The first world war 7000 years ago?

a reply to: looneylupinsrevenge

Why does it have to be an open area??

Here is some wood from 5000 years ago. www.nytimes.com...

If the Pharaohs of 5000 years ago were smart enough to seal up objects in order to preserve them , then why didn't this supposed advanced race do the same?

Your tell me that you believe that an advanced race never wanted to make something that would last? That they never wanted to preserve there history ?

Our society has created materials that can last pretty much forever. www.nanocomptech.com...

But this ancient advanced race that you believe in couldn't make even ONE item that lasts??

originally posted by: looneylupinsrevenge

originally posted by: scraedtosleep

originally posted by: stormcell

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
I dont buy these ancient epoch tales of todays tech. We'd have unearthed endless bits of milled stainless steel, titanium, etc, by now. I would have myself even!

After 500 years, all metals would have rusted away, and wood, paper, leather would have decomposed. The only things left standing would be stone carvings and clay tablets. Tectonic plates move at 5mm/year. After 20 years, that's a meter, 20,000 years, a kilometer, 200,000 years, ten kilometers. What was once a mountain thousands of meters in the air, could become a sea thousands of meters deep.

When we explore the sea bed of the North Sea, spear tips, and bones from woolly mammoths and large cats are found.

Here is an example of wood structures older than 500 years. www.theguardian.com...

Here are some old metal stuff, older than 500 years. www.jpost.com...

Great now show me an open wooden structure from 5000 years ago... Don't worry, I'll wait. Or how about a 5000 year old hunk of metal that has been exposed to the elements for the entirety of its existence, like a statue or something similar. I would say I'd wait, but I'm thinking you wont have much luck.

The remains of wooden structures (posts) have been found at Stonehenge dating back that far. Just one example.

Also, it was stated that concrete degrades after a few hundred years and that might be true. However, it will be recognizable as concrete for tens of thousands of years. Even after it's crumbled to pieces.

Harte

Correct me if I am wrong here but the wooden posts you mentioned were found buried in the ground, correct? Which is a Chalky clay substance, which as I stated before is anaerobic in nature thus preventing/slowing/halting their decay.

It would depend highly on just what the concrete portion was exposed to but it's extremely doubtful it would be recognizable after 500 years let alone the tens of thousands you suggest. It's simply not possible, sorry to say. Concrete while a valuable and versatile building material, the chemical bonds holding it together simply degrade way to fast for that to ever happen.

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: looneylupinsrevenge

Why does it have to be an open area??

Because you were implying that if there was another advanced Civilization, one which existed in ancient times, then we should be finding bits and pieces scattered across the ground. I also mentioned, though it appears you have missed it, that the different environmental conditions account for why we find the things we do. That most things wouldn't survive for that long of a time period without some other mitigating factor, like the perfect conditions for dessication and petrification
(the desert) or an anaerobic environment to seal it off from bacteria (peat or clay bogs). Those things that do survive? Well they get reused for something else by the people who come after (the metals and smaller stones).

Here is some wood from 5000 years ago. www.nytimes.com...

Again it appears you have misunderstood what I was saying, because this is in the desert... Which as I mentioned is a prime location to find ancient artifacts because of it's inherent nature.

If the Pharaohs of 5000 years ago were smart enough to seal up objects in order to preserve them , then why didn't this supposed advanced race do the same?

Once again if you were to actually pay attention to where the site is, you would understand that it had little to do with the Pharaohs that these things lasted this long, and more to do with the environment.

Your tell me that you believe that an advanced race never wanted to make something that would last? That they never wanted to preserve there history ?

Have you really not been paying attention? We, all those arguing that they may have existed, have said that they may have created some of the massive stone marvels we have today. So yes it is safe to assume, that like us, they wanted to be remembered. It was because of the following civilizations and time that we have so little to go off of.

Our society has created materials that can last pretty much forever. www.nanocomptech.com...

Yup we did, but that doesn't mean they did. It also doesn't mean that after our civilization falls, that the one that follows will understand what they are and not attribute it to another intervening civilization or falsely conclude that it is natural in nature rather than man made. Arrogance is a mighty thing.

But this ancient advanced race that you believe in couldn't make even ONE item that lasts??

Obviously they left things behind. It's just that those things are being attributed to other civilizations or have disappeared because of the intervening time. 5000 or 10,000 even 50,000 years is a small blip on the time line of the planet let a lone the galaxy and universe, but it sure is a dam long time from our perspective and very little survives it without some sort of mitigating factor.

originally posted by: looneylupinsrevenge
Correct me if I am wrong here but the wooden posts you mentioned were found buried in the ground, correct? Which is a Chalky clay substance, which as I stated before is anaerobic in nature thus preventing/slowing/halting their decay.

It would depend highly on just what the concrete portion was exposed to but it's extremely doubtful it would be recognizable after 500 years let alone the tens of thousands you suggest. It's simply not possible, sorry to say. Concrete while a valuable and versatile building material, the chemical bonds holding it together simply degrade way to fast for that to ever happen.

When sites are explored by Archaeology, they carefully dig a long trench into the ground.
Imagine future Archaeologists doing this. As the trench progresses in length, they dig through meters of soil, then they hit a ten thousand year old (former) concrete foundation.

Do you believe they won't notice?

Harte

a reply to: Harte

Oh sure they would notice, but would they know the difference between that and natural sedimentation layers? after all, all that would be left is limestone dust and gravel. You can find sedimentation layers that seem like someone put them there but they are a result of natural deposits.

originally posted by: looneylupinsrevenge
a reply to: Harte

Oh sure they would notice, but would they know the difference between that and natural sedimentation layers? after all, all that would be left is limestone dust and gravel. You can find sedimentation layers that seem like someone put them there but they are a result of natural deposits.

Given that it would be both square and level, and would be made up of the constituents of concrete, yes, they would be able to tell the difference.
They can spot where the soil has been dug into and refilled 10 thousand years ago. Why would you think they couldn't tell if a former concrete foundation was one?
Not to mention the rebar and wire.

Harte

originally posted by: looneylupinsrevenge
a reply to: Harte

Oh sure they would notice, but would they know the difference between that and natural sedimentation layers? after all, all that would be left is limestone dust and gravel. You can find sedimentation layers that seem like someone put them there but they are a result of natural deposits.

It's extremely easy for a trained archaeologist to tell the difference. They can even tell the difference in the ground where ancient walls stood but are now gone.

And remember, this "ancient great forgotten civilization" had to go through a bunch of not-so-great phases (you don't go from standing around in the mud to building concrete skyscrapers in one generation without a lot of steps between). Each of the steps (including the last one) needs to harvest resources... like mining for metals. Mines leave a HUGE impact on the land. So do farms.

a reply to: anonentity

You sound verbatim like Giorgio Tsoukailous.

a reply to: looneylupinsrevenge

Because you were implying that if there was another advanced Civilization, one which existed in ancient times, then we should be finding bits and pieces scattered across the ground.

No , that is just what you wanted to hear because it makes you feel better about your theory.

Of course any ancient civilization , if it existed, would be deep deep underground.
The same as the actual ones that we do find.

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: looneylupinsrevenge


Your tell me that you believe that an advanced race never wanted to make something that would last? That they never wanted to preserve there history ?

How much of a priority has our own society given to that objective?

Our society has created materials that can last pretty much forever. www.nanocomptech.com...

But this ancient advanced race that you believe in couldn't make even ONE item that lasts??

Maybe they built their society near the ocean, to take advantage of sea trade? If it was more than 10k years ago, the lands they sailed their ships from would now be deep underwater. No telling how many things they "built to last" that we can't get at now.

As for the interior lands, are we to assume that every advanced society immediately sees a purpose in expanding into the lands held by hunter-gatherers? Rather than simply leave them alone and be left alone?

Xenophobia can be very beneficial from a security standpoint. Much of what Egypt achieved happened precisely because their geographic surroundings protected them from the outside world, making their kingdom easy to defend for thousands of years. (And saving them the cost of a large military.)

If you're part of an advanced coastal culture, and choose to just leave the inland hunter and gatherers alone, and refuse to teach them any of your technology, they would be unable to pose a military threat.

Xenophilia has advantages too, of course.

originally posted by: firerescue
a reply to: bloodymarvelous

Once you have enriched uranium at a high enough purity, all it takes to create an atomic blast is to hit it with a hammer.

One You have to extract the U 235 from the more common U 238 . U 235 makes up 0.71 % ( 1 part 140) - its takes a
massive Industrial complex ( Oak Ridge) to extract sufficient U 235 of sufficient purity to create a weapon

Critical mass of U 235 is about 25 kg (55 lbs)

Two to make a nuclear explosion you need to combine 2 subcritical masses, which together make a critical mass, at high
speed using explosive charge Too slow and will blew itself apart before reaction gets going

Three Nuclear weapons leave lasting traces, radioactive by products which can simply by their presence indicate formed by nuclear weapon detonation

It depends on if you want a very good explosion, or just a "dirty bomb". A better engineered trigger event (such as using conventional explosives to hit it evenly on all sides) will get you a better explosion.

However, it only needs to be perfect if you've got the exact minimum amount (minimum combination of U-235 purity and total mass). If you've got more than that, it's easier to do. The more the easier.

At a certain point, if you get enough of it gathered in one place, it would set itself off without any need for a trigger at all. But that requires quite a lot.


My point is: the only serious hurdle is gathering and refining. Any other technological deficiency can be overcome simply by exceeding the minimum critical mass by a large enough amount.


It's important to remember that, since Uranium in its natural form is mildly radioactive, the people experimenting with it would be dying of cancer frequently. It's amazing anyone ever learnt how to use the stuff! But on the other hand, Uranium has interesting chemical properties in its own right, so intrepid alchemists might be willing to chance it.

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous


Maybe they built their society near the ocean, to take advantage of sea trade? If it was more than 10k years ago, the lands they sailed their ships from would now be deep underwater. No telling how many things they "built to last" that we can't get at now.

Okay. So, what did they trade? Sea shells?
There's no resource near the ocean that's not seafood and people willing to trade for your seafood live inland, or they'd have their own.
Where's the e idsence for these ancient seafood-craving civilizationss then?

Harte

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: looneylupinsrevenge


Your tell me that you believe that an advanced race never wanted to make something that would last? That they never wanted to preserve there history ?

How much of a priority has our own society given to that objective?

While we may not create anything with the specific goal of surviving 10-20-50 KA of weathering and erosion from the elements, we certainly have created feats of engineering and construction that will leave evidence of their existence many millennia into the future. If we can discern the remnants and footprint of an artificial structure dating back ~500KA before present that was built by H. Erectus in Japan then I think its incredibly devoid of plausibility to claim that a so called "advanced" civilization was able to advance to such a stage without leaving an iota of evidence, not a single artifact attributed to this magical culture. It is inconceivable for such a scenario to occur.

Our society has created materials that can last pretty much forever. www.nanocomptech.com...

But this ancient advanced race that you believe in couldn't make even ONE item that lasts??

Maybe they built their society near the ocean, to take advantage of sea trade?

So where is the evidence of such trading? What was traded? if they were trading precious metals or weapons then where was the infrastructure to support such? Whether precious metals like gold or silver were the currency or bronze or copper in the form of weapons or farm implements, you need to mine for the materials. Mining leaves long lasting signatures of its occurrence. If they were trading food, where was the farmland? What crops were they growing domestically?

More importantly, how did this magic civilization manage to begin working metals, how did they manage to domesticate and hybridize crops when neither metal working or domestication of food crops several millennia before the earliest known occurrences in the near and middle east? And keep in mind that physical evidence of neither of the aforementioned practices, which are prerequisites for being considered a civilization, is actually required as we can discern and calculate mutation rates and the movement of various plants as they were being domesticated from one geographic location to the next.

If it was more than 10k years ago, the lands they sailed their ships from would now be deep underwater. No telling how many things they "built to last" that we can't get at now.

Except that every other emerging civilization ( as the regions transitioned from paleolithic to PPN to chalcolithic to the transition from Hunter gatherer to sedentary farmers and up through the copper, bronze and iron ages), got their start in river valleys which gave them incredibly rich soil to plant their crops in thanks to seasonal flooding. Literally all of the early, major civilizations arose in river valleys... The Nile in Egypt, Tigris and Euphrates in Mesopotamia, the Indus Valley, the Yellow River in China, Mississippi river in N. America...

As for the interior lands, are we to assume that every advanced society immediately sees a purpose in expanding into the lands held by hunter-gatherers? Rather than simply leave them alone and be left alone?

Again, this scenario seems to exclude important things like the need for resources to feed, cloth, house the inhabitants of the mythical, advanced ancient civilization we are hypothesizing about. One would need to at the very least be on good terms with the HG's living inland from the coasts to trade with them or purchase goods from them which means that either they aren't HG's if they're sedentary enough to set up shop and trade with the hypothetical civ, they were all wiped out by the military might of our advanced forbearers or they were absorbed into the civilization. Regardless of your preferred answer, there would still be evidence of animal husbandry, the crops that fed the animals, the crops that fed the inhabitants of the city and the infrastructure to maintain it all. There is no evidence of any of this.

You can't have a city let alone a full fledged civilization that operates in a vacuum with zero outside influence and zero influence on the outside. If they had anything to trade, these items would show up in the archaeological record and isotopic analysis can in many cases show where the objects came from.

Xenophobia can be very beneficial from a security standpoint. Much of what Egypt achieved happened precisely because their geographic surroundings protected them from the outside world, making their kingdom easy to defend for thousands of years. (And saving them the cost of a large military.)

it's a little over the top to try to claim that Ancient Egypt was xenophobic. We're talking about a period of time encompassing 3000 years from the unification of Upper and Lower Egypt to the time it was incorporated into the Roman Empire. But having random, short periods of time where a specific Pharaoh enacted policies that could be considered xenophobic and trying to fold that in with geographical barriers is a pretty striking leap of logic considering that for the vast majority of Dynastic Egypt's history, foreigners were openly accepted. In the Old Kingdom, Medjay archers were used in the Egyptian army. That doesn't play well into the idea of AE being fearful of foreigners does it?

And while yes, geography made foreign invasion incredibly difficult, its not true to state that they didn't have a large army. Again, we're talking about an entire civilization that lasted more than 12 and a half times as long as the USA has been an independent country and 6 times as long as Europeans have been sailing to and trading with the Americas. Different periods of time between the Old, Middle and New Kingdoms and the whims of the currently ruling Pharaoh could alter the size and configuration of the armed forces. This variation led to periods like the Second Intermediate when the Hyksos sacked Memphis and also led to Egypt being the only nation to repulse the advances of the "Sea People" who decimated the Near East. You also have to consider that the size of their military was also a reflection of the manpower needs in relation to the technology used at the time. In the Old Kingdom, Egyptian chariots gave them a massive advantage. Especially when combined with their archers .

If you're part of an advanced coastal culture, and choose to just leave the inland hunter and gatherers alone, and refuse to teach them any of your technology, they would be unable to pose a military threat.

Try telling that to the Egyptians who were overrun, conquered and ruled by the Hyksos.

Xenophilia has advantages too, of course.

Kind of contradictory considering your premise is that the magical advanced civilization that was SO advanced it didn't leave a single iota of evidence that it existed because they lived in a vacuum that avoided going inland from the coasts thereby ruling out embracing "foreigners".

originally posted by: peter vlar


In the Old Kingdom, Egyptian chariots gave them a massive advantage.

This is wrong, but I certainly agree with the rest.

Harte

a reply to: Harte

I am from time to time way off base when going off of memory and always appreciate the error being pointed out so that I don’t repeat the error in the future so thank you. That will teach me to post from my phone while at my kids horseback riding lesson!

ETA- I feel really dumb in hindsight for mentioning the Hyksos conquest of Egypt and not realizing that chariots were introduced to Egypt by them during the second intermediate. I honestly don’t know why I had it in my head that Chariots had been introduced as far back as the okd kingdom

originally posted by: peter vlar
a reply to: Harte

I am from time to time way off base when going off of memory and always appreciate the error being pointed out so that I don’t repeat the error in the future so thank you. That will teach me to post from my phone while at my kids horseback riding lesson!

ETA- I feel really dumb in hindsight for mentioning the Hyksos conquest of Egypt and not realizing that chariots were introduced to Egypt by them during the second intermediate. I honestly don’t know why I had it in my head that Chariots had been introduced as far back as the okd kingdom

Meh, it's a minor detail and in no way pertinent to your overall argument.
I just wanted to correct it before the fringers seized on this single, small error. You know how that is...

Harte

originally posted by: peter vlar

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: looneylupinsrevenge


Your tell me that you believe that an advanced race never wanted to make something that would last? That they never wanted to preserve there history ?

How much of a priority has our own society given to that objective?

While we may not create anything with the specific goal of surviving 10-20-50 KA of weathering and erosion from the elements, we certainly have created feats of engineering and construction that will leave evidence of their existence many millennia into the future. If we can discern the remnants and footprint of an artificial structure dating back ~500KA before present that was built by H. Erectus in Japan then I think its incredibly devoid of plausibility to claim that a so called "advanced" civilization was able to advance to such a stage without leaving an iota of evidence, not a single artifact attributed to this magical culture. It is inconceivable for such a scenario to occur.

In modern society, all, or nearly all technology is shared with everyone.

That's only one way technology can go, and 100% of the reason it happens is because we have patent laws.

With no patent laws, inventors would keep their inventions to themselves. A small elite guild might know how electricity works, but they won't put up power lines everywhere.

Our society has created materials that can last pretty much forever. www.nanocomptech.com...

But this ancient advanced race that you believe in couldn't make even ONE item that lasts??

Maybe they built their society near the ocean, to take advantage of sea trade?

So where is the evidence of such trading? What was traded? if they were trading precious metals or weapons then where was the infrastructure to support such? Whether precious metals like gold or silver were the currency or bronze or copper in the form of weapons or farm implements, you need to mine for the materials. Mining leaves long lasting signatures of its occurrence. If they were trading food, where was the farmland? What crops were they growing domestically?

More importantly, how did this magic civilization manage to begin working metals, how did they manage to domesticate and hybridize crops when neither metal working or domestication of food crops several millennia before the earliest known occurrences in the near and middle east? And keep in mind that physical evidence of neither of the aforementioned practices, which are prerequisites for being considered a civilization, is actually required as we can discern and calculate mutation rates and the movement of various plants as they were being domesticated from one geographic location to the next.

I was watching Carl Sagan's documentary on ancient Greek steam powered engines once, and he asked an interesting question: Why didn't the inventors of this engine think of using it as a labor saving device? Instead of a toy in a temple intended to fool people?

I think in the ancient world, technology wasn't used for the purposes that we use it now. It was used to gain power.

An ancient society with advanced technology really means a small elite with advanced technology. Who uses it to maintain power over their people, and then conquer others.

I think ancient people were indeed just as smart as modern people, but their society was structured differently, and the difference in societal structure is what caused their discoveries never to go as far as they do today. But that is different from saying they didn't know stuff.

Imagine if, instead of fighting crime, Batman just wanted people to think he was a powerful wizard. He would trade for things he needed for his machines, but not in huge volumes. (He needs the ignorant masses to think it is magic, so he's not going to give them batmobiles to drive.)

More likely, the big ticket trade items would be things like slaves.

Xenophobia can be very beneficial from a security standpoint. Much of what Egypt achieved happened precisely because their geographic surroundings protected them from the outside world, making their kingdom easy to defend for thousands of years. (And saving them the cost of a large military.)

it's a little over the top to try to claim that Ancient Egypt was xenophobic. We're talking about a period of time encompassing 3000 years from the unification of Upper and Lower Egypt to the time it was incorporated into the Roman Empire. But having random, short periods of time where a specific Pharaoh enacted policies that could be considered xenophobic and trying to fold that in with geographical barriers is a pretty striking leap of logic considering that for the vast majority of Dynastic Egypt's history, foreigners were openly accepted.

The Xenophobia of the Egyptians wasn't like a policy. It was more of a cultural attitude that the rest of the world outside of egypt was mere ants. The benefit was they didn't venture out of their boundaries to try and conquer others (until Thutmose III). Most of their interaction to the North wasn't military at all, and most of their military campaigns to the south were just raids and slave grabs.

The word for "Egyptian" and "Human" was the same word. It's kind of like how China's actual name for itself is ZhongGuo or "The center land".

Then when you look at their murals, pretty much every pharaoh is shown crushing his (or her) enemies, even if they never participated in any military actions during their lifetime. That indicates something about how they saw the nearby nations that wanted a piece of their action.

In the Old Kingdom, Medjay archers were used in the Egyptian army. That doesn't play well into the idea of AE being fearful of foreigners does it?

You mean the fact they let captured slaves enter military service in order to escape slavery?

Sounds like the USA letting Mexicans earn citizenship by joining the Army.

It more likely shows the Egyptians considered themselves to be too good for military service themselves.

originally posted by: LABTECH767
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Good point but would you recognize such an object for it's age or simply assume that it was modern junk, that cable in the ground is therefore modern, those parts of a buried machine are therefore not that old and those anomaly's on the moon and mars are not evidence of a previous and far more advanced civilization but people seeing sheep in the cloud's.

Personally I believe there was an advanced previous civilization and the reason's we are not stumbling on there rubbish landfill sites are many, there civilization may have taken a lot longer to achieve it's science and it could have been kept to the priestly class and the nobility or indeed it could have degenerated into such a society as the then elites of the past consolidated there power to themselves is one possibility, there civilization may have been more agrarian therefore and there are constant challenges to the fertile crescent theory for example with one very good documentary discussing how there are so very many variety's and type's of domesticated vegetables in south america whose wild variety's are often actually poisonous, how long did it really take to adapt them and of course they are not ALL fertile crescent crops such as barley but CORN, Potatoes and tomatoes to name a few which it seems' are actually more suitable for the human body that barley is, so is barley in reality a later cultivated crop and does this constant pushing of the fertile crescent agenda suggest a serious both deliberate and otherwise entrenched knowledge filter.

Aluminum block, the Aiud artifact, here is a point many claim it is proof of ancient alien's, they are wrong it is proof of ancient technology, aluminium is an earth mineral as you know obtained by processing bauxite and it does not form naturally in a refined state.
coolinterestingstuff.com...

Now here is were I differ in my opinion, I believe that the human race is far older than the modern evolutionary theory, I believe giant's were human's with a much longer life span and far lower rate of child birth and we may be the stunted genetically challenged but fast breeding remain's of that race, perhaps adapted to a quicker rate of birth as a survival strategy after our world was decimated and we were nearly wiped out.

I believe that this former civilization is far further back in time than 7000 years and that 7000 years ago people were actually fairly primitive but that some repository's of knowledge remained in some location's were ancient teachers or guardian's of that lost knowledge tried to teach the savage's how to live again but I think even that is earlier, still the ancient Mesopotamian did mysteriously have the Zero and the Decimal point yet these were lost after there age past and other cultures had no use for these high mathematical principles until they had to be re-invented.

Many ancient royal lineages NOT in any way, shape or form related to modern inbred royal line's though they did start that dubious tradition of marrying only there own to preserve there trait's had multiple digits such as six or seven fingers and toe's, were taller and had longer lives according to the legend's of the past which would suggest pre-mutation we as a species may have been taller, longer lived and had six or seven digit's, ancient Mesopotamian mathematics have base 12 numerology and of course we still use base twelve in our hours of the day inherited from them so are we the stunted short lived rapid breeding descendant's of a much longer lived species that died out except for us.

Did ANY of there previous civilization's have to even resemble our's or would a longer life span promote a different social psychology?.

The Vatican, the Smithsonian and many other's have been linked to a secret policy of covering up ancient technology and evidence of giant's.

What if there were many former civilization's, what if there have been many types of destruction such as war, natural and even culling by a predator civilization that has an ethical policy of not wiping a species out entirely but of putting them back into there natural environment? once there dangerous technology has been totally eradicated.

I have a different belief for Tihuanaco/Tiwanaku and that has to do with a natural cataclysm toward the end of the last ice age so I do believe the site is far older, that later human activity re-used it but that the scattering and destruction of both that site and the nearby puma punku was through a cataclysmic tilting of the south american continent like a greater than 10 on the Richter scale earth quake and the tilting also submerged much of the east coast of the south american continent which along with other catastrophe and famines at the end of the last ice age and also natural sea level rise of over 200 feet caused a massive global tidal wave that literally washed the coastal agrarian society's of that time away all around the world, the few survivors would have had to merge with or else compete with the more primitive hunter gatherer tribes in the formerly less hospitable hinterland's and highland's of the continent's.

These are not proof but just worth thinking about, remember though the Coso Geode which was proven to be a 1920's champion spark plug encrusted in older dirt backed on by the sun.

Every 3657 years Nibiru passes Earth and on some passes it causes Global Continental Displacement which by proxy catalyse Global Continental Displacement Waves that wipe clean everything from the surface of the Continents....we are constantly finding multiple intermingled historical records of different cycles of Humanity and their work and technologys….our history as a species is not one long straight linear record...it is a long stack of CIRCLES or CYCLES that are lain down one atop the rest or stacked up and in many places these layers or circles have been intertwined and intermingled creating great difficulty determining what order they all came in.

If the Supervolcano in Yellowstone National Park ever erupts, most of the Northwest of the USA would become unrecognizable.

www.washingtonpost.com... term=.0c9d5bf61b20

Some Soviet nuclear strategies during the Cold War were directed to the possibility of deliberately setting it off.

Do you think this ancient advanced culture might have known about fault lines?

a reply to: bloodymarvelous


If you ask most people today how the technology works, they wouldn't have much of a clue. Yes we use radios and Televisions, but making one is a different story. If the main factories that produced spark plugs disappeared. It wouldn't be long before it all slowed and stopped . Every component of high tech is as important as the next, so if a few people make one component and then refuse to make and supply it. It could bring any society to revolutionary change.
With AI making things it means not many humans could make things from the ground up.