It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The 10,000 year old civilization which was more advanced than us

page: 9
53
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 02:07 AM
link   




posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 06:47 AM
link   
Interesting speculation

A few comments

Why would cities be built on the sea coast? That explanation has been used a great deal amongst fringe writers but is without basis.

Sumerian, Egyptian, Chinese and Indus civilizations arose along rivers. That is where farmers and agriculture would have first coordinated together. Could there have been a seacoast only civilization? Yep, but the fact that there might have been one still doesn’t change the simple undeniable fact that we haven’t found it yet.

There have been a number surveys of deep sea wrecks and use of dredges, nothing unusual has been found.

As of this day no evidence for an advance civilization exists, until such evidence is found the speculation is cool but ultimately irrelevant.

The giant ground sheet explanation, this one is also common, this holds that a civilization-from the moment of its rise - would go about and consciously avoid leaving any mark of its existence. This is remotely possible but given human nature is it probable?

Even if a society stayed only along a coast line, sooner or later they would have moved beyond the 100 meter line, but no sign of them has been found. No habitation levels, burials, trash, no resource collection (mines etc). They are either well hidden or we are very unlucky. Strangely we do find evidence for early societies going back tens of thousands of years – but no advanced ones.

Then there is the O & I explanation, the omnipotent and incompetent conspiracy to hide knowledge. This alleges that all the governments in the world and its leading scientists have for centuries conducted a conspiracy to hide stuff. Yet they also let out evidence which some claim is proof. Having had some experience with the scientific world I would be surprised that scientists and government officials from France, North Korea, China, Iran, Israel and Guatemala could agree on anything.

Off topic continues below

Oh and for the WTC7 no such thing happened, its collaspe was considered minor compared to the other events. It is well covered in media but as little loss of life occurred compared to the WTC 1 & 2 it was a minor footnote - but we diverge. If you are interested in that subject I would recommend going to the JREF site which has a great deal on that specific subject forums.randi.org... or ATS's own site.



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 08:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune
There have been a number surveys of deep sea wrecks and use of dredges, nothing unusual has been found.


Yes there has, you just didn't find it.

[edit on 19-9-2007 by C.C.Benjamin]



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 11:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Hanslune
 


ah the old "they're too incompetent" defense. this assumes that the conspiracy is run by the standard (admittedly useless) gov bureaucracy. it is not. as you say, this is probably not the thread to discuss this though, suffice it to say that: yes some proof gets out but:
- its normally of the debatable kind or the "uncoverupable" kind, ie not worth completely covering up, or things like global societal mythological stories, that cant exactly be easily erased

as to the not living by the sea thing, while I admit you have a partial point, you cannot look at where civilizations sprung up AFTER a hypothesized flood as proof of where they normally spring up to disprove said flood... (ie IF there was a flood (meaning large sea level rise and tsunamis) and there had been civilisations on the sea and smaller less advanced ones on rivers, which ones would survive for us to know about and think were first?)

also in your own words "that is where farmers and agriculture would have first coordinated together" but the point of this is not where the farmers and agriculture where (we know they were at least starting to get busy around this time), the point is where the citys and towns we would recognise as advanced were, and in the stratified civilisation I am suggesting, this is not necessarily the same place.

also have a read through this, I found it interesting after recently reading about pole shifts and so forth
www.mondovista.com...
now imagine giant tsunamis and torrential rains lasting a month or more along with earthquakes and global polar shift, all occuring at the same time. Now (and this is unlikely, but worth thinking about) imagine it happened not too long after a nuclear war.... in a society mostly living in third world conditions but with an elite with SOME tech of a roughly 1940s level, who were mostly based in atlantis (which is now probably undersea if it existed)
and some other coastal base..
what would be left for us to find? would it be enough that if some group did want to keep it secret, the evidence would be obvious enough for us to see anyway?


also something else to look up and consider is the younger dryas period.
wiki
which could be related since the timing 10500 bc is around the time mentioned by many people theorising about ancient civilisations (and supposedly astranomically aligned structures)
perhaps evidence of nuclear winter, or some other man made global weather effect, or part of the global catastrophe that helped destroy this civilisation



posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 08:05 AM
link   
reply to post by C.C.Benjamin
 


Howdy CC

The mechanism is certainly interesting but comes from historic times (100 BC) and can be assigned to the Greeks (due to the writing on it).

There was in the last year or so a complete relook at that great piece of engineering. It is a sign post showing Greek technical ability to and the importance of Bablyonian influence astrology in that time period.

Howdy diablomonic

The problem of course is that until someone finds something all the speculation is moot!

One question, when do you feel the conspiracy came into effect? Why didn't this conspiracy stop the news of the Hobbit discovery?

From the Mondo information


"The salient difficulty that we must face with Atlantis is the simple fact that this putative civilization lived so deep in time that artifacts would now be extremely few in number and probably be unrecognizable in general."

Hanslune: Yet we have materials from that time frame that are human made and much earlier, its odd that these people never accessed the resources or left ruins or habitation levels anywhere.

"On top of that, these artifacts are underwater in their heartland. This means that for now we can satisfy ourselves only to the extent of showing that it might have been."

Hanslune: Underwater archaeology exists and people have been dredging the coastal areas for hundred of years - a friend of mine did their dissertation on certain aspects of bones and stone tools dredged up from the North sea. To date nothing from these advanced civilizations has come up. Given the combing that treasure hunters are making along the coastal areas it is interesting that no unknown ship wrecks have been detected nor submerged developed ports. Even one of the most common underwater artifact, the anchor, is missing.

Regards

[edit on 20-9-2007 by Hanslune]

[edit on 20-9-2007 by Hanslune]



posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 08:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by diablomonic

now imagine giant tsunamis and torrential rains lasting a month or more along with earthquakes and global polar shift, all occuring at the same time.


That just means all the world's geologists, climatologists etc are also all in on the conspiracy to hide the evidence



posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 08:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Essan
 


Yes they are all in on it but there are many dissenters and thousands of them are killed over this subject each year - THEY say it's due to natural causes and "age" but we know they were about to spill the beans.

I checked and every single believer in early civilizations dies!

Shocking



posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 04:37 PM
link   
So we can find remains of fire pits created hundreds of thousands of years ago and date the carbon to determine when they were made, but civilizations as advanced as our own leave no real evidence?

Color me confused.



posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 01:52 PM
link   
Although its is POSSIBLE that we have missed evidence for an advanced civilization (especially one in the last 20,000 years) I find it improbable, but my own incredulous belief is just that a belief. It is always possible something will come up but the evidence so far, a complete lack of evidence, is compelling.

Now a contrary opinion, one from one of my professors from long long ago...


Look at it this way. Go to a blank wall, a big one in a large room. Take a pencil and throw it at the wall so the point hits. Now that pencil mark represents the entire surface area of the earth that has been excavated versus (rest of the wall) that hasn't been.

As I like to tell all who believe in Atlantis and other advanced civilizations- don't post on websites, go become an archaeologist or explorer, or failing that provide funding and support to those that do and go find the sucker.



posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 10:58 PM
link   
What thoughts do you folks have regarding the Piri Reis map? It shows a detailed cartographic representation of the land mass under the ice of Antarctica. Ice has covered it for a very long time, and yet somehow someone (or, dare I say, something) managed to create a map of it. Piri Reis, who supposedly drew the map in 1513, claimed that it was based on older maps. Just curious what y'all think of how that fits into this discussion.

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 11:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Essan
 


no not everyone is knowingly "in on it" in fact, the VAST majority aren't (I expect). This is more a case of: teach someone the world is flat, and it takes a lot to change his view, especially if all his peers believe the same thing, he risks economic and career suicide by even considering otherwise, and all the proof that it is not flat has been tarnished by controversy (deserved or not).

Im not saying I believe 100% that the following is the case, I am only stating that I DO believe there is a global conspiracy in other areas so this wouldnt surprise me

now if you have such a (top level) conspiracy, you DO NOT need almost anyone to know the true extent of it (think compartmentalisation) and you can in almost all cases convince people to act for your own benefit without them knowing why they are really doing it. Also you do not need to cover up every little discovery, all you need is to sow a little doubt on most small ones and the in built paradigm of linear civilisation proggression will do the rest.

The only time you need to actively cover anything up is if there is a major discovery that is hard proof, and for it to be hard proof it needs to be thouroughly documented by qualified archeologists, and this means 2 things:
1) word will normally get out in parts of the archeological community, giving the conspirators a warning they need to act and
2) archeological digs take time, so this gives them TIME to act.

as I said, there wouldnt normally be any need to kill anyone or similar, simply putting the reasonable suggestion that it is a hoax will be enough for most to dismiss without even properly looking at it, given the "overwhelming evidence" for the current paradigm. This of course is a self reinforcing cycle.

[edit on 21-9-2007 by diablomonic]



posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 11:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Hanslune
 


If I had the funding, I would LOVE to investigate this stuff personally. of course, I doubt that will ever happen (plus it would only convince me, Id be a complete amatuer, whod believe me if I found something)



posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 11:29 PM
link   
I think at this point I should say I agree with most of you that disagree with me in that you have fairly valid points but I think the main thing Im trying to say is IF there was a conspiracy to hide this, it COULD be done. And there are MANY reasons for such a conspiracy, whether its a global organized elite hiding their origins (and very existence) or unrelated groups (eg religious groups ) hiding discoveries for their own reasons.

All I can say is 1)plenty of strange stone ruins exist, many have people claiming they are older than the accepted date, maybe they are not quite as clear cut as is thought.
2) if you look up oopart (out of place artifacts) you get a whole bunch of wierd #, much of which may be hoaxes plus some real interesting things, and usually the only reason the interesting ones are considered hoaxes is because they are out of place in the accepted timelines (ie an object that if it dated to the right era, would be considered real, but is somehow dated to the wrong era)
3)anyone here like to tell me why you think the sphinx weathering is NOT water erosion? (I am not a relevant expert, but it looks like it to me), and if so, when that occured?



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 07:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by diablomonic

3)anyone here like to tell me why you think the sphinx weathering is NOT water erosion? (I am not a relevant expert, but it looks like it to me), and if so, when that occured?



If it is water erosion it means the Sphinx could date back to 4,000BC - but there's no reason for supposing any further than that.

The African Humid Period ended around 5,000 years ago, thereafter the climate of Egypt became much drier. I reckon 1,000 years of rain could produce that sort of erosion in soft limestone quite easily



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 11:05 PM
link   
ok cool, didnt know that.
Now this is still very interesting: we have a very large stone structure, which has had a fairly well accepted history for quite a while, and yet that history is most likely wrong!
Now as you say, this could date the object to only 500 - 1500 years before the traditional dating, but really that is a minimum date! in the absence of any other evidence it may make sense to date it as this age, but who knows how long it was there BEFORE the weathering (and indeed just how much weathering it has taken) especially given extended periods buried under the sand...
for the purposes of this topic, there is no evidence to prove it is NOT older than this, is there?
My point being, how many other "sphinxes" are there? stone relics dated to the wrong age simply because that seemed to fit better with accepted history? maybe there are none, I dont know, but theres certainly a lot of claims..



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 02:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by diablomonic
I think at this point I should say I agree with most of you that disagree with me in that you have fairly valid points but I think the main thing Im trying to say is IF there was a conspiracy to hide this, it COULD be done.


It really couldn't. There's some known conspiracies -- Project Camelot was one of them. It was secret for a short time before the scientists started raising ethics questions. Nixon's government tried to silence them and found that it just couldn't. :
www.redorbit.com...


...usually the only reason the interesting ones are considered hoaxes is because they are out of place in the accepted timelines (ie an object that if it dated to the right era, would be considered real, but is somehow dated to the wrong era)

Not so. Most are outright fakes.


3)anyone here like to tell me why you think the sphinx weathering is NOT water erosion? (I am not a relevant expert, but it looks like it to me), and if so, when that occured?


Water AND sand, and several different types of limestone. Limestone comes in different hardnesses, and weathers at different rates. Schoch tried to say that it was water erosion and not wind erosion that caused it -- conveniently ignoring the fierce sandstorms, I guess.

www.geocities.com...



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 07:01 PM
link   
It could be posible.

I mean Sanskrit is an Object Oriented Language created by cavemen?

Thant sounds suspicious...



posted on Sep, 24 2007 @ 12:34 PM
link   
For Diablo, you can always volunteer to dig, volunteers are the lifeblood of archaeology these days....

no not everyone is knowingly "in on it" in fact, the VAST majority aren't (I expect). This is more a case of: teach someone the world is flat, and it takes a lot to change his view, especially if all his peers believe the same thing, he risks economic and career suicide by even considering otherwise, and all the proof that it is not flat has been tarnished by controversy (deserved or not).

Hans: Then nothing much should have changed in the last two hundred years, yet in fact change has been paramount and those causing the change have been deemed heroes and heroine of science. Where was the conspiracy?

Im not saying I believe 100% that the following is the case, I am only stating that I DO believe there is a global conspiracy in other areas so this wouldnt surprise me

now if you have such a (top level) conspiracy, you DO NOT need almost anyone to know the true extent of it (think compartmentalisation)

Hans: To suppress archaeological knowledge you’d need people knowledgeable in every aspect of it and associated areas of knowledge, scores of people if not up to around 150 to cover every aspect. Remember a pot shard would prove the existence of an ancient civilization as could pollen, sedimentary cores, geology, etc. You’d have to watch tens of thousands of publications and institutions and tens of thousands of scientists in every country.

and you can in almost all cases convince people to act for your own benefit without them knowing why they are really doing it.

Hans: Could you give a real world example of this dealing with archaeology?

Also you do not need to cover up every little discovery, all you need is to sow a little doubt on most small ones and the in built paradigm of linear civilisation proggression will do the rest.

Hans: Unless of course the evidence actually points to CP

The only time you need to actively cover anything up is if there is a major discovery that is hard proof, and for it to be hard proof it needs to be thouroughly documented by qualified archeologists, and this means 2 things:

1) word will normally get out in parts of the archeological community, giving the conspirators a warning they need to act and

Hans: Actually no this works against the conspirators as more people get in the know as the evidence is spread about

2) archeological digs take time, so this gives them TIME to act.

Hans: Such as?

as I said, there wouldnt normally be any need to kill anyone or similar, simply putting the reasonable suggestion that it is a hoax will be enough for most to dismiss without even properly looking at it, given the "overwhelming evidence" for the current paradigm.

Hans: How would you explain a city as a hoax? What if the discovery is made by an independently wealthy professor emeritus armed with hard evidence any archaeologist can see? Can you give an example of something that “was dismissed without properly (being) looked at”? Oh by the way when was the current paradigm established and by who?



posted on Sep, 24 2007 @ 01:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by diablomonic
My point being, how many other "sphinxes" are there?

Lots and lots and lots. In fact, at Giza, there's a whole avenue of lined with them. I've seen several of Hatshepsut's many sphynxes. Take a look at this beauty from Lower Egypt:
www.whitman.edu...


stone relics dated to the wrong age simply because that seemed to fit better with accepted history? maybe there are none, I dont know, but theres certainly a lot of claims..


As Hanslune said, I'd encourage you to volunteer on an archaeological project. You'll get a much better idea about how things are dated, how we find the stuff, and how we determine provenance.



posted on Sep, 24 2007 @ 10:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune

Hans: Then nothing much should have changed in the last two hundred years, yet in fact change has been paramount and those causing the change have been deemed heroes and heroine of science. Where was the conspiracy?


Diablo: think of it more like damage control than complete stagnation: to completely halt archeological progress would be pretty much impossible, so simply slow it (for example by setting up a system whereby scientists learn to "tow the line" in the long struggle to become a tenured professor, by which time even if they were originally just paying lip service to the current paradigm, they are pretty much part of it by the time they get tenure)and steer it (by encouraging doubt on (and this is important) any discoveries that arent automatically dismissed by skeptical "tow the line" "experts", which are probably not many.


Originally posted by Hanslune

Hans: To suppress archaeological knowledge you’d need people knowledgeable in every aspect of it and associated areas of knowledge, scores of people if not up to around 150 to cover every aspect. Remember a pot shard would prove the existence of an ancient civilization as could pollen, sedimentary cores, geology, etc. You’d have to watch tens of thousands of publications and institutions and tens of thousands of scientists in every country.



Diablo: extremely old pot shards where supposedly found at that cuban "underwater city". They where dismissed by other "experts" as natural artifacts. This is, in all likelyhood, true, but how would I know? Now I dont claim the dismissing people are "in" on it, just applying occams razor a little too vigorously (ie apply it AFTER getting and studying all the evidence, not as an excuse to not even look...)


Originally posted by Hanslune
"and you can in almost all cases convince people to act for your own benefit without them knowing why they are really doing it."

Hans: Could you give a real world example of this dealing with archaeology?


diablo: in on it upper class university dean (UD) sees breaking story about some fantastic discovery. UD says to most traditional, respected (not in on it) expert in school "how about you write a paper on this giving your opinion, ride the publicity a bit. Personally, it sounds impossible, (hint hint) what do you think? WHAT DO YOU THINK THE EXPERTS PAPER WILL SAY? do you think he will really give the evidence a proper chance, or will he come at it with extreme bias and preconceptions?




top topics



 
53
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join