What happened 3600 years ago?

page: 4
37
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 10:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Unity_99
reply to post by Donny 4 million
 


www.abovetopsecret.com...

I've made a thread about this, and the evidence for past disasters is overwhelming, and very significant ones to the earth's mantle, resulting in the sun rising from new directions, in cycles. One of the most dangerous things a race can do, is not learn from the records of the past, they went to great lengths to record their journey.

www.the-rabbits-hole.com...
And pictures speak a thousand words. The bottom of this page presents dots for each one found on the globe. Yet if its different each time, we may need to calculate. In that era, roughly 3600-3800 years ago, when many of them were dated, it seemed to be an indundation in North America that drove them west to the highest mountains.

Now my thread has been focusing so far on the historical records, and only some of many with suggestions for others to research more. Its going to go into the earth records, and finally the whole Saturn/Dark Star/Darksider agenda of the elite, and their sun god allegories, seemingly spreading sun god religions in hopes to trick people into signing up to their own "handlers".......

Scientists say most stars are binaries. I was told ALL ARE, for this infinite universe school is a duality. There is an implication in that.


You are doing fine in researching happenings.
Do me a personal favor and plot all your thinking that you endeavor TOWARDS.
I mean like index it-- write it down. Print it out.
Then assail it with everything you can possibly find to contradict it.
You are going to do well.
It is called sorting the wheat from the chaff.
Loose some of your chaff.




posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 11:23 PM
link   
reply to post by ANNED
 


The biggest thing in the dry lake bed areas is the rising of the San Gabriel I think. Causing a rain shadow. Look it up. Also the San Andreas fault that most likely swallowed those lakes water up like unplugging a bath tub. Not to mention the neat and amazing depression caused by the Pacific plate over riding the continental plate in that region. See Rainbow Basin. That Mojave desert is a must see for everyone. Death Valley 320 feet below sea level is a spiritual place to behold. You have not lived until your hands are full of Superior Lake's Sea Monkeys.( brine shrimp that lay dormant in the dry mud until it rains enough to make a puddle)
Your welcome Donny



posted on Mar, 29 2010 @ 01:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Unity_99

it is quite shocking to see the pockmarked side of our beautiful moon. I've seen the pockmarked side before, mind you, but something clicked this time, and filled me with dread. a star for you, thanks for the link to the-rabbits-hole.

and a star and flag for the OP. Great thread.

So, Paraguay seems to be where the Bushies and Moonies will be hanging post-apocalypse? I hope they make it long enough to have to resort to cannibalism...



posted on Mar, 29 2010 @ 02:16 AM
link   
I'm not going to say Nibiru is real, and I'm not going to say it isn't real. All I know is, there's still some questions that need answering.


1) We've all seen the Washington Post article, before [at the bottom, for the few that might not have], but I have two other questions I'd like answered. (I have seen a few articles where this issue was addressed and some say it turned out to be a distant galaxy, but no more conclusive/corroborated than the original story, itself)

2) Why is there NO mention of the Kolbrin Bible on Wikipedia? As far as I can tell the civs/religions that contributed to the txt are all legit(?) Even if they weren't, I see no reason why something as popularly speculated (and hotly contested) as this would not find it's way into the world's largest repository for knowledge in the world


3) Last year, right about the time when (the numbers say) people should've been complaining that 'if Nibiru were coming, we would see it by now' (nevermind the fact that it is a brown dwarf, emitting no light in the visible spectrum) there was a massive disinformation campaign launched against supporters who were supposedly providing solid evidence that it was in fact on the way (YouTube "Nibirushock2012"). You have to ask the question: why would someone go to the trouble of disproving a theory considered too wild all by itself, to begin with?! And, the people who launched this campagn had a LOT of access, and a LOT of know-how - and likely had a team of hackers working in total concert as they took over accounts and shutdown others (?) - why all the effort?!

_________________

The 1983 Washington Post article that was published and then immediately retracted (rumored under force/threat).

For your convenience, I have posted an excerpt, below - I'm sure most have seen this before. Remember this was countered, vehemently and immediately...


By Thomas O'Toole, Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, December 30, 1983 ; Page A1

A heavenly body possibly as large as the giant planet Jupiter and possibly so close to Earth that it would be part of this solar system has been found in the direction of the constellation Orion by an orbiting telescope aboard the U.S. infrared astronomical satellite.

So mysterious is the object that astronomers do not know if it is a planet, a giant comet, a nearby "protostar" that never got hot enough to become a star, a distant galaxy so young that it is still in the process of forming its first stars or a galaxy so shrouded in dust that none of the light cast by its stars ever gets through.

"All I can tell you is that we don't know what it is," Dr. Gerry Neugebauer, IRAS chief scientist for California's Jet Propulsion Laboratory and director of the Palomar Observatory for the California Institute of Technology, said in an interview.





[edit on 3/29/2010 by SquirrelNutz]



posted on Mar, 29 2010 @ 07:12 AM
link   
reply to post by SquirrelNutz
 


My guess for this retraction is the fact that if there was a grain of salt to the location of such a large object
right in the vicinity of the solar system there is no way science wouldn't jump all over it?
Although I really haven't looked into this Niibiru stuff as I think it would be a waste of time.


By the way--- who forced the threat?



posted on Mar, 30 2010 @ 10:37 PM
link   
Wow, I hadn't visited this thread in a while.

Thanks for all the kind words, stars and flags and especially the additional info.


If there's one story that says it all, it's this one from Astrobiology Magazine a couple weeks ago.

Except I don't think the extinction intervals are 26 million years.



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by GoldenFleece
 


The article makes it clear that the Peruvian civilization, not the only people on the continent, collapsed over the course of many generations. Hardly a single event.

The woolly mammoths went extinct 3700 years ago went the last vestiges of their group died out on Wrangell Island. AS the article clearly states the woolly mammoth were nearly gone 6000 years ago.

The Sahara quote is a copy and paste from fringe sites. The link is no good.

The Santorini material seems to be the only legit material listed.

The ice core samples appears to be yet another circulated internet hoax. I just read the article. The claims about the article are not supported.



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 09:34 PM
link   
reply to post by GoldenFleece
 



When you add the sudden demise of a successful 2,000 year-old Peruvian civilization, the sudden extinction of the Wooly Mammoth, ice core samples that suggest "great geologic stress" and the Sahara grasslands suddenly turning to desert that was "triggered by changes in the Earth's orbit and the tilt of Earth's axis" -- all of which happened 3,600 years ago -- it doesn't take a genius to conclude that there's most likely something to Mayan prophecies.


There was no sudden demise of the Peruvian civilization. The article clearly states it took several generations.
The woolly mammoths went extinct over thousands of years. That's hardly sudden.
The ice core sample claim is not support by the referenced article.
The Sahara change was not sudden either.

There is no link to the Mayans in any of the articles - figures



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 09:35 PM
link   
reply to post by GoldenFleece
 



Mystery Heavenly Body Discovered
The Washington Post, Page A1
December 31, 1983

The distant galaxy again. Dangerous them distant galaxies are.



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 09:45 PM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 

Thanks for bumping my thread!



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 12:10 AM
link   
reply to post by GoldenFleece
 


Glaringly obvious that you made no effort to defend these false claims.



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 12:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by GoldenFleece
 

The Sahara change was not sudden either.

Do you ever stop lying?


Sahara desert born 4,000 years ago
Once covered by grass and low shrubs

By BBC News Online Science Editor Dr David Whitehouse

Using a new computer simulation of the Earth's climate, German scientists say that the Sahara underwent a brutal climate change about 4,000 years ago.

Over a very short time scale - possibly as short as 300 years - it went from grasslands with low shrubs to the desert we are familiar with today. Summer temperatures increased rapidly and rainfall almost ceased. The change devastated many ancient cultures and caused those that did survive to migrate elsewhere.

Scientists at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Research say that the desertification of the Sahara was one of the most dramatic changes in climate over the past 11,000 years.

The loss of agricultural land to the desert may have been one of the reasons why early civilisations developed along the valleys of the Nile, the Tigris and the Euphrates.

Feedback mechanism

Slight climate alterations caused by subtle changes in the Earth's orbit around the Sun were amplified by a climatic feedback mechanism.

Some 9,000 years ago the tilt of the Earth's axis was 24.14 degrees; today it is 23.45 degrees. Today, the Earth is closest to the Sun in January. Nine thousand years ago, our planet was closest to the Sun at the end of July.

The changes in the tilt of the Earth occur gradually. However, the interplay of atmosphere, ocean and landmass can react to these changes in abrupt and severe ways.

The climate model suggests that land use by man was not an important factor in the creation of the Sahara.

news.bbc.co.uk...

Let's see, +/- 4000 years - 300 = 3,700.

Pwnd again!



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 07:23 AM
link   
reply to post by GoldenFleece
 


I wrote the following

The Sahara change was not sudden either.


GoldenFleece posted the following

Over a very short time scale - possibly as short as 300 years


As I correctly stated, no sudden event caused the changed.

All of the issues listed by the OP were gradual changes and not sudden events. These are sudden in geological terms. In human terms these are all slow events taking many generations to occur. These are not sudden civilization destroying events.

No matter how much hand waving is done there is no special significance about 3600 years ago.

It's so vague that the OP thinks that an event about 4000 years ago is a match to 3600 years ago.


Let's see, +/- 4000 years - 300 = 3,700.

Although written completely wrong it is possible to see that the poster likely meant to write 4000 +/- 300, which is a misrepresentation of the article. The 300 is not a precision associated with the 4000 year ago date.
Even if we account for sloppy writing it is abundantly clear that the authors did not intend that the duration of the event be used in the sense of a precision.

Another utter failure.



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 05:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by GoldenFleece
 

As I correctly stated, no sudden event caused the changed.

And your explanation for a global event that caused a "brutal climate change" that "devastated many ancient cultures and caused those that did survive to migrate elsewhere" is what?

Anthropocentric global warming?



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 06:22 PM
link   
reply to post by GoldenFleece
 


Nothing of what you just stated is true, hence no explanation for fiction is necessary.





top topics
 
37
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join