The sunken Continent of the Tamil

page: 7
224
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 02:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mercurio
In the Ramayana, wasn't it Rama who built a bridge to Lanka? Looking at the picture of Adam's Bridge, it doesn't look natural. It looks artificial.
from Wikipedia:



Yes Rama built Ramas Bridge. And yes, in that picture I posted it does look like it could be artificial.




posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 02:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tamahu


(Sanskrit, literally "the ever youthful")




Thank you for bringing gnostic viewpoints to the thread.

(As for Kumari: I asked because I wondered whether the country is referred to as the infancy of mankind.)



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 03:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by hoghead cheese
Thank you sky, this is really informative. For one I've been trying to find some good information about Lemura or Tamil for months now and I keep getting debunkers saying that Lemura is based on some writer who wrote a story back in 1850 or 1890. But know it really points to that their may have been a sunken continent or very large island in this area.


Academia has certain standardized routine-answers that obfuscate reality. Among these are:

"Plato did not mention that area"

"Plato is the sole source of the Atlantis myth"

The truth is that there are hundreds of sources of the sunken continent myth.

"The Lemuria idea was developed in the last century by James Churchward"

As this thread shows, the idea has been around for longer than that. But even before Churchward, the Theosophical Society and many others theorized about a sunken continent in the pacific or Indian Ocean.



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 03:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by korathin


The Japanese have issue's. Read up on the Ainu people and how the "Children of the Sun" have all but destroyed them now.

By claiming a link between Tamil, the Japanese can gloss over the genocide they are in the process of committing against the Ainu.


You're bringing some heavy-duty politics into this thread. Just what exactly are you referring to?



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 03:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
Humanity is only 50,000 years old. So how can they have existed 200,000 years ago?


What makes you so sure no humans existed 200 000 years ago. Were you there?



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 03:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


Scientific research. The human form had evolved, not the brain, Supposedly we weren't even capable of our modern linguistic skills until 50,000 years ago or so.

All of humanity is related to a band of people whom left Africa 50,000 years ago. 200,000 years ago humanity did not exist. There is no evidence for it. anatomical humans existed, but not our species. You see our species had to develop mentally still. This is called behavioral modernity.

en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 23-3-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 04:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


Yes and hence Science rejects the stories of the Tamil and most other stories of around the globe because these stories claim that humans and even advanced civilizations have existed for longer than that.



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 04:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mercurio
Has this been mentioned yet?

Indian epic Mahabharata tells of nuclear war.



I chose to write about the Tamil instead of that because there are already many posts and threads on the ancient Nuclear wars.



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 04:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


Not necessarily. Do we have an age for these buildings? You yourself show it only to be the beginnings of a culture up to 50,000 years ago.

Fundamental fact is that you cannot change what is observed true to fit what you want to be true. You must apply what is true to what you want to be true. What does not fit gets booted. What does stays. Everything you have presented could easily fit within 10,000 years of civilized development around 45,000 years ago. I myself have to beg to question if it even was humans whom built such things. no civilization built by man remains for more than 1000 years before it collapses, gets conquered, or is simply undone through the slow erosion of time via natural disaster (and considering its location, it would be prone to them).

In ergo, it is perfectly plausible to theorize it as a hominid settlement that had its own culture that later humans from Africa took over, killed the locals, and then got it started into something really cool around 45,000-30,000 years ago. That is, after all, what happened in Europe and in Asia.
edit on 23-3-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)
edit on 23-3-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 04:28 AM
link   
Actually, the earliest fossils of anatomically modern humans (Homo sapiens sapiens) goes back 200,000 years.



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 05:39 AM
link   
Interesting topic. I've been doing research on human population genetics and the issue of haplogroup D in the Andamans, Tibet and Japan has intrigued me quite a bit.

Also checked out this site and the world topography looks roughly like this at 3.5km(!) below current sea level.




posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 06:53 AM
link   
A clearer version of the supposed location of Kumari Kandam (even though the sea-level maps indicate there may have been nothing there):

edit on 23-3-2011 by Skyfloating because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 07:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


Screw the history channel and the lies.

Scientists and researchers can be so stupid and ignorant at times. These people hate religion so much that they will do anything to prove that the bible is complete fabrication. There is no land or was there ever land where history channel is trying to show. They dont want to show you Sundaland or the sunken land around Florida because they will have to admit the earth flooded around 15-8000 years ago.

I think about all those morons who call themselves researchers or scientist yet they spend all there time looking aound the truth cause they dont want to believe it so they invent something else knowing full well they will have a large band of pseudo-intellects regurgitating their ignorance.
edit on 23-3-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 07:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kalki2012
Interesting topic. I've been doing research on human population genetics and the issue of haplogroup D in the Andamans, Tibet and Japan has intrigued me quite a bit.

Also checked out this site and the world topography looks roughly like this at 3.5km(!) below current sea level.



This map shows you that the only land that was under india was Australia and that was millions of years ago. Your map also show that the earth is expanding.... ya ya i know.... that fact is 100 years premature for this civilization in whole to accept.



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 07:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Mercurio
 


This I said.But anatomical humans are not necessarily homo sapiens sapiens. What something looks like and what it is can be two very different things. The species we all belong to began 50,000 years ago when a change occurred within a small population's method of how they thought. And the rest is history.



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 07:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


Are Australian aborigines human? Are they modern humans or do we consider them a different species?

These people were said to have lost contact with the rest of the global village longer than other races hence their unique appearance. I am sure 50,000 years ago we had all kinds of diverse humans but as the global village became reacquainted, interbreeding continued and unique races blended in.
edit on 23-3-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 07:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


Could've been farmland. However that maps is highly inaccurate.

A look at Earth's topography reveals how impossible that is.

martianchronicles.files.wordpress.com...

That said, a Chain of Islands and mountains could easily support a pretty cool civilization.

Indonesia is a far better candidate for the location ans size of your lost continent. And it still fits in with the data you claim.

www.stvincent-tallassee.org...

Bare in mind Indonesia today is a huge nation with a huge population to maintain, so perhaps a revelation into their past, as many places today are beginning to become what they were long ago.



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 07:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 


They, like all humans, originate from the same band that left Africa 50,000 years ago. Humanity is the only surviving hominids species, mostly because we eliminated all the other ones as we spread out.

Humanity is like a stamp of approval over whatever was here when we evolved. As we spread out across the globe, we exterminated or absorbed every other hominid species that was around us. Due to the ice age preserving relics and data, Europe seems to have the best record of these events. However, we know similar events unfolded to the East. However, Australians date back 50,000 years ago, just like everyone else. They were one of the earliest migrating people, and they even reached the Americas long before the Inuit peoples.

news.nationalgeographic.com...

news.bbc.co.uk...
edit on 23-3-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 07:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


No continent is lost. You have to think 4th dimensionally. The land that is said to have been lost is submerged from 0.1 meter- 120 meters below current sea levels. When you look at google earth maps, all the land in light blue that is underwater was above water around 10000 years ago.

Yes the flood happened. Most civilizations or peoples have this story in their history. Doesn't mean the bible is right or that Christians were right when you figure out this fact. So dont let your prejudices blind you to the truth.
edit on 23-3-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 08:50 AM
link   
Can anyone tell me what S&F means? Lol I'm new to this website hahaha





new topics
top topics
 
224
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join