Pre-Ice Age Complex Found Off Bahamas Coast

Originally posted by schuyler
Jesus went missing for a few days he actually came to the Americas to preach. This is all in the Book of Mormon given to the original head Mormon guys by the angel Moroni. That couldn't be read until you put on a pair of magic glasses.

This is all speculation of course

reply to post by EthanT
The A.R.E. have been crying wolf for decades in their endless search to prove Cayce wasn't just babbling. Look at this article...

Researchers for the Association for Research and Enlightenment (A.R.E.) have investigated an underwater site with what appears to be the remains of a collapsed multi-room building.

*Appears* is the key word here. Bear this in mind when reading their closing thoughts...

Locals first found the structure and notified A.R.E. team members who made several expeditions to the location. The building foundation has manmade mitered limestone corners and other debris inside the outer walls.

We've gone from *appears* to man-made mitred limestone corners in a breathless second. This is called observational bias, they believe in Atlantis and Bimini walls and can't help but see the evidence everywhere they look. FWIW, mitred corners in a limestone building doesn't make any structural sense. You'd essentially have free-standing walls! Also, if it is mitred stone, they'd need to explain why it's all by itself and rule out ballast.

A sample of beach rock from a long, straight foundation wall was carbon dated to between 21,520 BCE and 20,610 BCE. These dates are astonishing, because prior to this discovery most researchers considered the oldest dates for humans in this area to be 1000 BCE.

What just happened here? Sentence one says, 'These rocks are old.' Sentence two says, 'Wow, people have been here for 20 000 years?!' They've apparently got a date from the limestone debris at this unnamed site and extrapolated human occupation?

this is the first site to actually be carbon dated to a time long before the last Ice Age ended, indicating that a highly developed culture once lived off the coast of the Bahamas and operated throughout the region.

Here we go again. It's indicative of nothing more than a sample of rock being 20 000 years old. This is one of the many reasons why they aren't taken very seriously. With a small photo and a piece of rock to go on, they've over-extended into 'multi-room building' and highly developed cultures. They need to rule out natural formation and ballast before publishing definitive articles like these.

Its only a small thing, but if homo sapiens is 200,000 years old, he has had to have lived somewhere. Its could be argued that as there is so little sign if his habitats except in caves, the planet's surface must have had an incredibly volatile history.

We have had it relatively easy over the last few hundred years with pretty minor earthly upheavals. On a small scale, we know in Britain that we had a mini ice age 400 odd years go, with the Thames frozen over during winter. Wehave no living memory of this so have not experienced just how cold that must have been so we don't relate to the upheaval or the inconvenience something as minor as that would have caused.

I do suspect that Atlantis existed and it was situated in or near the Azores. Trade obviously happened between the ancient peoples of Europe and the Americas and an island mid way would have acted as a staging and trade post which would have made the people of this land influential and wealthy.

Originally posted by graceunderpressure
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/ab65d6edf353.gif[/atsimg]

Sorry, I couldn't resist poking a little fun with Giorgio. You know that we'll see this discovery the next season of Ancient Aliens.

his hairs all poofy

reply to post by miniatus


Thanks, Miniatus and Dave. I confess to a secret irrational attraction to Giorgio which even I do not understand.

Back on topic: With all the possible earlier cities and civilizations, I don't get the particular fixation on Atlantis (over 95,000 books available on Amazon.com). Yes, it's interesting, but there are undoubtedly many more interesting places to be discovered.

reply to post by lonewolf19792000


Not entirely, this is one of my favorite recent discoveries. 200,000 Year old City, Gobekli Tepe was also mentioned.

Original Story

Originally posted by Themadalchemist
reply to post by EthanT

 

you may be able to date when rocks were formed, but not when they were hewed from the quarry's, cut and squared for the builders use. i can take that very stone and build a house for my dog, and it would not mean my dog house was 60,000 years old...

edit on 17-8-2011 by Themadalchemist because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-8-2011 by Themadalchemist because: typo

I'll try and explain the reasoning behind all this again.

Beachroch is formed near where the water meets the land - i.e. at "the beach", hence the name, and it forms rather quickly. Therefore, beachrock is one tool used in determing past sea levels, which do change over time. As we currently understand things, sea levels are higher today than they were at 10,000 BC. And, they were higher in 10,000 BC than they were in 20,000 BC. Beachrock that dates to 10,000 BC should be found near what we believe to be the 10,000 BC shoreline, and so on.

The stucture mentioned in this article had limestone beach rock at approx. the 10,000 BC shoreline, but it dates approx. to 20,000 BC. Now, limestone beachrock doesn't typically pick itself up, carry itself uphill and lay itself down in a pile that resembles a building with multiple rooms. Therefore, the conclusion being drawn is that the structure MAY be man-made, i.e. somebody moved the beachrock. And, the relation of beachrock formation to sea level allows us to determine when this happened, roughly.

Of course, maybe past sea levels weren't what we think they were. I'm certainly not an expert on past sea levels, but my understanding is that there is a fairly high degree of confidence in our knowledge of recent past sea-levels during the time periods in question here.

i think you guys should go over to this thread 'Did Humans and Dinosaurs Coexist?' according to them the worlds only 6000 years old lol, so how could there be complex structures 200 000 years ago?



anyway, i think the attraction to atlantis is the way it was reported to vanish in just a day

Originally posted by Angelic Resurrection

Originally posted by schuyler
Jesus went missing for a few days he actually came to the Americas to preach. This is all in the Book of Mormon given to the original head Mormon guys by the angel Moroni. That couldn't be read until you put on a pair of magic glasses.

This is all speculation of course

Umm, that's what Mormons believe and teach. Surely you understood my main point, which this story amply supports.

Interesting that a post I made a few minutes ago goes in to some detail about the possibility of an older advanced civilization.

More from the site I linked in that post:

"The story has the fashion of a legend, but the truth of it lies in the occurrence of a shifting of the bodies of the heaven, which move round the earth"

-- Dialogues of Plato

65-1"And in those days Noah saw the earth had tilted and that it's destruction was near."

--The Book Of Noah

Plato's description of Atlantis is that it was 321 miles long, 223 miles wide and rectangular in shape. (Converted from the Stadium Measurement used by Plato) The ocean approach to Atlantis was high cliffs all along it's coast. It was washed away in one night in an incredible flood. It was destroyed in 10,000 B.C. after a series of earthquakes and possible volcanic activity.

The area I cover in this writing is the Caribbean Basin. The Caribbean Basin sits on the "slab" of the Puerto Rico Trench. The Pacific side is bordered by the Mid America trench. This area was born of Earthquakes and Volcanoes. An earthquake there was an absolute Certainty.

Plato's description of Atlantis would easily match the area of the Caribbean Basin. The location and time of destruction coincide perfectly with Plato's writing. There is no other place on Earth that is any better matched for the Atlantis described by Plato than the Caribbean Basin.

So, what's happening on earth at this time?

The Earth 10,000 B.C.

The Ice Age is in retreat. The meltoff water flows from the 3,000 mile long, 4,000 mile wide Canadian, North American Glacier. This Glacier is as much as two miles thick even down to the area that is Chicago today. This entire portion of North America was buried under one super thick sheet of ice. Canada looked like Antarctica does today. It would be easier to cross the Greenland Ice Cap today than it would have been to cross Illinois then. The vast blanket of ice buried most of the mountains of New England, and was as much as ten thousand feet thick in parts of Ohio. The weight of this ice compressed the land beneath it as much as 3,000 feet lower than it is today. This massive ice pack has absorbed so much of the Earth's water that the sea level's are as much as 300 to 500 feet below today's sea level.

What does lower sea levels mean for the Caribbean?

Below the Gulf were the Caribbean Land Masses. Much of these land areas were due to the 300' to 500' lower sea levels. This section of the Caribbean Basin formed 'millions of years ago' due to plate tectonic activity. The section known as the Caribbean was hundreds of feet lower than the area around the Gulf. This section is outlined by the Puerta Rico Trench. It was surrounded by hills that are today the island chain known as the Caribbean Islands.

What else was shaping the area?

Remember, the Mississippi Valley is 100 miles wide. This is an astounding amount of water. If you could stand on one side, you could not see the other side. The curveture of the Earth would prevent it. Standing on the shore of the Ocean, a six foot tall person with good eyesight can see the horizon about 3 miles away. The Mississippi was thirty times wider than that.

This incredible volume of water proved to be too much for the smaller Florida Yucatan opening. 12,000 years ago all of the now submerged land area of Florida and Yucatan was exposed.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/c9c749083ad1.jpg[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/ad0b0bdba828.jpg[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/f4e241e3b1ed.jpg[/atsimg]

Satellite view:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/eeb1ed76d289.jpg[/atsimg]

I do not know what forces could cause the Earth to Tilt. There are forces in this universe I am not aware of and that I don't understand. But I have listed below a few, that in my humble opinion may have played a part in such a Tilt. I have provided links back to the source of these materials. Some will accept a tilt theory, some will not. But Tilt or no Tilt, the Caribbean Megaflood took place!

Supporting data:

"By analyzing the magnetic composition of ancient sediments found in the remote Norwegian archipelago of Svalbard, Princeton University's Adam Maloof has lent credence to a 140-year-old theory regarding the way the Earth might restore its own balance if an unequal distribution of weight ever developed in its interior or on its surface. The theory, known as true polar wander, postulates that if an object of sufficient weight -- such as a supersized volcano -- ever formed far from the equator, the force of the planet's rotation would gradually pull the heavy object away from the axis the Earth spins around. If the volcanoes, land and other masses that exist within the spinning Earth ever became sufficiently imbalanced, the planet would tilt and rotate itself until this extra weight was relocated to a point along the equator."

-- Science Daily: Planet Earth May Have 'Tilted' To Keep Its Balance, Say Scientists www.sciencedaily.com...

"The Earth has not always rotated at 23.5 degrees. Many factors effect the angle of Earth’s tilt. The motion of large air masses can change its tilt by measurable amounts even today. During the major Ice Ages, large sheets of ice on Earth’s surface and lowered sea level may have caused the Earth to have an even larger tilt."

You can find this article at:
University of Illinois van.physics.illinois.edu...

source for all above quotes and images

reply to post by jadedANDcynical


The sudden rise,I think was about .75millimeters per year.
There was a sudden release of fresh water about 13,000 years ago that plunged Europe into a mini ice age.

Scientists say they have found the trigger of a sharp cooling 13,000 years ago that plunged Europe into a mini ice age.

Mark Bateman from the University of Sheffield in England said a catastrophic flood unleashed from a giant North American lake dumped large amounts of freshwater into the Arctic Ocean. This led to the shutting down of the Gulf Stream ocean circulation pattern that brings warmth to Europe. "We're talking about a lake the size of the UK emptying very quickly," Bateman told Reuters by telephone. "We don't know the exact period of time but we're talking about a catastrophic flood." The finding has confirmed past theories about the likely cause of a sudden cooling period called the Younger Dryas when temperatures in Europe, similar to today's, quickly returned to ice age conditions. The cooling lasted for about 1,400 years.

A study published in the journal Science last November said recent summers further accelerated Greenland's mass loss to the equivalent of 273 cubic kilometers of water per year in the period 2006-2008. The also represented 0.75 millimeters of global sea level rise per year.

www.reuters.com...

The Younger Dryas is one of the most well-known examples of abrupt change. About 14,500 years ago, the Earth's climate began to shift from a cold glacial world to a warmer interglacial state. Partway through this transition, temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere suddenly returned to near-glacial conditions (Figure 6). This near-glacial period is called the Younger Dryas, named after a flower (Dryas octopetala) that grows in cold conditions and became common in Europe during this time. The end of the Younger Dryas, about 11,500 years ago, was particularly abrupt. In Greenland, temperatures rose 10° C (18° F) in a decade (Figure 6; Cuffey and Clow, 1997).

www.ncdc.noaa.gov...

Following the end of the last glacial period about 11,500 years ago, the Earth's climate system began to look and behave more like it does today. The large continental ice sheets shrank, sea level rose, temperatures ameliorated, monsoons grew in strength. Around 8,200 years ago, however, a surprising event occurred. The 8.2 ka event, as it is now known, was first discovered in the Greenland ice core GISP2, where high-resolution analyses indicate that over two decades temperature cooled about 3.3°C in Greenland (Alley et al., 1997; Kobashi et al., 2007). The entire event lasted about 150 years (Thomas et al., 2007; Kobashi et al., 2007) and then temperatures warmed, returning to their previous level

www.ncdc.noaa.gov...

Then,they have discovered a possible cause to this sudden change.

The discovery was made by scientists from the University of California at Santa Barbara and their colleagues. James Kennett, a paleoceanographer at the university, said that the discovery may explain some of the highly debated geologic controversies of recent decades. The period in question is called the Younger Dryas, an interval of abrupt cooling that lasted for about 1,000 years and occurred at the beginning of an inter-glacial warm period. Evidence for the temperature change is recorded in marine sediments and ice cores. According to the scientists, the comet before fragmentation must have been about four kilometers across, and either exploded in the atmosphere or had fragments hit the Laurentide ice sheet in the northeastern North America. Wildfires across the continent would have resulted from the fiery impact, killing off vegetation that was the food supply of many of larger mammals like the woolly mammoths, causing them to go extinct. Since the Clovis people of North America hunted the mammoths as a major source of their food, they too would have been affected by the impact. Their culture eventually died out.

www.physorg.com...

Good info guys.

It is interesting how Cayce talked about much of this before before it was well recognized. Also, a related one that's pretty neat was what he said about the Nile River, and a fertile Saharan region, in general.

Reading #364-13:
Edgar Cayce: ...The Nile entered into the Atlantic Ocean. What is now the Sahara was an inhabited land and very fertile.

Reading #276-2:
Edgar Cayce: ...In the one before this we find again in this same land now called Egypt (this before the mountains rose in the south, and when the waters called the Nile then emptied into what is NOW the Atlantic Ocean)...

As if to confirm some of the above, an article published in Science (August 1986), reported that the Shuttle Imaging Radar from the Space Shuttle had discovered previously unknown river valleys beneath the driest part of the Sahara. Through satellite imaging and on-site archeological investigations, it appeared as though the present day Nile had changed its course, once flowing across the Sahara, through Africa, and into the Atlantic Ocean!

Source

Greg Little posted this on Andrew Collins FB page, in reference to the radio carbon dating of the beachrock:

Beach rock is filled with organic material. It is carbon tested often. Bulk carbonate tests done on limestone give wide sigma dates, but beach rock tests done on the embedded organic material yield narrow and reliable dates. The dates of the Bimini Road were established by 5-6 bulk carbonate radiocarbon tests done by Shinn of the US Geologic Service.

Also:

Beachrock is routinely carbon dated--literally hundreds of articles in journals are available on it. Skeptics carbon dated stones from the Bimini Road to try to show that the stones were younger than 10,000 years. It was their main (actually only) proof against the Bimini Road as Atlantis proponents.

Source

I would imagine the same folks from USGS did the radio carbon dating on this recent find, as well.

Bimini dated to approx. 5,000 BC, if I remember correctly. So, it doesn't jive up with the whole Atlantis "story". This new structure, with it's older dating results, possibly can. But, we're along way from knowing that for sure.

The ARE has release some photos of the site and they are available to ARE members. I've posted a few below.

I didn't find them overly impressive. But, then again, I have yet to see photos of any really old structure/complex discovered underwater that are impressive.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/4c4ad4d550b7.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/7252778ab709.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/2a02f7c7df41.jpg[/atsimg]

Ok - so I have 50,000 year old quartz countertops in my kitchen - does that mean my house is older than the 3 years it is? Maybe in another dimension but not this one.

reply to post by viking46


LOL, this was explained like three times and its in the links/OP.

Does anybody even read anymore?

reply to post by EthanT


Thanks for posting the pictures EthanT.

The middle picture definitely looks man made. You know the skeptics are going to claim the object is from a ship wreak. It would be interesting to find out what’s underneath it. If the rock is just sitting on top of the sand then it likely came from the surface.

Do you think a carved statue could retain some of its surface features buried under the sand in the ocean? I wonder if they’ll find something like that?

The tsunami of 2005 cleared the sand to reveal some ruins on the shores of India. Their carvings weren’t completely worn off.
Tsunami Uncovers Ancient Temple Relics near Chennai


Here’s another interesting story from India on sunken ruins.
Tsunami Reveals Ancient Ruins in India

"You could see the destroyed walls covered in coral, and the broken-down temple in the middle," said Durai, a sinewy fisherman... "My grandfathers said there was a port here once and a temple, but suddenly we could see it was real, we could see that something was out there."

Originally posted by lostinspace
reply to post by EthanT

 

Thanks for posting the pictures EthanT.

The middle picture definitely looks man made. You know the skeptics are going to claim the object is from a ship wreak. It would be interesting to find out what’s underneath it. If the rock is just sitting on top of the sand then it likely came from the surface.

They have found a few things that DID, in fact, turn out to be something more modern that was dumped off a ship.

Since this is all beachrock at this site, that seems a bit more unlikely.

Shifting sands have been a continual problem for them. A storm can roll through and completely cover structures on the bottom, only for another to come through and expose it. Very typical for this area

That has happened at this site in question too. Apparently the last time they were there, a majority of the structure was covered up that was previously exposed. In these pictures, much looks covered and so they are probably from the most recent expedition.

BTW, thanks for the links on the India ruins ... I have always found those fascinating.