Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Path of huge flood that caused ancient 'Big Freeze' located

page: 1
19
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
+1 more 
posted on Nov, 5 2012 @ 10:46 PM
link   

The drainage pathways of meltwater stored in glacial lakes located along the southern margin of the Laurentide Ice Sheet. The direction of meltwater drainage is shown by the yellow arrows. The approximate position of the ice sheet is shown (in white) just before the onset of the Younger Dryas. The ocean colors are surface salinity from the control integration with warm (cold) surface currents shown in red (blue).


OK here we go...

It's been discussed, debated and now finally some proof. The question still remains what caused it but at least now they have something new to debated and discuss...


Path of huge flood that caused ancient 'Big Freeze' located

Starting about 12,900 years ago, the Northern Hemisphere was abruptly gripped by centuries of cold, an era technically known as the Younger Dryas. Scientists have suggested this chill helped wipe out most of the large mammals in North America as well as the so-called Clovis people. The Big Freeze was not a glacial period, which are colloquially often called ice ages — it was a cold time in the relatively warm spans between glacial periods.



Seems we still have a ways to go to understand fully the "Big Flood" event. I'm still digging at the idea of coastal flooding that may have submerged ancient early coastal Civilizations and or Cultures..

As always stay tuned,




posted on Nov, 5 2012 @ 11:12 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 




The question still remains what caused it


Discovery of nano-size diamonds proves comet stuck earthe 13,000 years ago



An international team of scientists has discovered nanosize diamonds in the Greenland ice sheet, according to a study presented in the Journal of Glaciology. The diamonds, which number in the trillions and are so tiny that they can only be observed with special, highly magnifying microscopes, add credence to the controversial hypothesis that fragments of a comet struck North America and Europe approximately 12 900 years ago.


My guess would be that there was an extra terrestrial impact or atmospheric explosion somewhere within the Laurentide Ice Sheet that caused the glacial lakes to flood into the oceans.



posted on Nov, 5 2012 @ 11:25 PM
link   
After reading that link it got me wondering if volcanic activity could have caused such a abrupt melting. In the right location I think it could. Granted this kind of thinking is above my pay grade, it's the only event other than a comet or meteor I could imagine causing such a event.



posted on Nov, 5 2012 @ 11:26 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


It's all about the meltwater which is freshwater. If the salinization in the ocean is disrupted too much, it could cause a definate ice age event, which is what we're cruising towards. But what i don't get is why the hell the water is rising so damn fast if global warming is a "myth". Scientists are saying in as soon as 30 years, low lying areas like Florida, Louisiana and the eastern side of the Appalachian mountains coastal areas will be underwater.



posted on Nov, 5 2012 @ 11:31 PM
link   
Might want to look here for a further explanation.



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 12:21 AM
link   
all wrong.

it was alien suv's with evil polluting v8's. and worst of all, none of their tires were properly inflated!

al gore told me thats what is killing the planet, and he is al gore. so he knows.



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 01:49 AM
link   
I thought some would find it interesting
I'm working on an update for tomorrow on a related topic.



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 02:20 AM
link   
Howdy Slayer

These always help to make the subject a bit clearer












edit on 6/11/12 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 02:41 AM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


ha sorry off topic i just watched that movie with the butcher, he did a great acting job in that movie, and the scene that ur avatar depicts was creepy, imagine waking up to the Butcher watching u sleep after u just layed with Cameron Diaz. ha lol

on topic though thanks for the info, it seems that there has been many flood storys, know it seems there is evidence, i say the world itself goes through cycles of crazy weather to liveable weather over thousands of years, maybe its just the earth keepin everything in check, making sure we dont over populate.
edit on 6-11-2012 by DocHolidaze because: (no reason given)
edit on 6-11-2012 by DocHolidaze because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 08:32 AM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 


I don't think it's a question of whether or not warming and melting are occurring, but more a question of exactly how much of it is human caused versus how much is naturally occurring pattern.



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 10:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69
OK here we go...

It's been discussed, debated and now finally some proof. The question still remains what caused it but at least now they have something new to debated and discuss...


Path of huge flood that caused ancient 'Big Freeze' located

Starting about 12,900 years ago, the Northern Hemisphere was abruptly gripped by centuries of cold, an era technically known as the Younger Dryas. Scientists have suggested this chill helped wipe out most of the large mammals in North America as well as the so-called Clovis people. The Big Freeze was not a glacial period, which are colloquially often called ice ages — it was a cold time in the relatively warm spans between glacial periods.


Seems we still have a ways to go to understand fully the "Big Flood" event. I'm still digging at the idea of coastal flooding that may have submerged ancient early coastal Civilizations and or Cultures..


The problem with this is that it implies that cultures could only form at the seashores and were terrified of being away from the sight of the ocean -- so terrified, in fact, that they did not hunt or farm or even walk on lands away from the edge of the ocean. This means a group of civilizations so frightened of the land that they didn't even trade with the people who were living in the interior of the land. That they didn't mine, that they didn't quarry stones or cut trees or dig for clay or farm and that they were so terrified of the interior that they didn't move their houses or themselves when the sea levels started to rise.

In short, a civilization of clams.

When areas are devastated by natural disasters, people move out and then move back (heck, the Romans built over Pompeii and other areas buried by lahars and volcanic action) or move to nearby areas. Homo sapiens and almost every other lifeform capable of moving from one area to another will move away from climactic problems rather than stay and die.



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 10:47 AM
link   
I believe the cause is a 6.5 degree pole/earth shift.

Just read Scott Crieghtons book The Orion Prophecy.... Excellent.

This is backed by the degree difference in the King and Queens chamber shafts in the Pyramid. The difference is marked with the stars before and the stars after... The time line matches.



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 10:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Byrd
 


Clams! lol

I love just love that, but I think the idea is that instead of gradual rises in water that somehow a pulse of water occurred that swamped said cultures - or so claims Hannock....and others

As you've noted early cultures didn't live on the sea shore, they did visit it as part of the constant movement, constant search for food, of nomadic people, as the shell middens we find demonstrate

The other thing is unless they unusual few people live a '0' elevation, tides quickly teach them that is a bad idea, they usually live up a bit.

I can see two guys from that culture


'Why cannot we pick fruit on that hill'?

Tis' forbidden we must stay within 56 paces of the sea until we die.......actually I could see such a religion cooming up with something that odd, but I digress



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 10:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Julie Washington
 


But the time is off, Slayer is talking about 12,900 BC



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 10:54 AM
link   
Not that my opinion matters. (i'm no subject expert) but I've noticed a lot if not most cultures build their largest settlements near rivers or lakes inland and away from the sea. Not far away from the sea but away enough to be sheltered from the weather associated with living on the cost. Inland was more stable conditions wise and so that is why most civilizations start inland a little.

So a giant flood wouldn't have wiped out all of the civilizations. But it's plausible that many coastal cities were obliterated over time and that is where the stories come from. It's also possible that some civilizations were just unlucky enough to settle down in places below sea level and got flooded out that way too. It's obvious people survived the flooding or nobody would be talking about it. I say more survived than didn't. But that it was tragic enough that the story got embellished, grander and was passed down from generation to generation.



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 10:57 AM
link   
reply to post by BASSPLYR
 


Yep people like fresh water and with the development of agriculture need steady supplies of it. The sea also produces salt spray which isn't good for grain crops



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 11:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Hanslune
 


Yeah marine layers are horrible for crops. Even worse on wooden structures. Not much is going to get a decent start close to the ocean civilization wise. Unless you live in some tropical paradise where you could live outside without shelter year round and not have any problems.

Thats why I think south asia is such a wonderful example of a place where humanity should search harder for some of it's ancestors. Perfect spot for trade. Civilizations can easily get started there due to the weather and readily available foods. Just makes sense that people should start looking harder there to see how man may have lived thousands of years ago.



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune
reply to post by Julie Washington
 


But the time is off, Slayer is talking about 12,900 BC


No, he said 12,900 years ago, not 12,900 BC.



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 11:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by olliemc84
reply to post by SLAYER69
 




The question still remains what caused it


Discovery of nano-size diamonds proves comet stuck earthe 13,000 years ago



An international team of scientists has discovered nanosize diamonds in the Greenland ice sheet, according to a study presented in the Journal of Glaciology. The diamonds, which number in the trillions and are so tiny that they can only be observed with special, highly magnifying microscopes, add credence to the controversial hypothesis that fragments of a comet struck North America and Europe approximately 12 900 years ago.


My guess would be that there was an extra terrestrial impact or atmospheric explosion somewhere within the Laurentide Ice Sheet that caused the glacial lakes to flood into the oceans.



Yes, and this is what could have caused the 6.5 degree pole/earth shift.



posted on Nov, 6 2012 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd
The problem with this is that it implies that cultures could only form at the seashores and were terrified of being away from the sight of the ocean -- so terrified, in fact, that they did not hunt or farm or even walk on lands away from the edge of the ocean. This means a group of civilizations so frightened of the land that they didn't even trade with the people who were living in the interior of the land. That they didn't mine, that they didn't quarry stones or cut trees or dig for clay or farm and that they were so terrified of the interior that they didn't move their houses or themselves when the sea levels started to rise.


That's a very large assumptive scenario.

Frightened?

I didn't mention they were in any immediate peril? People cant live underwater. Nor do I think they would move temples and large important stone blocked structures inland as the oceans started in encroaching on them. If NY City for example were to be flooded out permanently I doubt they'd dismantle the Empire state building or the Brooklyn bridge to move them inland....

edit on 6-11-2012 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)






top topics



 
19
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join