Originally posted by Byrd
It's well known in geological circles -- the one in Gabon is the most famous. There's a good Wikipedia article with some references:
I remember writing a paper about this in my college chemistry class back in 1994. Our professor gave us information and we had to write a detailed
paper on what it was and how we think it could happen, I needed his help because their wasn't as much information on this phenomenon (before the
internet of today). I remember reading about this and them saying it was naturally occurring. I didn't think about any ancient reactor but after
doing my own research on ancient mysteries and such, I question the natural process. For one I'm shocked this hasn't been replicated on other parts
of the planet (it could be that we haven't found it yet) with the same conditions or better conditions. And two, time is a b***h truly. If a
billion and a half years went buy after all of us tomorrow afternoon disappear, what would be left of our accomplishments. I saw the life after
people series and short when it came out and after a few thousand years much of our stuff was decaying or gone and skyscrapers where falling into the
ground. So in that much time ceramic/concrete etc. wouldn't be recognized as nothing but rock and the only processes left would be the material from
the reactors that have been processed for fuel and still cooking after the water from the cooling pools (if they used that technology) are gone.
Look at the hover dam, eventually it would split and break open from the pressure of the water from the other side not being released or not fast
enough. Then you would have remains of a concrete structure with the metal parts lying in the water or out. after 1 million years you wouldn't even
think a dam was there. After a billion years that river and the land mass would have moved and such and there would be no sign or even hint of an
ancient civilization called 20th century human. And for some reason that something does exists, if found it would be considered fake because of where
it was found (billion years worth of silt and dirt where people of this age would say civilization couldn't have existed), most of this evidence
would be buried in as I said a billion years and more of silt and soil. And three we may be looking at it but can't tell if it is natural or fake
because of the age it looks like rock or is rock (stone sculpture eroded).
I will give the skeptics their do, this and other stuff doesn't say that aliens or ancient civilizations had advanced technology or visited earth or
whatever but here's something think about.
1.) It's hard for some to believe that aliens came to this planet and/or exists. But at the same time some can believe that a magic being in the sky
made this planet and humanity. So we have to decide either magic brought humanity into being, we where already here or aliens did. What if humanity
is a more complex story that we have bits and pieces of from oral tradition and legends. If you can't believe in magic then you must believe that
life exists on other planets. And if it does whats to say they didn't figure out space travel and actually come to this planet. Look at us we have
sent people to the moon "supposedly" but we did send things there. Then we sent probes to mars and around this whole system. We are taking our
first steps out into space. The reason why we are still stuck using rocket tech from the 60's and early 70's is because their are people on this
planet in power that don't believe in essentially science and what it's doing to their powerbase/religion. Also others don't believe that space is
a place for humanity to be or to go. If we had a population that was committed to this new science and paradigm, then we would have bases and/or
colonization on the moon and better rocket science. Whats to say these aliens weren't more committed to going out to space than our leaders.
2.) Look at us supposedly 6,000 years of civilization, thats it 6,000 years. Everything sure fits a nice tight package with a BIG FAT ETHNOCENTRIC
BOW on the outside of the package. We are finding out that civilization is getting older and older as more digging is done and stuff is found (like
the one place in Turkey where it was a complex village built up with walls and such at least 10,000 years old, which we shouldn't have had animal
husbandry). Why didn't this "spark" of civilization happen before like 30,000 years ago or longer. Did this spark of civilization have to be with
Homosapiens us back so long ago. If you look at Gigantopythasus, neanderthal, both branches of hominid was horribly strong and in Gigantopythasus was
at least 8 feet tall. And yet they lost out in the fight for supremacy of this planet. It's real easy to say they where dumb or not as intelligent
as homosapiens. But as with apes being able learn and observe, we can too. And they could also, on top of being really strong and extremely tall.
And we know that the neanderthal knew how to make objects and draw, but yet we one out. We won out between at least these hominids, we won out trying
to survive in the Megafauna age where almost all animals where to large to mess with unless hurt or dead. Somewhere down the line our history of the
hominids is flawed and at one time or more (billion and a half natural reactor) humanity or another species (ever wondered why no sauron species
(raptors or another) or dinosaur ever became sentient (could they have been the reptilians)) had advanced to a level that we forgot or don't
What we are I believe is a species that is a survivor of a major cataclysm that washed away much of the history of hominids at least (won't say about
the billion years), and we are just picking and choosing what is worth studying and what is not worth studying that fits that paradigm. I always here
that they say that the usual Daniken, Hancock, Cremo and others just pick and chose what fits their theory, that may be true or not. But whats never
never questioned or attempted to be asked is questioning the academics about their works, truly. They almost look like you asked them to cut off both
arms. People always question the ones that question Mainstream. But the MS academia do pick and choose in order to fit their theory or thesis, it's
just natural. Because in some or many of their minds who is going to truly look over with a fine tooth comb the theory of snail movement to moon
positioning (making a point), and if so they will be encumbered because they won't know where or what data is the problem since it may be to obscure.
Also they try to focus on their particular field like looking at the tree while the forests is around you. If they look and hypothesis that moss
grow on one side of the tree all the time and then look around and see moss growing on the side of another tree 180 from what you said, your theory is
shot and you wasted time. thats why they focus on their own little made world and theories.
There afraid of looking up and seeing something that without a doubt makes there theory moot at best.