Submerged Prehistoric Archaeology...

I thought you might like this picture to peruse,







see the way there is a ridge in the rut itself?

Originally posted by smurfy
I thought you might like this picture to peruse,
see the way there is a ridge in the rut itself?

To me that could mean that when the soil was soft the wheels/slid [Whatever] could have created both sets of side by side ruts and pushed up the softer soil to the center of each one of the tracks.

Left goes with the left and right with the right etc.
I guess we'll just never know for sure.

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Originally posted by smurfy
I thought you might like this picture to peruse,
see the way there is a ridge in the rut itself?

To me that could mean that when the soil was soft the wheels/slid [Whatever] could have created both sets of side by side ruts and pushed up the softer soil to the center of each one of the tracks.

Left goes with the left and right with the right etc.
I guess we'll just never know for sure.

Yes, a real possibility, and that picture is a real study, notice the matching chamfered edges on both sides of the central ridge around the lower middle of the picture, which then becomes straight down edges nearer to the bottom of the picture, you's nearly think that someone was working that section.

Originally posted by TRUELIES11
reply to post by GezinhoKiko

 

Are you saying you have a problem with what I write because you read it as fact?

I am telling you there was a civilization of people living underwater. There is no link with that.

edit on 30-12-2012 by TRUELIES11 because: (no reason given)

Interesting hypothesis.
Its called the Aquatic Ape Hypothesis.

www.ted.com...

www.unmuseum.org...

I always find ancient things interesting.

you never know what theyll find next.

Another wonderful thread. I am very excited for these sorts of finds. While they may not be as ancient, I would love to see what could be found in the seas between England and Europe, as that was once above water.

reply to post by Ashaman Kyre

Excellent theory. Most especially, I'm intrigued by the bearing concept. Maybe most of the stones have made their way to the near end of the ruts. I wonder, though,when the guy that drew up the bearing concepts, what did he, or she, get as a reward?

More wheel ruts in the Mediterranean

they don't always have to go somewhere prolific or extravagant

This is great to hear, I really do hope that mainstream science/archaeology begins to ACTUALLY research prehistoric sites, and when I say actually, I mean doing so without (as the OP said) any agenda.. Although, while I have hope that this begins to occur, I also have quite a bit of doubt that they will go about it this way, which is very saddening..

There are SO MANY amazing sites in which defy mainstream's doctrine, truly amazing places that I WISH would be researched and HONESTLY done so.. Anything that does not go along with mainstream's notion of our history and the 'way' things should have played out, is simply discarded and or distorted...

Graham Hancock wrote a very interesting book on underwater ruins -- "Underworld: The Mysterious Origins of Civilization "

There is also the megalithic structures of mainland Europe some of which, like the Carnac stones, also lie at least partially submerged. For instance, here is a pic of a stone circle on the small island of Er Lannic:




Also, there is supposed to be at least another circle completely underwater and right next to the above one but I can't seem to find a pic for visual confimation. However, here is a diagram of this supposed other circle:



The age of most of these sites are indeterminate at this time as most do not have corresponding organic material which can be dated with radiocarbon but the general consensus is that their construction seems to have started around 3700 BC. And, for what it's worth, that is a date which corresponds very well to when the structures in Malta were said to have been built(approximately 3500 BC).

Sources:
Stone circle Wiki
Malta Wiki

reply to post by Mad Simian


I've seen those before. Great contribution. The 'Subsidence' argument is almost always used in explaining how those became partially submerged. Yet, If we were to reconsider the age it would fit nicely into the idea of it being a much older site.

Coincidence?
Possibly.

reply to post by SLAYER69


I'd have to strongly disagree with the subsidence argument because the Gulf of Morhiban is only about 60m(~197ft) at its deepest which is well within the 120m(~394ft) change in sea level. Going by this information, one could make an educated assumption that the area was still above water until the halfway point between the Younger Dryas(the last hurrah, so to speak, of the last ice age) and now.

Ok, let's crunch some numbers...

The Younger Dryas occured approximately 12-13,000 years ago. Divide by 2 and you get a halfway point of 6-6500 years. Subtract that from the current date and you get 4-4500BC for when the area could have still been above water. That also fits well with the general construction dates accepted for the ruins of Malta, the Carnac Stones and other megalithic structures of the time. AND, currently we know that we've been capable of building such structures since the Younger Dryas era(your aforementioned Gobeckli Tepe and surrounding sites).

All in all, you'd have to be completely thick headed not to believe that there is A LOT of lost history still waiting to be discovered underwater or, at the least, believe that some of these sites might be considerably older than currently accepted. The 'breadcrumbs' are there(I've just demonstrated a few myself lol); we just need to follow them.

I have a theory.

The ruts where created while an ancient civilization was quarrying stone that they found off the coastline, from a much earlier and lost structure of a much more advanced civilization (alien, human or in between, take your pick) After the flood waters receded it uncovered parts of structure that had become submerged during the "cataclysm" which they then use to rebuild and build new structures nearby. Building upon a much more advanced civilizations old, ruined, and abandoned structures.

reply to post by Mad Simian



Couldn't agree more.
No argument from me

another good thread, this stuff is pretty interesting.

Originally posted by SLAYER69
The question becomes for some is this. Are these ruts evidence of a much older culture/civilization using the Islands as a source for megalithic stones for construction and these now submerged tracks prove that the area in question where the tracks run under water was once dry land [Pre-Ice age melt off] which could potentially put them at around 10,000 +/- B.C. that were then flooded in Prehistory when the Ice Age Melt off occurred?

Malta and its submerged landbridge to Sicily is something I've studied for over a decade now. I've gathered hundreds of maps, satellite images, bathymetric charts and nautical charts just to recreate the former sunken coastline of Malta.

Map of the Coastline of the Malta-Ragusa Platform

Detailed Coastline of Malta at the Last Glacial Maximum

With Malta there's several groups to cross over to the island. Neanderthals are the first group. The second group is a group of hunter gatherers who crossed the landbridge at the Last Glacial Maximum. When they cross the Malta-Ragusa platform from Sicily into Malta, the Maltese dwarf deer went extinct.

But traces of the hunter gatherers that crossed into Malta also vanished. They may have left the island back thru the landbridge after the deer went extinct. They themselves might have died off. But that's all around 18,000 years ago.

The next group to arrive to Malta did so by boat as the landbridge became submerged. Their arrival was approximately 10,000 years ago or 8,000 B.C.E. The first boat group to Malta had domesticated goats, sheep, horses, cows and DOMESTICATED CATS! Yes cats! All such animals arrived to Malta by boats large enough to carry them across the sea.

SOURCE: A. Mifsud, S. Mifsud and C. Savona-Ventura
Palaeolithic Man and His Environment in Malta: Archeology Study of the Ghar Dalam cave

With Malta though, I actually did an entire botany study. The name of the island Malta comes from the word "Melite" for honey. So I tracked down honey-bee flower species that were imported to Malta by its legendary honeymakers to figure out their TRUE origins. Malta's imported honey bee orchids and flowers come primarily from the Thrace-Troas-Lesvos coast with another set imported from the Macedonia-through Thessaly region. Really rather surprising because a lot of people attribute Malta's honey making to the Levant or Phoenicians. And I truly couldn't find any honey bee flowers imported from the Levant at all. The majority of bee flower species are Thracian-Troas-Lesvos in origin of importation.

I have a detailed blog on Malta covering 9 years of research of its sunken coastlines and the precise botany study to track origins of different boat groups that colonized Malta.

DETAILED: The Maltese Islands to Sicily: Malta-Ragusa Platform