It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Fry2
Maybe because you don't know the difference between antarctica and the north pole?
Originally posted by FreeMason
In fact it's dumber than the flat earthers because anyone can tell how long it takes to pile up 9000 feet of ice, however it is hard to tell at human height that the world is round.
BTW Santa used to live in the North Pole, but they had to move - the polar bears that turned purple developed an unhealthy hunger for Elf flesh
Originally posted by j619pinoy
I thought this was interesting.
"First, that the Flood was a real event around 13,000 years ago. Secondly that a culture survived and built the Pyramids, Sphinx and so on. And thirdly, that there is a missing link between 11000-4000 BC, where we cannot fully identify where this culture was based. That is where Antarctica comes in, because it was ice-free during this period. Then, around 4000 BC, when Antarctica froze over, we suddenly find signs of cultural transfer to other parts of the globe - to Mesopotamia, where the Sumerian civilisation began; to the tin mines of the Zagros Mountains; and to Tiahuanacu in Bolivia, which was almost certainly a centre for the production of bronze."
There is allegedly an ancient of Antarctica that shows the continent before it was covered in ice....
Originally posted by Netchicken
Modern subglacial topographic maps indicate the ancient maps are not exact renditions of what actually lies beneath Antarctica's ice, nor do they account for what the subglacial topography of Antarctica would actually look like if massive amounts of ice and snow were removed and the land rebounded from the weight (isostatic rebound):
Antarctica would be raised as much as 3,100 feet in the interior and 160 feet along the coasts. Thus, while both of these maps may have been efforts to guess at what the land mass of Antarctica looked like, neither was drawn by someone who actually saw an ice-free Antarctica.
The accuracy that the Piri Reis Map has results from his "source maps" being reconstructed with the
assumption that original source maps were accurate and any errors in it came from copying and compilation. Thus, any errors in the Piri Reis map were eliminated by fitting the Piri Reis to modern maps and accounting for the misfits by adjusting the boundaries and separate grids of his hypothesized and unproven "source maps".
Second, the Piri Reis Map lacks any topographic contours. If contours are lacking on the Piri Reis Map, the topographic data needed to compare the topography shown by the 1949 seismic
data with the topography of the Piri Reis Map on a scientific basis are completely lacking.
Without this data, the claims of
Lt. Colonel Ohlmeyer and Dr. Hapgood are nothing more personal opinions, certainly not proof, that cannot be scientifically tested.
Finally, the single seismic line, i.e. the seismic profile of the Norwegian-British Swedish Expedition of 1949, is insufficient evidence to determine if the subglacial bedrock topography of
Antarctica resembles the Piri Reis map.
The problem is that the comparison is being made along one essentially randomly chosen line. Neither Lt. Colonel Ohlmeyer, Dr. Hapgood, nor the 8th Reconnaissance Technical Squadron could know whether the topography outside of this line, a good 99.9 percent of the area resembled the Piri Reis map because they lacked any other data in addition to the seismic profile.
Even the map of the bedrock geology of Antarctica compiled in 1972, Heezen
et al. (1972) shows that even by that date the bedrock topography lying beneath Queen Maud Land was largely unmapped and unknown. Thus, even in 1961, because of insufficient
information, it would have been impossible for anybody to make any positive claims about whether the Piri Reis Map and the subglacial topography shows any resemblance.
.. heaps more...
For 1513, this map shows an astonishing amount of detail. The notes on the map explain that the map was synthesized from about 20 maps, many of which were captured from Spanish and Portuguese ships in the Mediterranean. It was also supplemented by accounts given by captured Spanish and Portuguese sailors.
Not a map from some ancient Atlantean civilization, not a map created by extraterrestrials, but a first class piece of naval intelligence. Considering that it was created by a sailor whose country never participated in the age of exploration, and that it's drawn wholly from second-hand sources, it's an astonishing piece of work. It seems to contain up-to-the-minute details derived from enemy maps, many of which would have been tightly-guarded secrets.
There's a class of crank that hates the idea that other people might have real accomplishments, because they never accomplish anything themselves.
So Shakespeare didn't write his plays, other people did; Robert Peary didn't reach the North Pole as he claimed, and so on. And Piri Reis wasn't a gifted admiral and good intelligence analyst, but had to get help from ancient lost documents. Get a life, folks.
Originally posted by Abraham Virtue
Ever think that the whole of Earth might have once been the Atlantis we know???