Cuban 'Atlantis' Cover-Up Solved?

I know there are lots of threads that have been posted about this before but they all DEAD END with the same info. I am going to post links to info about the sunken city off of Cuba's west coast as b.g. for anyone who is new to this. Then write a timeline with links as I know it and then end with correspondence I found online that may answer why all information about this discovery has stopped dead and possibly why Zelitsky has so completely clammed up.

In 2001 Paulina Zelitsky announced that she had found an ancient city and structures off the coast of Cuba.

Researchers with a Canadian exploration company said they filmed over the summer ruins of a possible submerged "lost city" off the Guanahacabibes Peninsula on the Caribbean island's western tip. The researchers cautioned that they did not fully understand the nature of their find and planned to return in January for further analysis, the expedition leader said on Thursday. The explorers said they believed the mysterious structures, discovered at the astounding depth of around 2,100 feet and laid out like an urban area, could have been built at least 6,000 years ago. That would be about 1,500 years earlier than the great Giza pyramids of Egypt.

LINK

Further research right after that clearly identified Pyramids, streets, massive stone structures. SONAR PIC
SCROLL 1/2 DOWN FOR PYRAMIDS AND MEGALITHS
mikesingh's pics of roads and a 'face'

The 2002 Linda Moulton Howe Interview LINK

IN Spring of 2004 Luis Mariano Fernandez tracks down a now reclusive Zeltisky and Iturralde and after much persistence gets the last interview known: SCROLL 1/3 WAY DOWN

In October of 2004 after raising 2 million dollars Zelitsky and an international group of explorers set-off from Mexico to further document and research their already extraordinary discoveryLINK This is not reported in US MSM as far as I can tell.

And that is it. After that nothing. Zero. Zilch. Why that is has been a big question for all of those/us who follow it until, possibly, now. One day when I was obseesing on this topic and digging in strange places I found at the bottom on one of David Wilcock's (very long) pages correspondence from a woman who said she was stationed in Cuba in 1980-81 she says she

was in the Navy and stationed at GITMO Bay in 1980-1981. At that time we were supplying ships that were on a mission off of the coast. We were told they were mapping Atlantis.
There were subs, seals, etc. all involved.
We were told that the city they had found was huge, with writings on walls, etc.
We had of course asked them how they knew it was Atlantis and their response was… "it was written all over the place."

Just some information for you and your team. I don’t know if there are any documents about this, however, being considered a military mission I would assume that there would have to be.

CONT'D IN NEXT POST

[edit on 24-7-2008 by TheWayISeeIt]

Wilcock's kept up correspondence with her, asking background details. I will excerpt some of it here then link, but will say for my part that she comes off as a credible, middle aged lady who only happened upon the whole notion that the world at large had discovered this site by being a fan of and regular reader of Wilcock's who does not spend most of his time discussing this type of thing.

Here is what I can remember. My MOS was shipserviceman, basically supply. There were a lot of experimental ships coming in and out that we would prepare pallets of supplies. Only specific people with the proper classification would take it to the ships or come and pick it up. We were not allowed near them.

I never talked to anyone specifically… it was what the men that delivered the goods were telling the rest of us when they came back. (Disparaging, I know.)

However, at the time we figured they were full of it! So it was not really something that details would come in handy on later type of thing.

I CAN tell you what I was told. Unfortunately I am afraid there is not much detail to it. It was easy to get drunk seals to talk when there were cook outs on the beach.

We were told that the government had begun to map the area’s off the coast of Cuba and had found this city. That it was huge, with machines that were still operating somehow.

They were mapping it out and studying it.

They did not want anyone to know about it until they had gotten all the information they could from it.

They had mentioned pyramids but not sphinx’s. They said that there were all kinds of buildings and roads were paved with stone.

Like I said earlier we asked them how they knew it was Atlantis…their reply was "It is written all over the place." Which to me made no sense!

They had not mentioned crosses or anything else. Just that it looked like this city went from coast to coast. They were worried that Castro would try and claim it.

There are other events that occurred that you may be able to check on and verify that occurred during this same time.

One was the USS Pegasus…an experimental ship that was also a hydroplaning type. It was very operational and from what we heard out maneuvered jets easily.

Another was the USS Boeing that blew her boilers while in dock. Another was during a defense exercise a Russian Sub came up in the bay. No one knew that it was even there until they surfaced.

These are just a few things. I am sorry I cannot remember more, however I hadn’t even thought about it in something like 23 years and I was reading your website.

Maybe a freedom of information act request will open the case for you. Now that you are aware the government has known about it for quite some time.

I am glad to know that it was not a bunch of bunk… now I owe that person an apology if I could only remember their name. LOL Don’t give up… if I know, there are others who know more!

And excerpts from the the final letter where she gives more info so that he can verify her credibilty -- SO HEADS UP MILITARY RESEARCHERS pile on and let's see how much we can match up:

Like I said, we had ships in and out all the time. I remember mention of the U.S.S. Pegasus… some kind of hydroplaning or hydrofoil type ship. In one of her test runs… during a defense exercise she easily out maneuvered our jets. Once again that is what I would consider rumor or hearsay… just like the Atlantis claim.

The U.S.S. Boeing did blow her boilers right through birthing compartments and up the stacks while in dock. She had to be totally re-outfitted before she could get underway.

The Russian Submarine that surfaced inside the bay while the base was undergoing defense exercises did occur. However I don’t think anyone would want that information out as it does not speak highly of our defenses. LOL

Here's the link to the page where the full text can be found at the BOTTOM

reply to post by TheWayISeeIt

Since no one is posting, I will sum up what my take-away from this is if true. Zelitsky unwittingly stumbled on a site the U.S. military had already secretly discovered. She told the world her findings, the images were v. compelling and the world media responded.

Immediately National Geographic announces to fund further exploration allowing for stone samples to be taken, more images, etc. and do a special broadcast about it. Then suddenly, and apparently for no reason, they call the whole thing off. She is caught off-guard and takes a few years to cobble together funding. In order to secure the funds she has to sign an NDA which compells her silence.

So the question is, who funded the October 2004 trip and why is total media black-out so important to them? I was only able to find the ONE announcement about the Oct. '04 expedition on the entire www. The ship departed out of Mexico and the press release came out of Mexico City, was v. brief and made a point of saying she is leading and intl. team of scientists.

Obviously Mexico would have a cultural interest in the site as the origin of the Olmecs is obscure, but the Mexican govt.'s interest are v. aligned with the US. Which leads me to speculate that perhaps it is a private individual? Or could the Mexican govt. angling through an individual to glean info and barter with the US about keeping it secret, as surely whoever it was has secured her silence.

And what about her parnter Iturralde? He was always mentioned with her after the discovery, but was not in the press anouncement... Is there anyone on here in Cuba who can go talk to him?

If anyone can add to this please do. I am out of my depth when it comes to researching military actions, re: the woman who corresponded with Daivd Wilcock (and if you've read this far I sincerly suggest you read her correspondence in full to really hear her 'voice' it strikes me as v. credible and genuine with details I did not excerpt).

This is one the GREATEST HISTORICAL DISCOVERY of our time and it has been SILENCED.

BTW, didn't I just see an annnoucement that Wilcock is getting a forum here? Perhaps the Mighty of ATS can inquire directly and see if he found anything more. Hmmm?

The BIGGEST problem with all this is:

It doesn't match ANYTHING that Plato said about Atlantis (except perhaps that Atlantis wasn't in Greece.) Since Plato is the ONLY source for the story, in order for the information to be correct it MUST match Plato's account.

There's no large continent there made up of 10 rings of land masses, there's no large central city, and there's no evidence that a culture from Bronze Age Cuba ever ruled over the Mediterranean area.

If anything, the "channelers" are trying to cover up the original Plato story.

Originally posted by Byrd
The BIGGEST problem with all this is:

It doesn't match ANYTHING that Plato said about Atlantis (except perhaps that Atlantis wasn't in Greece.) Since Plato is the ONLY source for the story, in order for the information to be correct it MUST match Plato's account.

There's no large continent there made up of 10 rings of land masses, there's no large central city, and there's no evidence that a culture from Bronze Age Cuba ever ruled over the Mediterranean area.

If anything, the "channelers" are trying to cover up the original Plato story.

was thinking the same thing but didnt want to post a re-hash post

didnt he also say somewhere along the 33 degree latitude or longitude

THis story had me very excited a few years back as well. I wondered what had become of the mission. I read in 2004-5 that Fidel was in on it too. Dunno if that is reliable. Sorry I do not remember the sources. I do remember that this story opened many doors and then seemed to die. I will be watching the developments.
It would be great to hear from Wilcock as to if the emails were a hoax. I don't know his site until now.
I will be staying tuned to this thread.
I'd star and flag this thread if I could work out how to do it....
Thanks.:

Hey Byrd - Psyched for my first thread encounter with you, was a long time lurker and always enjoyed watching you hand the OP's a$$ to them on a platter.

Anyway, I guess I should have put 'Atlantis' in quotes like that in the first place, or used the designated term of MEGA as it was, and is not, the point of the thread to debate Atlantis. I used the term it because it is has tended to be general nomenclature for pre-historic underwater cities, or evidence of, in that region.

Regardless, I would love to hear any thoughts or knowledge you have about the MEGA site. It is very compelling data evidencing a pre-historical society, and since I have been able to glean that you are a subject master when it comes to anthropology and culture, I wonder what your thoughts are?

PS - Who's talking about "channelers"? Nothing in the thread mentions anything about channelers....

Edits: For typos and PS

Edit:
[edit on 24-7-2008 by TheWayISeeIt]
[edit on 24-7-2008 by TheWayISeeIt]

[edit on 24-7-2008 by TheWayISeeIt]

It all sounds interesting but some of the claims seem too far fetched.
I highly doubt the part about "machines still working down in the depths" is credible. Plato's Critias didn't say anything about high tech machines. Unless the machines they found are working gears of the large door that let the ships into Atlantis.

This sounds like the first Stargate Atlantis episode.


Anyway, thanks for the research. I also believe there is more to come on this Cuban discovery. Someone just needs to fund this expedition. Someone please call Bill Gates. He has too much money and needs to put it to good use.

Hey Lost - Thanks for the post. The expedition was funded, it took place in October of 2004 and went uncommented on. If you look at my 3rd post I highlight that again and raise the question of who may be funding it and why.

As to 'machines working', the former soldier was just repeating what she had heard from fellow servicemen. All of what she realted was what she overheard and saw as she was working in supply.

It is not central to what she is communciating and she is v. clear about her experience, and was not, IMO, at all trying to set herself apart by being a 'source'. She comes off like an older woman recollecting her days as a military grunt and surprised that her experience is relateable.

Please, please read 3rd post again and click on the link to read her correspondence. I would love to know your thoughts after.

Originally posted by TheWayISeeItRegardless, I would love to hear any thoughts or knowledge you have about the MEGA site.

Until I see artifacts and bones, I'm reluctant to call any site an archaeological site. To date, no one has returned with any of these. Mikesingh's pictures really don't convince me.

Zelitsky wasn't that convincing, either. Yes, I agree she sounds sincere, but what I have never seen is any credentials that back up her claim of who she is and how she would know things. I think the reason that the expedition never "made" was that NatGeo came to the conclusion that her findings were either fraudulent or incorrect. If she'd found anything, every archaeologist in the world would be all over it...as would every hunter for the fabled Atlantis. Heck, NatGeo and History Channel (and Discovery) have backed some pretty wacky undertakings. It's not political sensitivity that made them drop this -- but I do think they dropped it because she couldn't convince them that she had found something.

Reading the "Shift of the Ages" chapter adds to the sense that someone is making things up. There are so many wrong things there:

One thing we found, the anthropologist found, was an American cross. It’s a Central American cross.

LMH: Two long ovals crossing each other the way a cross crosses?

PW: Yes, the way a cross crosses, only the shape is not a single line. It is a flattened circle.

I've seen a lot of Central American crosses and rock art and can say I've never seen that. So I'm suspicous of an "anthropologist" who makes the identification. Furthermore, anthropologists aren't the ones who dig up and identify artifacts -- it's archaeologists. That makes it doubly suspicious.

I did look at the picture of the rock art, and while those are genuine pieces of rock art, the symbols when seen in context are actually stars.

This one was a real eye-roller, too:

PZ: Yes, thank you. I was overhearing my husband and I don’t want you to make any bad mistakes mixing Greek, because it is not Greek. It has the same tendency, but it is not Greek. We don’t know what it is, and scientists are trying to decipher it.

LMH: Right. It has some resemblance in lettering to Greek, but is not Greek. And there are some like pictographs that would fall into the hieroglyphic category as well?

PZ: Yes, and symbols as well.

There are different signs, more like American nature, like they have found in Central America. Pyramids. And strong delineation of the structures which suggest pyramidal type, American pyramidal type, not Egyptian pyramidal type.

Hieroglyphs and letters? No. That's not believable. Furthermore, he's going on about "American pyramidal types" when the photo shown of her on the expedition shows a very clear "egyptian pyramidal type" with smooth sides and so forth. So the words contradict the pictures.

And where are those wonderful pictures? It's said they were given to the Cubans (a government that we are not on good terms with and haven't been on good terms with for about the last 60 years.) Did they just wade ashore and ask for directions to the University and hand over cameras and everything else? They kept no negatives for themselves? No prints? Nothing to show NatGeo?

And the "anonymous informant" at the bottom of the page who "confirms" her story with one about "cities with working machines" really lacks credibility. How was it that they knew they were "mapping Atlantis" and "it was all over the site" in 1980 -- when according to the 2004 expedition the language hasn't been decyphered? The two accounts don't match and I'm most skeptical of the "military informant" who "came forth" with "secret information." The pattern is similar to that of UFO hoaxers... a pseudo-insider in a military operaton who miraculously gets access to top secret info.

Bottom line -- where is the evidence?

Speaking as a scientist, if I had located something important, the first thing I do is get a GPS fix on it AND photos -- and the second thing I do is round up a bunch of colleagues who will come along on their own to go confirm this. There are folks in the academic community who will go to stupid lengths to get to a new find, and who will trek out into the back of nowhere (or dive there) to confirm or challenge a finding. When you're in the scientific community, there's a whole network of people who "know someone who knows someone" and you can collect an expert in nearly any field you like by talking to colleagues and mentors.

Instead, they have an unnamed anthropologist (wrong field!) and a Cuban Academy of Sciences (unlisted colleagues and associates.) If they really did have these, they'd name the names (the old saw "well, they can't name the Cubans because their government would kill them" won't fly... because the government would have already known about it and if they knew about it, they'd publish it immediately to show the rest of the world what a great and important place Cuba was.)

In looking at cultural evidence, ask "who gives the evidence", "what are their credentials (do they know anything about what they're looking at)",
"where is the evidence?", "has it been dated," and "who supports them?"

So far it's "just two people", "apparently none", "maybe the crocodiles et it?", "no" and "no one outside some Atlantis enthusists. They can't even get tv channels desperate for ratings interested in them."

PS - Who's talking about "channelers"? Nothing in the thread mentions anything about channelers....

Well, Atlantis was mentioned, but Plato never said anything about pyramids, etc. That was channeled info from the 1800's.

Brief comment:

As ex military and ex archaeology the last people you'd want on a dig site are untrained military. Although the British soldiers in Cyprus were occasionally helpful when I worked there.

Sounds like a lot of "UFO" style buzz, a lot of noise and nothing substantial.

Nice post TheWayISeeIt.

I hope to join in soon so that you are not alone against Byrd and Hanslune...both formidable debunkers.

Originally posted by Byrd
The BIGGEST problem with all this is:

It doesn't match ANYTHING that Plato said about Atlantis (except perhaps that Atlantis wasn't in Greece.) Since Plato is the ONLY source for the story, in order for the information to be correct it MUST match Plato's account.

A submerged lost city need have nothing to do with "Atlantis", much less with the stories of a Greek historian.

The OP uses the word "Atlantis" metaphorically, as we all do when we say "Atlantis discovered in Bolivia!" or "Atlantis discovered in Cyprus!" etc.

Originally posted by Byrd
If she'd found anything, every archaeologist in the world would be all over it...as would every hunter for the fabled Atlantis.

The thinking here is that there are no special-interest groups that deliberately withhold information for reasons of money and power.

This is, in my opinion, wrong.

If she'd found anything, every archaeologist in the world would be all over it...as would every hunter for the fabled Atlantis.

The thinking here is that there are no special-interest groups that deliberately withhold information for reasons of money and power.

This is, in my opinion, wrong.

Howdy Sky

What Byrd says is correct if anything has the slightest hint of being true people will be all over it - to debunk or become part of. In this case there was nothing.

What money or power would be involved in keeping the information about a sunken city from public knowledge? Information on such things tends to leak out at an alarming rate.

Just the act of trying to suppress it would generate enough interest to blow it sky high.

Sometimes the reports are just wrong. Like the reported sunken city in the bay of Cambay.


Additional info the two US ships mentioned in the article, Pegasus and Boeing, AFAIK the Boeing doesn't exist in those time periods (or any) and the Pegasus was a hydrofoil gunboat - a poor research or support vessel to say the least.

[edit on 25/7/08 by Hanslune]

Hi Byrd (and Hanslune) On PST and a deadline, but would like to quickly address a couple of the points and then, if necessary gather more info and will post that later.

In general, Byrd, I see that your postion as 'it is all nonsense' as it does not seem to qualify to your specific academic standards in how, or by whom, a discovery can be made.

Byrd says - Zelitsky wasn't that convincing, either. Yes, I agree she sounds sincere, but what I have never seen is any credentials that back up her claim of who she is and how she would know things.

Zelitsky is a professsed engineer and knows enough about what she does to have had an agreement with the Cuban government in the late 90's-2000's to search the deep seabed for sunken gallleons, with an eye towards oil exploration sites as well. She was capable enough in that context to have a ship funded, with the technology, that allowed her to explore depths up to 800 meters and make sonars scans.

While making soundings of the bottom using sidescan radar we realized that we had come upon a plain of thousands and thousands of meters covered with a very fine white sand, like silica, and which was somewhat boring.Thus we went like that for three or four days sweeping nothing else except that very fine white desert sand. Suddenly we saw in our maps the appearance of very symmetrical structures and as if they were man made.

Within this clean sand area of silica we had been totally scared, in a strange way, because we thought in the beginning that perhaps we had come across submarine facilities of the United States or another very great world-wide power that could construct blocks of structures in totally deserted areas.

We were first in investigating the bottom of this part of the sea because it is very deep. The depth ranges from 500 up to 3000 meters (1.8 miles) and until even today very few investigators possess the instruments that could fulfill this task.

She then took these results to Manuel A. Iturralde Vinent the Director of the National History Museum in Havana and a well-respected and published Geologist. GOOGLE HIM

Byrd says - I've seen a lot of Central American crosses and rock art and can say I've never seen that. So I'm suspicous of an "anthropologist" who makes the identification. Furthermore, anthropologists aren't the ones who dig up and identify artifacts -- it's archaeologists. That makes it doubly suspicious.

Iturralde Vienent comments when interviewed:

As a geologist I can say that there are high linear structures that could perfectly agree with streets and pyramids. These high structures have rectangular forms. They form squares and some elements that are repeated from one to another one.
Also there is a semi ellipsoid form at the center, there is a perfect square with a cross in the center.... that is to say, that are a series of structures for which I do not find a simple or natural explanation.

LINK

In parting, for the moment, I will say that the entire article I just linked to states out-of-the-gate that it is a poor translation and explains methods used. So I think there is the possibility that the academic institution you dismissed may be a victim of that. If Sky or anyone, wants to work on that, have at it. Cheers!

[edit on 25-7-2008 by TheWayISeeIt]

Originally posted by Hanslune

Just the act of trying to suppress it would generate enough interest to blow it sky high.

A sensational find like this would not only be connected to a lot of money for those who discover it but also a sudden restructering of our societal-beliefs.

In our current climate and society I find it rather improbable that such a find would be openly admitted and freely shared.

As for mikesinghs pictures of Cuban Underwater, the face seems to be nonsense, but the straight lines are indicators of streets or tracks.

reply to post by Hanslune


Yes, the USS Boeing did not sound right. Having said that there was a ship USS Pegasus that was made by Boeing and in Cuba in 1981. It was a hyrdofoil boat with a Harpoon Missile system also made by Boeing. It was involved in an accident near gitmo in 1981. LINK

The Harpoon Missile system could have conceivably been being tested as surface to air with jets trying to evade it hence her confused recollection, which she admittedly says is faulty and repeatedly says was based on hearsay which she paid no mind to at the time.

Like I said, we had ships in and out all the time. I remember mention of the U.S.S. Pegasus… some kind of hydroplaning or hydrofoil type ship. In one of her test runs… during a defense exercise she easily out maneuvered our jets. Once again that is what I would consider rumor or hearsay… just like the Atlantis claim.

reply to post by Byrd

Okay, I have more time to address more of your issues in better detail. In response to your statement:

Byrd says - In looking at cultural evidence, ask "who gives the evidence", "what are their credentials (do they know anything about what they're looking at)",

First let's get clear about Paulina Zelitsky's b.g. and resume

The person responsible for this discovery is the oceanographer and engineer Paulina Zelitsky, a Soviet expert - nationalized Canadian who during the cold war dedicated herself to the construction of secret submarine bases and who at the present time is employed on civil engineering and topography projects of the oceanic floor.

Several years ago,(1998) Zelitsky reached certain notoriety in the mass media when she located the resting place of the Battleship Maine, whose sinking ignited the Spanish-American War. The ship was located about five kilometers off the Coast of Havana at almost a thousand meters of depth. Zelitsky’s equipment was able to capture impressive video of the shipwreck location.

Now let's look at Iturralde Vinent. I don't think even you can question his academic credentials as his resume states that he is:

Curator and researcher. Ingeniero Geólogo, Doctor en Ciencias Geológicas, Profesor Titular del Instituto Superior Politécnico "José A. Echeverría". Geologist Engineer, Doctor of Geological Sciences, Professor of Higher Polytechnic Institute "Jose A. Echeverria." Académico Titular de Academic Holder la Academia Academy de Ciencias de Cuba, Especialista en Geología, Paleogeografía, Paleontología General y Carsología Ambiental de Cuba y del Caribe. Science of Cuba, Specialist Geology, Paleogeography, Paleontology and General Carsología Environmental Cuba and the Caribbean. Presidente de President of la Sociedad Cubana the Cuban Society de Geología. Geology.

LINK

Byrd says - Speaking as a scientist, if I had located something important, the first thing I do is get a GPS fix on it AND photos -- and the second thing I do is round up a bunch of colleagues who will come along on their own to go confirm this. There are folks in the academic community who will go to stupid lengths to get to a new find, and who will trek out into the back of nowhere (or dive there) to confirm or challenge a finding.

And per Iturralde, that's just what they did:

Five or six months after this news and the beginning of the investigations I was called to join the group as a geologist, because in the group everyone else was an archaeologist.

As to getting a 'GPS fix on it', there is no question that they know exactly whre the site is:

to the west of Cuba, in the Guanacabibes peninsula. Two kilometers towards the Yucatan channel near San Antonio. In the vicinity of San Antonio there is a mountain that arises from the bottom of the sea.

As to your comment:

So far it's "just two people", "apparently none", "maybe the crocodiles et it?", "no" and "no one outside some Atlantis enthusists. They can't even get tv channels desperate for ratings interested in them."

I think it's clear that is more than two (v. credible) people, I take Iturralde at his word when he says he was asking to join as the group was comprised of archaelolgists and they needed a Geologist. I cannot see a man of his stature having any upside in lying about this.

What we don't know is who else was involved becuase the whole thing has been SILIENCED. I did email Iturralde and asked him to clairify who the video data was sent to.

Howdy all

A sensational find like this would not only be connected to a lot of money for those who discover it but also a sudden restructering of our societal-beliefs.

Hans: why would you say that Sky, we have no idea what it is? What was the impact or the restructuring of societal-beliefs with the discovery of the Minoan, Sumer and Harrappa civilizations? Additionally what was the effect on the west of the discover of the new world? Not to disabling was it? Also since you already believe in whatever you think this is please tell us what effect it had on you? Were you restructured?

In our current climate and society I find it rather improbable that such a find would be openly admitted and freely shared.

Hans: I see nothing at all in the "climate and society" that would be effected by finding an unknown civilization - why would there be? Why in particular would the Cubans suppress this?

I would suggest you just contact the various people involved and ask them, instead of stewing over it.

Oh an a thought to ponder if there is a massive conspiracy why did National Geo not know about it? They've been around for 120 plus years -odd they weren't aware of it.

Other comment: the problem with the Z person is that she is not an archaeologist with the specialization necessary to analyze what she is seeing. There is a lack of data.

In my experience the first reports of these types of things are given great media coverage. The ending of them is given little or none. Dig a bit and you might find it. Check Spanish language publications.

[edit on 25/7/08 by Hanslune]