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 plube
reply to post by stormcell
I can't believe your entertaining this and trying to actually explain tectonic plate movement which was only introduced when i was a kid in school...please don't go there...because it does not work...continental drift does not cover this...England separated from mainland Europe...it did not move out around and then south....some times I think people will just believe anything....but trying to explain this just by throwing that out without thinking is just nuts....I took that into account my friend...and guess what....using logical thought....IT IS Wrong....and that is why the scientific community has deemed this farcical...but nice try at baffling with ...you know the word....and some foolish person starred you...lmao.
Originally posted by OpenMindedRealist
First-time poster here. Hello to all thinking ATS members.
I am astounded by the number of people who are willing to write this off as "just a rock." So astounded, that I have finally stopped lurking and decided I need to participate.
A few points:
1. To claim that the rock is natural and has not been altered by a human requires an ignorance of geologic processes.
2. Assuming the rock (and carving) is more than a few thousand years old, it is entirely plausible that such a medium would be used to create a map. Small size and durability would have been priorities; rock would have been one of the few choices.
3. Look at any map from before the 16th century (excluding a few interesting anomalies) and you will find large inaccuracies. If this carving was done even 10,000 years ago, it would be a huge accomplishment for its time.
4. I realize that not everyone can readily spot visual patterns. To anyone who says there is only a casual resemblance between the carving and Europe and the Mediterranean region, I say go study a globe. If you still don't see how this carving could be a map then I am inclined to put you in the category of pre-determined denier.
In my opinion, the real question here is whether or not it is a hoax. WIth the information posted it is impossible to say, but there are lab tests and examinations that can be done to determine approximate age and carving method.
Originally posted by Hanslune
Nice comments but its still appears to be just a rock, you might want to think about it a bit more. There are things to consider and study then there are things to think about and say, nope, and move on.
Not a hoax just a natural rock that out of billions has a half-ass appearance of part of the real world - you might want to ask what does the rest of the rock look like? I suspect it looks like a rock and no part of globe which is probably why it isn't shown.
Originally posted by Mindlouka
reply to post by OpenMindedRealist
1.000.000 years ago? Fire? According to mainstream archeology...NO.
Yet, they knew geography.