Joe Atlantis Posted March 30, 2012 Author #26 Share Posted March 30, 2012 THATS ENOUPH. Your choice wording needs to end. Mammoths was discussed and you never made a rebuttal. Your fault not anyone else's. Bring your evidence and stop insulting people. I"m not interested in insulting (sorry) I'm interested in awakinging. NO ONE has rebuttaled my mammoth statement, bring it on. This no joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aus Der Box Skeptisch Posted March 30, 2012 #27 Share Posted March 30, 2012 (edited) That's.... that's not at all what happened. Most were hunted to extinction by humans, but some survived to as late as 1700 B.C.E. north of Siberia, so I don't really see your point here. And as most have said, there is no evidence of Atlantis having ever existed. Did you miss this post Joe. Those colored lettersare a link to further information in regards to mammoths. This no joke. Edited March 30, 2012 by Aus Der Box Skeptisch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Atlantis Posted March 30, 2012 Author #28 Share Posted March 30, 2012 What you have isn't evidence. It's someones poor understanding of the facts and has been discussed here at UM before. Got anything else? cormac I got more then you can handle, for instance please explain why froozen Mammmoth parts continue to expose in Siberia during a supposed warm interglacial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aus Der Box Skeptisch Posted March 30, 2012 #29 Share Posted March 30, 2012 I got more then you can handle, for instance please explain why froozen Mammmoth parts continue to expose in Siberia during a supposed warm interglacial. What you wrote is self answering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orangepeaceful79 Posted March 30, 2012 #30 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Greetings, Is science covering up a pole shift that sunk Atlantis 10500 BC? Do you have any idea how hard it is to get scientists to agree on regular everyday mundane science things? Its like herding chickens! Trying to get them all or even a majority to agree to perpetrate a cover-up of something like this "pole-shift" you speak of would be a task of monumental proportions. What the hell does science care anyways? How would they benefit from covering up something like that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Atlantis Posted March 30, 2012 Author #31 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Did you miss this post Joe. Those colored lettersare a link to further information in regards to mammoths. This no joke. No miss, This is a lie. Let me put it this way, were you there to see these Mammoths living on an island in the Arctic Ocean. Didnt happen, C14 Not Reliable due to impacts. peace Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aus Der Box Skeptisch Posted March 30, 2012 #32 Share Posted March 30, 2012 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6284214.stm And http://www.google.com/url?q=http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woolly_mammoth%23Frozen_remains&usg=AFQjCNGzoS3Y9tXG70nW-7pKpIJjShFb_g&sa=X&ei=1hx1T6OAHMvbggeA96GMDw&ved=0CDIQygQwAg There's a start... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Atlantis Posted March 30, 2012 Author #33 Share Posted March 30, 2012 What you wrote is self answering. Someone has to stand up, since science wont Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aus Der Box Skeptisch Posted March 30, 2012 #34 Share Posted March 30, 2012 (edited) No miss, This is a lie. Let me put it this way, were you there to see these Mammoths living on an island in the Arctic Ocean. Didnt happen, C14 Not Reliable due to impacts. peace No miss, This is a lie. Let me put it this way, were you there to see these Mammoths living on an island in the Arctic Ocean. Didnt happen, C14 Not Reliable due to impacts. peace The burden is now on your shoulders to prove this is a lie. And you know very little about c14. Though I will let someone better versed fill you in. In the mean time.... nevermind. There is no discussion you seek. Edited March 30, 2012 by Aus Der Box Skeptisch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Atlantis Posted March 30, 2012 Author #35 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Do you have any idea how hard it is to get scientists to agree on regular everyday mundane science things? Its like herding chickens! Trying to get them all or even a majority to agree to perpetrate a cover-up of something like this "pole-shift" you speak of would be a task of monumental proportions. What the hell does science care anyways? How would they benefit from covering up something like that? Those running the show are responsible, scientists just stick thier head in the sand, you tell me why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aus Der Box Skeptisch Posted March 30, 2012 #36 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Someone has to stand up, since science wont What are you even talking about. You have lost the ability to be coherent with this reply Joe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aus Der Box Skeptisch Posted March 30, 2012 #37 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Those running the show are responsible, scientists just stick thier head in the sand, you tell me why? Lol first the conspiracy section is somewhere else. Second I didn't bring my tin foil hat so I'm not sure we should be discussing this right now. They may be monitoring us. Thirdly if its safe for you to answer this who are running the show? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Atlantis Posted March 30, 2012 Author #38 Share Posted March 30, 2012 The burden is now on your shoulders to prove this is a lie. And you know very little about c14. Though I will let someone better versed fill you in. In the mean time.... nevermind. There is no discussion you seek. C14 is dependent on atmosphere conditions, which was deeply altered 10500 BC by impacts. Wake up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Atlantis Posted March 30, 2012 Author #39 Share Posted March 30, 2012 What are you even talking about. You have lost the ability to be coherent with this reply Joe. Your the one lost Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orangepeaceful79 Posted March 30, 2012 #40 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Ok Joe...let me see if I understand you. I'm new to this particular forum so bear with me, as I might seem a little slow. Based on some C14 analysis that you haven't yet linked us to..or maybe you did and I missed it - anyway - based on this you are theorizing that there was a pole shift around 10500 BC that screwed everything up, sunk Atlantis, and that now "those running the show"(IE Illuminati, Reptiles in robes, etc..) have coerced the entire scientific community to collaborate on a giant hoax to cover it up? Is that an accurate synopsis? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Atlantis Posted March 30, 2012 Author #41 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Lol first the conspiracy section is somewhere else. Second I didn't bring my tin foil hat so I'm not sure we should be discussing this right now. They may be monitoring us. Thirdly if its safe for you to answer this who are running the show? The conspiracy section is RIGHT HERE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Atlantis Posted March 30, 2012 Author #42 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Ok Joe...let me see if I understand you. I'm new to this particular forum so bear with me, as I might seem a little slow. Based on some C14 analysis that you haven't yet linked us to..or maybe you did and I missed it - anyway - based on this you are theorizing that there was a pole shift around 10500 BC that screwed everything up, sunk Atlantis, and that now "those running the show"(IE Illuminati, Reptiles in robes, etc..) have coerced the entire scientific community to collaborate on a giant hoax to cover it up? Is that an accurate synopsis? Yes bud. C14 has been shown nonsense by Dr. Richard Firestone, A hero of mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orangepeaceful79 Posted March 30, 2012 #43 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Yes bud. C14 has been shown nonsense by Dr. Richard Firestone, A hero of mine. Can you link us to anything anywhere that can help you back up what you are saying? That would be a great help to me personally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cormac mac airt Posted March 30, 2012 #44 Share Posted March 30, 2012 interesting indeed, not. I brought my best evidence (Mammoths), which you choose to ignore (no surprise) dont be a brainwashed sheep The Mysterious Origins of Man: Atlantis, Mammoths, and Crustal Shift cormac Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Atlantis Posted March 30, 2012 Author #45 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Can you link us to anything anywhere that can help you back up what you are saying? That would be a great help to me personally. Hi, appreciate your post, Mr Hapgood is a good place to start. Pole at Hudson Bay 10500 BC but no Earth Crust Displacement. This planet stopped rotation and started up at a differant angle. I Know but no joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orangepeaceful79 Posted March 30, 2012 #46 Share Posted March 30, 2012 The Mysterious Origins of Man: Atlantis, Mammoths, and Crustal Shift cormac Hmmmm. So on one hand we have established scientific research. On the other we have a group of ninnies screaming that the scientists are lying because the Big Bad Wolf tells them to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orangepeaceful79 Posted March 30, 2012 #47 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Hi, appreciate your post, Mr Hapgood is a good place to start. Pole at Hudson Bay 10500 BC but no Earth Crust Displacement. This planet stopped rotation and started up at a differant angle. I Know but no joke. Okay so I googled " Pole at Hudson Bay 10500 BC but no Earth Crust Displacement." like you said and came up with the Wiki on it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pole_shift_hypothesis Not exactly conclusive with regards to your theory. It seems that the real "scientific" supports for what you are saying all were theories that were developed before plate techtonics were fully understood. What makes you believe in this so strongly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cormac mac airt Posted March 30, 2012 #48 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Hmmmm. So on one hand we have established scientific research. On the other we have a group of ninnies screaming that the scientists are lying because the Big Bad Wolf tells them to. What can I say. Bullscheise propagates like rabbits. cormac Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Atlantis Posted March 30, 2012 Author #49 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Okay so I googled " Pole at Hudson Bay 10500 BC but no Earth Crust Displacement." like you said and came up with the Wiki on it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pole_shift_hypothesis Not exactly conclusive with regards to your theory. It seems that the real "scientific" supports for what you are saying all were theories that were developed before plate techtonics were fully understood. What makes you believe in this so strongly? Well,I promise you that if you look at absolutely any core evidence, it will support a Hudson Bay pole. I challenge anyone to produce any evidence that contridicts this. Sadly a backwoodsman like me has to bring this forth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orangepeaceful79 Posted March 30, 2012 #50 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Well,I promise you that if you look at absolutely any core evidence, it will support a Hudson Bay pole. I challenge anyone to produce any evidence that contridicts this. Sadly a backwoodsman like me has to bring this forth. Where would someone find some "core evidence" like you speak of? Have you seen the core samples yourself or have you read about them/seen them online? I'd love to see photos and analysis. Perhaps you could help with the analysis. I think that you humble yourself unneccesarily - for a backwoodsman, you seem to know a lot about core samples and how to interpret them. That must count for something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts