A Message From the Ancients? - Or a Geographical Coincidence? - You Decide!

page: 3
37
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 26 2011 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by NibiruWarrior
reply to post by Byrd
 

The underwater pyraminds are NOT geological features!
[edit on 7/1/10 by NibiruWarrior]


They're certainly not natural formations. It doesn't take a geologist or science to know that either. All one has to do is look!
It's an obvious ruse, the whole, naturally formed bla bla bla.

But depending on the definition of geologic, they are made of rocks from the earth, however, IMO, not natural formations by any means.



P L E A S E . . .




posted on Jan, 26 2011 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Devino
 


I believe the theory wouldn't be some concentrated effort or society all living together at once.
Imagine a common civilization who brought these civilizations so many common things which can be indentified (folk and lore describes similar individuals, histories, views of death, the future, the end, the beginning, etc.)
If this common civilization made it's effects in a general time. The resulting civilizations (egyptians, mayans, japanese, etc.) would surely carry on in their own individual way for vastly different amounts of time.



posted on Jan, 26 2011 @ 12:04 PM
link   
reply to post by All Seeing Eye
 


Well actually, I believe the "feathered winged serpent" you're referring to, according to Hancock's research, was a white bearded person. This is based on sculptures images and stories we've gotten from the Aztec and Maya.

There was apparently a time when Quetzlcoatl (the light bringer, peaceful god) was driven out by a god whose name I cannot recall, but apparently this god was the one who reintroduced the slaughtering sacrificial practices which these civilizations are best known for. I'm not sure what his appearance was said to be compared to the light-skinned bearded man.



posted on Jan, 26 2011 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by NibiruWarrior
The underwater pyraminds are NOT geological features!

A lot of professionals and archaeologists have dived at the sites and have confirmed that they are in fact megalithic structures similar to those around the world still above sea-level such as at Gizah, Baalbek, Machu Picchu, Chichén Itzá, Luxor, Palenque, Pumapunku, Teotihuacan, Tiahuanaco, Uxmal, Yaxchilan, Tikal, etc, etc, etc.



If anything IMHO they were not constructed but used/carved on. The natural geography of the area still shows similar stone shapes that are now above water. This doesn't mean that ancient man didn't take advantage of the location while it was dry. There is circumstantial evidence that it was used as either a temple or a harbor. But I can argue that it wasn't "constructed"


Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
Teotihuacan and Stonehenge are separated by nearly four thousand years. Are you seriously trying to tell me they're from the same people?



I'll agree that they were not done by the same people but they were not 4,000 years apart. The largest Stones at Stonehenge didnt get put into place until around something like 2300 BC or there abouts. Since the verdict is still out on when and by whom Teotihuacan was started. One cannot declare "Absolutes" either way....

Teotihuacan: Origins and foundation

The early history of Teotihuacan is quite mysterious, and the origin of its founders is debated. For many years, archaeologists believed it was built by the Toltec. This belief was based on colonial period texts, such as the Florentine Codex, which attributed the site to the Toltecs. However, the Nahuatl word "Toltec" generally means "craftsman of the highest level" and may not always refer to the Toltec civilization centered at Tula, Hidalgo. Since Toltec civilization flourished centuries after Teotihuacan, the people could not have been the city's founders.


edit on 26-1-2011 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2011 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by skylightsintheillions

Originally posted by NibiruWarrior
reply to post by Byrd
 

The underwater pyraminds are NOT geological features!
[edit on 7/1/10 by NibiruWarrior]


They're certainly not natural formations. It doesn't take a geologist or science to know that either. All one has to do is look!
It's an obvious ruse, the whole, naturally formed bla bla bla.

But depending on the definition of geologic, they are made of rocks from the earth, however, IMO, not natural formations by any means.
P L E A S E . . .


That all you got? An argument from incredulity?

You realize that you're making a fallcious argument, right?

They certainly are natural, whether you prefer to think so or not.

Harte



posted on Jan, 26 2011 @ 04:00 PM
link   
Not sure if anyone's mentioned it before but the feeling I got when looking at the North Pole view of the locations in the OP was "I wonder if you could draw lines across the globe to each of those points, would they all criss cross and if so, where on the planet would they all meet?"

Might be an interesting angle to explore.



posted on Jan, 26 2011 @ 05:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Harte
 


No, that's not all I got, but that's all that is needed. Step pyramids and hallways don't form in that manner.
It's very simple, Harte.

Try and debunk all you want, but your arguments will fall on deaf ears.




Looks like stairs to me.
Anyone else agree?

What is your argument for it being a natural formation?
90 degree equal step measurements and parallel walls without deviation?
Doesn't look like a natural formation to myself.
That's only my humble opinion. I'm not going to pretend I'm an expert.
graham hancock photos

There are multiple threads here on ATS regarding this topic though, so if we're going to open this can of worms, perhaps we should start at one of those threads.



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 11:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by skylightsintheillions
reply to post by Harte
 


No, that's not all I got, but that's all that is needed. Step pyramids and hallways don't form in that manner.
It's very simple, Harte.

It's no wonder you deafen your ears, if you're willing to call this:


A "step pyramid."
You are perpetuating your own ignorance. That's not a problem, really, but you're trying to spread it. That is a problem.

Harte



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 06:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Harte

Originally posted by skylightsintheillions
reply to post by Harte
 


No, that's not all I got, but that's all that is needed. Step pyramids and hallways don't form in that manner.
It's very simple, Harte.

It's no wonder you deafen your ears, if you're willing to call this:


A "step pyramid."
You are perpetuating your own ignorance. That's not a problem, really, but you're trying to spread it. That is a problem.

Harte
I had never seen the whole area in one sketch like that, thanks Harty.
You know to me, it looks like it was a work in progress, not really completed. Only started if anything.



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 10:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by All Seeing Eye

Originally posted by Harte

Originally posted by skylightsintheillions
reply to post by Harte
 


No, that's not all I got, but that's all that is needed. Step pyramids and hallways don't form in that manner.
It's very simple, Harte.

It's no wonder you deafen your ears, if you're willing to call this:


A "step pyramid."
You are perpetuating your own ignorance. That's not a problem, really, but you're trying to spread it. That is a problem.

Harte
I had never seen the whole area in one sketch like that, thanks Harty.
You know to me, it looks like it was a work in progress, not really completed. Only started if anything.
Harte's image reminds me more of a Ziggurat if anything.

Sumarian Ziggurate of Ur



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 07:12 AM
link   
Formations similar to this sunken one can be found all over the nearby island of Yonaguni-Jima.

I bet if you removed all the topsoil, the island would look like a giant version of this underwater formation.

Google the island images yourself, folks. Here at work, google images is blocked.

Harte





new topics
 
37
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join