I had read this article from Pravda a few years back and haven't seen much about it since.


http://english.pravda.ru/main/2002/04/30/28149.html

hmm... something i always wondered was how could they possibly get the date right? what if some cave people drew this map on a 120 million year old rock? yes the rock would be 120 million years old, but the map would be only several thousand

That is really interesting! Thanks for sharing.

ah, very interesting...

You know pravda isn't a reliable source.

I beleive the source should be checked into even so. It's not the source, it's the actual evidence and proof that matters. But I understand what you mean. Once a lier, always a lier.

It's a hoax. Every mention of it anywhere is the same article cut and pasted. More importantly its not mentioned on any archeological site or university site.

^Thank you, it is a hoax. Which explains this:

Don't follow pravda, as you have been doing recently.

i have to agree pravda is not known for truth

although, just for reference, id like to know

is it possible to test the material used to "paint" the rock ?

i mean can you scrape a bit off and carbon date it ?

If you were refering to a pigmented coating then said pigment would have to organic for Carbon dating to work. Many pigments are mineral based though which leaves only referential dating available. You would have to figure where the mineral is available to the folks that made the paint and infer from collection techniques or trade possiblities with other cultures to draw a conclusion about a time frame. For most early paints the carrier of the pigment was usually organic (oils, fats) but after a few thousand of evaporation and contamination I'm not sure accurate of a measure you'd be able to get. On this matter I'm no expert though so I'd suggest looking it up if you want to be sure.

i think i get it

so if they used mud to paint with you would junt know how old the mud is which doesnt prove when it was used to paint with

but, if the used crushed berries, then they could tell when the berries grew

and of course berries dont last for ever

yeah police test ink for how recently its been used, dried etc.

I'll admit any information coming from Pravda must be looked at very carefully but University sites? Hell they accept government and corporation grants with many strings attached as to what they can say and research. I'll continue to get my information from many sources and try to filter out the crap myself.

capeo just said *not* on university sites. Unless...you already know this.

Yeah, you know those scientists always publishing hoaxes in their peer reviewed journals.

ET, that's the right track.
If they did use berries, depending on the substrate (whether it would contaminate the sample or even allow for removal), one may be able to apply carbon dating because the berries are organic.

Of course something that doesn't conform to stated "approved" history is not on a University site. Those cowards don't want to lose their funding.

Pravda=Crap
They had an article once that said miners had found the enterance to hell. Such a reliable source.

What is your definition of approved history?
If there is ever an update, a university site is apt to show it. But there is a difference between "approved" history and the crap that pravda comes up with.

Approved history comes from the tenured professors that used grant money to write books that establish themselves as the so called experts. They have a vested interest in blocking all research that would taint them in any way.

There are many examples like Indians were the first people in America. They won't even let researchers look at the body with europeon traits that was dug up and pre-dates any indian settlement.

How about the approved history that the Egyptians were the first complex society even though there is a lot of evidence that there were many civilzations before them.

Even modern history is censored. Take 9/11. even you must admit it was hard to believe that 4 big airliners could fly all over the east coast of the U.S. completely off course and no fighter jets were ever sent up. Now how did terrorist manage to do that?

Actually I've read a history book that clearly states that they were but again, they mention Christopher Columbus, Leif Ericson, etc, for kicks.

Actually approved history has it that those are the Sumerians, not the Egyptians.

"approved" historians, and archaelogical research funding for some reason goe nowhere near the numerous sunken temples, that will obviously pre-date any "known" civilization on this planet, its mostly left to private individuals to fund, and due to costs its mostly unfeasable. And in a strange twist of fate most rich people couldnt really care, so good luck getting a grant.

Mueseums are also guilty of these sort of kyboshing shenanigans. Lots of bad politics in those places, just becuase people are established historians at uni's or museums[who basicaly tow the party line, or their outa their] doesnt necesarily make them good honest people, like our one time bastion of truth Indiana.

"IT BELONGS IN A MUSEUM"

Yeah, all those nasty archeologists hiding proof of the many underwater temples dotting the ocean floor, they're just trying to pull the wool over our eyes. Give me a break.

In this day and age funding is going to many archeological and paleological digs that are testing fringe theories because Universities and Museums are in great competition for large discoveries. When I say fringe theories I mean theories that are outside of the mainstream but still stood up to peer review and warranted research not out of left field theories that propose ultra ancient civilzations that lack credible evidence.

The days of any one museum or university having a stranglehold on a given field of study are long gone since the British Museum's monopoly on Egyptology in the early 20th century.

I know I answered this yesterday with the Sumerians as the first civilization. But I don't think you know what the word "civilization" really means. What civilization came before the Sumerians, rota? Where is this huge amount of evidence?
Because I'm interested.

Don't worry, there is none.

Unless by civilizations he means small villages or roving bands of hunter/gatherers

It's common knownledge that any civilizations would have had cities near the sea. After the Ice age when the oceans rose these cities would be under water now. Like the city that they think is off Cuba. Others in the Indian ocean. Even Egypt has many complexes that have no hieroglyphics on them and were just given a date that put them into already established time periods without any proof.

Even the Spinx which has water errosion on it's sides instead of wind erosion is felt by some to be much older than the pyramids since water erosion could have only happened much earliar in time.

Where is your huge amount of evidence of these civilizations prior to the Sumerians?

Huh? That was my whole point. There are many areas that need to be funded and researched which will never happen to protect the status quo. control the purse strings and you control what will be researched.

rota you said there was a lot of evidence on it. So now you're backing off on your statement?
Are you sure you know what a civilization is?

No there is plenty of evidence out there but I can't lead a blind man around all day trying to explain it all.

In other words, no you don't have any surmounting evidence. And no you don't know what a civilization is.

No it means there is a lot of sources and a lot of reading involved. Now a lazy person such as yourself who only believes what you are told by the "proper" authorities, who have been proven time again to be spin meisters and liars seems like a complete waste of my time.

No, rota, the thing is you make these claims about evidence on a thread like this you have to have back it up. Otherwise no one will take you seriously rota. And you having pravda as resources very early on in the game, doesn't give you a lot of credibility. What's next? National Enquirer? <---- rhetorical question, just to let you know.

Are you still sniviling about Pravda? Get a grip already and wipe those tears from your chubby cheeks. I proved in the other thread one of their articles I posted was the truth.

No I'm discussing your credibility, or lack thereof. Don't say you have proof if you can't back it up.

ok

im lazy

i admit it

i usually avoid threads that have one post that is about a full page

rota, youre basing the age of this pic on what exactly ?

the age of the rock ?

if i found a moon rock, and painted a pic on it
could i tell you it was obviously a pic that came from the moon and expect you to believe me ?

Obviously they werent the first "civilization" on the planet, as sumer was founded by blacks from africa who had been on the go for 200,000[modern homo sapians i.e us] years prior to that. And much evidence does suggest they abandoned nomadic lifes and settled in much more of a community setting. We just dont have a firm make up of what their societys were like however, as basicaly everythign was communicated orally, very little records.

Yeah then right back at you, prove I'm wrong. If you can't prove it then shame on you, your credibility goes down the toilet as far as I'm concerned. You are the one claiming it's BS. All you've done is boast and berate, no facts.

I really did laugh out loud. You really look foolish. I wasn't the one who posted pravda links.
I'm being honest with you because of that no one is going to take you seriously. It's like posting National Enquirer and cheesy tabloids, rota. You had nothing to prove to begin with. And obviously, you don't know what a civilization is. You never answered that one. Just skirted it entirely.

Your the one who can't back up your claims that this is BS. I used Pravda to plonk and plunk you into the stone age and left what was left of your rotten corpse for the buzzard to clean up over in that other thread.

Did you come to this forum to be nasty to others or just to spread idiotic information?

It's well known that pravda is BS. Look through the archives as someone previously mentioned.

No......just stalking, ankle biting, bottomfeeders like you.

Isn't time for you to take your meds and go to bed. I think the nurses should be turning off your lights soon.

ROTA

once again i ask you

what is it you are basing your claim for the age of this "artifact" ?

What are yaping about? I haven't claimed any thing about the age of those things. The russian scientist did in the article.

He is not going to give you a straight answer on anything. He is more likely to give you a nasty insult.

Yeah listen to Erica, she knows what's going on.

thats your answer ?

this is your own thread and you dont care to discuss or defend it ?

the mods may as well close it

No....actually this subject sucks


Yeah once Erica highjacked it....well it hasn't been the same.

lmaoooooo

it's your thread