colony of Mu. There was also a white race there - tall blond people with blue eyes. It was the Mayas, very learned colonizers from Mu, who governed the country, and they constructed there, a replica of the Pyramid of Savanasa.

Seventeen thousand years ago, they explored the Mediterranean thoroughly, going via the north of Africa where they acquainted the Arabs, (descendants of the cross-breeding between yellow and black Bakaratinians) with much new knowledge - material as well as spiritual. The numerical script, for example, still used by the Arabs, came from Atlantis, and from Mu, of course.

They went to Greece where they founded a small colony and the Greek alphabet corresponds almost exactly to that of Mu.

Finally they arrived in a land that the natives called Aranka and which you know as Egypt. There, they established a strong colony with a great man, by the name of Thoth1, at its head. Laws were established which embodied the beliefs of Mu and the organizational principles of Atlantis. Improved plants, new techniques for raising cattle, new methods of cultivation, pottery and weaving were all introduced.

Thoth was a great man of Atlantis, extremely knowledgeable materially as well as spiritually. He founded villages, built temples and, just before his death, he had constructed what you now call the Great Pyramid." Thoa from Michel Desmarquets The Thiaoouba Prophecy.

According to Thoa The Isthmus that connected Atlantis to North America was just that an Isthmus. I call Photoshop on this picture. Why would Atlanteans build that large of a city as purported on a narrow strip of land like that.

Thank you all for your replies so far like i said in my opening post it could be just image artifacts but im no expert.
If this turns out to be a hoax then im sorry i just thought it was something that people on ATS would like to discuss.
There is a thing or two that puzzles me about this like getting confirmation there was really something there before coming out with the story.
They did say this in the article.

The site was found using advanced satellite imagery, and is not in any way associated with the alleged site found by Russian explorers near Cuba in 2001, at a depth of 2300 feet. “To be seen on satellite, our site is much shallower.”

I am sceptical of this myself so i hope we do not have years to wait for new info on this.

THANKYOU

Originally posted by Pryde87
Hmmm I think I am going to go with the compression effect on this one. Either that or the effect of the wake of the boat on radar scanning in water. It has been proven to create straight lines when there are none

1. you don't know the location
2. you have not been there
3. you have a closed mind
4. you registered 5 minutes ago to debunk this story (???)

Originally posted by Griffo515
Im not buying it and like probably 90% of people who see the images automatically think of compression artifact.

Quit that nonsense - Do some logical thinking for a change and stop relying on preconceived - and anticipated - notions.

Far out, everyone just drops their brain in the bucket when entering to use the sheets provided eh? No need to think, just assume so it appears, so it is.

I - as usual - don't know. But for gods sake, will people just quit the "I agree with the BS because it looks like a fib." instead of going "Lets look at this properly, see HOW it can be false in a coherent manner, and if we cannot see how it is false coherently, then see if we can make it coherent, either FOR or AGAINST."

I despair, I really do.

One image has the hand of google - ominous music plays - that is indeed exactly what an image of google earth at very thwarted closeness appears (beyond the absolute definition provided, and entirely artifacted). +1

So far, more for the against than towards the for. But I'm open to any interpretation. As long as it is justifiable and logical. Please.

Is it a bird ?
Is it a plane ?
It's a duck < Don't be absurd, it's obviously a bird!!! oO