|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
Was there a civilization that existed 13 000 years ago?
"Tedd" wrote in message ... "Jack" wrote in message m... "Robert J. Kolker" wrote in message ... Paul R. Mays wrote: Thats a start but theres a much longer list.... Where is solid measureable evidence to which a carbon dataing protocol can be applied? Speculations which support your speculations are not evidence. Quotations from ancient scraps are not evidence. Ancient writing could be bull****, fairytales or the truth. In the absence of solid evidence you have nothing. Bob Kolker someone from one of the science newsgroups ought to weigh in here with some authority, but isn't correlated carbon dating extremely accurate for this time period? edkookradian speculations are way off the mark here. carbon dating has a potential range back to somewhere around 60,000 years. however, dates over 50,000 are generally thrown out unless they have exceptionally strong stratagraphic context to support them. otherwise 40,000 is the general limit to consider with any great deal of accuracy. anything within 12-15,000 years the technique is quite accurate and quite cheep. making it the bread and butter method for paleo & archaic contexts. as the dates get older there is a greater range of error which is where you get the +/- X amount of years. as for weighing in here with some authority,... i think some of us are actually getting a kick out of watching how far off they can be with some of their claims and counter arguments. "2+2=3" "no, you're stupid! it equals 5!",... and so on. (or maybe they just like to argue) :-) Smart Quote: " 2+2=5 for large values of 2" But just to clarify.. I make no claims.. I state that some people of note have given specific evidence that supports the view of a larger civilization than what the present historical record indicate.. I'm have never mentioned the Atlantis myths, or the same flood myths of biblical context. Yes there were great floods.. Not one will argue that the ocean was 400 to 600 feet lower than today during the period in question... I don't think there's much argument that when the primary ice sheets receded the water held as ice Flooded vast areas that would have been high and dry lands... Not my claims.. there is evidence in abundance... from the Bad Lands that were formed from an ice dam break to giant rocks moved hundreds of miles from the flows. All I'm saying is there is a lot of evidence .... is it absolute proof... nope... in large part because we have a model that precludes the possibility and will make even very good evidence suspect for a long time until further evidence is found that answers some of the questions raised by the writers and researches I posted links for... I'm just pointing out that some people want others to do all the thinking and foot work while all they can do is rant without even looking at evidence provided because they didn't get a committee to tell them the evidence is OK... |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
Was there a civilization that existed 13 000 years ago?
Paul R. Mays wrote: I gave you links to the evidence that a great number of people agrees has merit... You do your own home work... I read every one. There is evidence of very old human habitations which are now under water. So what? Does that make them Atlantis? The most solid discoveries of the bunch offer no proof whatsoever of Atlantis or Lemura or Mu. No evidence of advanced technologies in ancient times. No Atlantean anti-gravity machines. I keep asking you where is the beef, and you keep showing me the location of the baloney. I have a rule. If a speculation sound the least like Von Danikken, reject it out of hand. Even Von D. admits he was a bull**** artist. I have another rule. Anything thing like Velikovsky proof that Venus made the sun stand still for Joshua is automatically laughed out of court. Velikovsky was a crackpot and a crank, plain and simple. So what does that leave? Legitimate archeologists who do not make fantastical claims about their findings. Bob Kolker |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
Was there a civilization that existed 13 000 years ago?
"Robert J. Kolker" wrote in message ... Paul R. Mays wrote: http://www.guardians.net/hawass/remnants.htm http://www.grahamhancock.com/news/index.php http://www.grahamhancock.com/library/bookshop.php http://www.macon.com/mld/macon/news/nation/2962443.htm http://archives.mundoacuatico.com/oc...iousstones.pdf http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...kencities.html http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/1923794.stm http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...glance&s=books http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/...in522626.shtml http://www.chinapost.com.tw/detail.asp?ID=32604&GRP=A http://www.morien-institute.org/yonaguni.html http://www.atlantisrising.com/issue1...apanunder.html I looked at them all. I am underwhelmed. Aside from some signs of habitations that have been submerged, what can you say about the people who used to live there? Nothing specific. Nothing definite. In short you have evidence of human habitations that have been flood by rising seas. So what? When they find Venice underwater 10,000 years from now, will they say Venice is Atlantis? Bob Kolker The point, O' intelligent one, is that if there are building at 400 to 600 feet under the sea the only time that spot would have been a place to spend your summer vacation was during the last ice age... I said nothing about Atlantis , which I regard as myth based on the verbal histories past down from the period of retreat... Noticed I said IF... The jury is out at this time.. But the evidence is there for your mind to ponder... soon as your committee says its ok to read it.. Go to the Library and check out the whole books I sent you the links for.. there's massive physical evidence... you just glanced and come up with building 10 k years old "(When they find Venice underwater 10,000 years from now, ) " add another 5 and you are almost there in your conceptualizing... Read, Study, research the subject that has been under study for a long time then make up your mind.. |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
Was there a civilization that existed 13 000 years ago?
"Robert J. Kolker" wrote in message ... Tedd wrote: as for weighing in here with some authority,... i think some of us are actually getting a kick out of watching how far off they can be with some of their claims and counter arguments. "2+2=3" "no, you're stupid! it equals 5!",... and so on. (or maybe they just like to argue) :-) How about ? + ? = ? therefore Atlantis exists? Asking for hard evidence is very reasonable. The more outrageous the claim, the better should be the evidence that supports it. The world is filled with assholes who see Atlantis in every "mysterious" archeologic al discovery. So far I have seen Atlantis near Japan, near Cuba, near Egypt. Where else will Atlantis be next year? Bob Kolker Atlantis is myth.. a story told and placed on parchment long ago.. I'm not speaking of anything to do with the mythological Atlantis... I speaking only of the documented physical evidence that says something happened in the 15 to 20 k ago time frame that seems to point to a larger population and a global civilization that was reduced to a few thousand scattered individuals around 70 k ago and rebounded somewhat till around 20 k ago when it was reduced again and the ice retreated. The DNA bottle neck points to that and many of the finds we are now coming across point to it.. If you just read a few of the books and check the evidence provided yourself and actually Think about it you might see what the buzz is about in Cuba.. Not Atlantis... Heck we are finding new lost cities all the time and they are recent , just a couple k old, but we had no idea of some of them until we used sat's to look a bit.. Just remember.. just 1 little man made varifable building at 400 feet is proof that there "Was a civilization that existed 13 000 years ago" which was the topic... no Atlantis mentioned.. |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
Was there a civilization that existed 13 000 years ago?
"Tedd" wrote in message ... "Robert J. Kolker" wrote in message ... snip So what? When they find Venice underwater 10,000 years from now, will they say Venice is Atlantis? Bob Kolker depends on which of three approaches they subscribe to; 1.) prove it! prove it! prove it! i want evidence! i want evidence! prove it! 2.) sorry, the idea doesnt fit with the evidence of what we do know. and 3.) wont say a word, just sit back and laugh that someone is actually arguing about it. i fall somewhere between 2. and 3. which 1. are you? 4. ) I found a city under water that's 10 k years old and I don't know what it is yet but its worth studying to see if I can find out.... I'm solidly on 4..... |
#76
|
|||
|
|||
Was there a civilization that existed 13 000 years ago?
On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 16:56:59 -0600, "Carl R. Osterwald"
wrote in alt.fan.art-bell: And if they had made stuff from steel, after this time you would find iron oxide dust scattered over miles of lands by moving mile thick sheets of ice.... HUGE POOLS OF MOLTEN STEEL!! BWAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!! -- V.G. "People are more violently opposed to fur than leather, because it is easier to harrass rich women than it is motorcycle gangs." - Bumper Sticker (This sig file contains not less than 80% recycled SPAM) Sarcasm is my sword, Apathy is my shield. |
#77
|
|||
|
|||
Was there a civilization that existed 13 000 years ago?
"Robert J. Kolker" wrote in message ... Paul R. Mays wrote: I gave you links to the evidence that a great number of people agrees has merit... You do your own home work... I read every one. There is evidence of very old human habitations which are now under water. So what? Does that make them Atlantis? Read the subject line 3 times and repeat.. atlantis is myth, atlantis is myth, atlantis is myth... The most solid discoveries of the bunch offer no proof whatsoever of Atlantis or Lemura or Mu. No evidence of advanced technologies in ancient times. No Atlantean anti-gravity machines. Who the **** said anything about any of that crap... I keep asking you where is the beef, and you keep showing me the location of the baloney. You read very poorly don't you... Go to the big building with all the books and read the details .... the web is not a place for study hall.. I gave you a list of books that provide many, many forms of evidence.. not for super human anti grav crap.. but for evidence of a civilization that predates what we have held as fact .. Not whizz bang advanced technology or glow in the dark magic... evidence that many think is valid of a global civilization that predates what we have come to consider history... I have a rule. If a speculation sound the least like Von Danikken, reject it out of hand. Even Von D. admits he was a bull**** artist. I have another rule. Anything thing like Velikovsky proof that Venus made the sun stand still for Joshua is automatically laughed out of court. Velikovsky was a crackpot and a crank, plain and simple. So what does that leave? Legitimate archeologists who do not make fantastical claims about their findings. I remember reading about a fantastic claim that the earth was round at one time... then some idiot made the claim that the earth actually orbited the sun... those fools... oh yea... they were right after all... Bob Kolker |
#78
|
|||
|
|||
Was there a civilization that existed 13 000 years ago?
"Paul R. Mays" wrote in message
... "Robert J. Kolker" wrote in message ... Paul R. Mays wrote: Cities under a few hundred feet of water and 90 or so feet of ocean debris can wipe a few traces.. and how much of a trace would you say a 200 foot tall stone building would leave... after being scraped over by a couple miles of ice.... for a 1000 years or so... You have not produced the means to distinguish between no such city ever, and a city wiped clean. In the absence of evidence you have not a square yard to stand on. All you offer us if feeble speculations not backed up by anything other than your foolish fantisizing. Bob Kolker I'm not the expert and I make no claims.. I have read and considered many areas of studies and I have found reasonable evidence provided by many writers that actually got off their asses ( unlike you) and researched the possibilities... Just because you have a limited mental ability to comprehend evidence presented by many well informed and respected researchers does not mean that a simple layman as I would waste my time repeating the writings of those that have spent their lives actually doing the research in order to spoon feed your knowledge void. http://www.guardians.net/hawass/remnants.htm http://www.grahamhancock.com/news/index.php http://www.grahamhancock.com/library/bookshop.php http://www.macon.com/mld/macon/news/nation/2962443.htm http://archives.mundoacuatico.com/oc...iousstones.pdf http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...kencities.html http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/1923794.stm http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...glance&s=books http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/...in522626.shtml http://www.chinapost.com.tw/detail.asp?ID=32604&GRP=A http://www.morien-institute.org/yonaguni.html http://www.atlantisrising.com/issue1...apanunder.html That's a start but there's a much longer list.... Paul, Do you really suggest that the above list are the 'references' you are using? You do not have a clue about providing references in an orderly and meaningful way, do you? Most of the items are crap, already shown to be wrong. Several are links to on-line bookstores, not to information that can be reviewed. One, a CBS news site, gets very wrong the date at which the Aztecs first learned about Teotihuacan; and is, in any case, a journalistic work (as are most of the rest of your "references"), not scientific work. You might be posting from alt.fan.art-bell; I don't know. But the other three groups you're cross-posting to are sci. groups, and in science, evidence is presented carefully, is discussed and debated in a scientific way, and is not conducted via dueling news stories. Tom McDonald remove 'nohormel' to reply |
#79
|
|||
|
|||
Was there a civilization that existed 13 000 years ago?
"Thomas McDonald" wrote in message ... "Paul R. Mays" wrote in message ... "Robert J. Kolker" wrote in message ... Paul R. Mays wrote: Cities under a few hundred feet of water and 90 or so feet of ocean debris can wipe a few traces.. and how much of a trace would you say a 200 foot tall stone building would leave... after being scraped over by a couple miles of ice.... for a 1000 years or so... You have not produced the means to distinguish between no such city ever, and a city wiped clean. In the absence of evidence you have not a square yard to stand on. All you offer us if feeble speculations not backed up by anything other than your foolish fantasizing. Bob Kolker I'm not the expert and I make no claims.. I have read and considered many areas of studies and I have found reasonable evidence provided by many writers that actually got off their asses ( unlike you) and researched the possibilities... Just because you have a limited mental ability to comprehend evidence presented by many well informed and respected researchers does not mean that a simple layman as I would waste my time repeating the writings of those that have spent their lives actually doing the research in order to spoon feed your knowledge void. http://www.guardians.net/hawass/remnants.htm http://www.grahamhancock.com/news/index.php http://www.grahamhancock.com/library/bookshop.php http://www.macon.com/mld/macon/news/nation/2962443.htm http://archives.mundoacuatico.com/oc...iousstones.pdf http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...kencities.html http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/1923794.stm http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...glance&s=books http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/...in522626.shtml http://www.chinapost.com.tw/detail.asp?ID=32604&GRP=A http://www.morien-institute.org/yonaguni.html http://www.atlantisrising.com/issue1...apanunder.html That's a start but there's a much longer list.... Paul, Do you really suggest that the above list are the 'references' you are using? You do not have a clue about providing references in an orderly and meaningful way, do you? Most of the items are crap, already shown to be wrong. Several are links to on-line bookstores, not to information that can be reviewed. One, a CBS news site, gets very wrong the date at which the Aztecs first learned about Teotihuacán; and is, in any case, a journalistic work (as are most of the rest of your "references"), not scientific work. You might be posting from alt.fan.art-bell; I don't know. But the other three groups you're cross-posting to are sci. groups, and in science, evidence is presented carefully, is discussed and debated in a scientific way, and is not conducted via dueling news stories. Maybe in a nice class room somewhere but on a few newsgroups on the internet where the likes of TJ, Smart, Spacey and others banter about, I think I might just be allowed to do and say pretty much what ever the **** I want to ... and say it in any way I wish.. When the time comes that I wish to have a peer review of some aspect of my own postulates I will take the time to quote from the books, provide an out line, bibliography, organized reference lists etc.. Till then I'll just say go to the big building in your town that has all those dusty old paper things with all the letters printed in them.... They use to be called books... and there's a lot of them and many have some neat stuff..... Tom McDonald remove 'nohormel' to reply I'm not writing a dissertation for peer review folks.... I could sit down and go through the many books on the subject ( I really hope you guys don't really rely on the internet as your primary information source) then individually post a series of supporting links and a complete bibliography of all reference material... But I really don't care that much... If you carefully read what I have written through this thread you might notice that I said these are not my suggestions of evidence... These are positions made by many writers, some I fully agree read the evidence and make statements that are far fetched... But they point to Evidence..... not proof... and many of the writers in the book listing pages have many pages of calculations, physical objects and a host of very specific pieces of evidence. To suggest that we all should give up reading the books, and just stick to getting your knowledge base on the internet, is a good way to examine the presented evidence is a whole new thread... The links I put up were just a quick capture and were not a follow up to some claim of proof of anything.. Just a few bits with some names of books that you can actually read and get some very detailed pieces of presented evidence.. some of the writers may from time to time make wild ass claims as to what they think the evidence means but it does not make the evidence they provide not have value.. If I found a buried bag with a 3 pound diamond in it and claim that it must have been left by aliens, that is a foolish claim, but the diamond a very interesting find worthy of further study all by itself... I'll just ask you just one thing and see if you will actually do your own leg work and see if there's something a bit weird... Map all the pyramids around Gaza ..... Match the positions of the 7 stars of the Orion constellation on any star charting software .... Rotate the constellation backward in time until the positions of all 7 of the Gaza pyramids match the positions of the 7 stars in the constellation... Thinks that's bunk don't ya... Ya think its just some wild claim... Try it.... Then think about our present model... |
#80
|
|||
|
|||
Was there a civilization that existed 13 000 years ago?
"Paul R. Mays" wrote in message ...
All I'm saying is there is a lot of evidence .... is it absolute proof... nope... in large part because we have a model that precludes the possibility how convenient. not only does your theory defy proof or disproof (which makes it a nontheory, even on the art bell newsgroup), you flat out ignore contrary evidence that falsifies your claim. and will make even very good evidence suspect for a long time until further evidence is found that answers some of the questions raised by the writers and researches I posted links for... great idea. shift the burden of proof to people who disagree with your claims, demand that they disprove your speculation. I'm just pointing out that some people want others to do all the thinking and foot work while all they can do is rant without even looking at evidence provided because they didn't get a committee to tell them the evidence is OK... you're just crying Konspiracy, a standard tactic of kooks everywhere. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Moon key to space future? | James White | Policy | 90 | January 6th 04 05:29 PM |
Incontrovertible Evidence | Cash | Astronomy Misc | 1 | August 24th 03 07:22 PM |
A dialogue between Mr. Big BANG and Mr. Steady STATE | Marcel Luttgens | Astronomy Misc | 12 | August 6th 03 06:15 AM |
Earth's birth date turned back: Formed earlier than believed (Forwarded) | Andrew Yee | Astronomy Misc | 0 | July 17th 03 11:28 PM |
oldest planet 13 billion years old in M-4 | Archimedes Plutonium | Astronomy Misc | 5 | July 14th 03 06:22 PM |