Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
Harsh86_Patel

Underwater civilisation predating last iceage

98 posts in this topic

Graham hancock has worked extensively to explore underwater ruins of ancient civilisations.What implications does this have on accepted chronology of human civilisation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is Graham Hancock's qualification??

You tell me!

Does he have a background in Archaeology or History or palaentology or anthropology etc?

Nada. Nil. Zilch.

All he has is a Degree in Journalism and an over imaginative brain.

Read any of his books.

Does he ever state anything with finality?

Never.

lets discuss.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly but i am not talking about his conclusions but am actually talking about what his various documentaries are putting in front of us.The various underwater sites he talks about.Am looking for someone who can tell me more about them.What are those ruins,definately look man made to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Use the "search" function here.

Harte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

weird stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Use the "search" function here.

Harte

Then he has a lot of catching up to do, lol.

I tried it sec ago and I got a 1000 hits, 40 pages, 25 posts per page.

And I think that is just the max number of hits that can be displayed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the advice Harte.

But then again whats the point of discussing and blogging when one can just search on the net.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But then again whats the point of discussing and blogging when one can just search on the net.

The flip side of this is, what is the point of beating a dead horse? And he didn't say search the net, he said search here at UM.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry am not aware that underwater ruins which predate the last ice age can ever be a dead horse. Other then advice can someone provide more information on these sites.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Sorry am not aware that underwater ruins which predate the last ice age can ever be a dead horse. Other then advice can someone provide more information on these sites.

There are no underwater ruins that pre-date the last glacial period, which started c.120,000 BP.

cormac

Edited by cormac mac airt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ohk i should rephrase any information or explanations on the ruins of these civilization which are in areas presently underwater.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is exactly why these ruins baffle me.As their mere presence can go against a lot of things held as facts by mainstream historians who more then often deny that there was any global deluge that sunk many coastal civilizations around the world at any given point of time.What could be these ruins in places which were last above the sea before thousands of years. Is this just a hoax,any alternative explanations.......thats what i am looking for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Concerning Dwarka, one can see many of the flaws with the claim of it's being c.12,000 years old here:

http://www.frontlineonnet.com/fl1905/19050670.htm

The only thing Hancock is good for is sensationalizing things he doesn't know a damn thing about.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

There are lots of 'underwater civilisations'...

Fortunately they did not start of underwater, unfortunately becoming 'underwater civilisations' is what ended their ability to support human life.

Edited by Junior Chubb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About the structures recorded by the sonar, Raman says: "There seem to be some formations. A platform of some sort and something like a tank, though I think the pillars that are seen look like natural formations."

A quote from the article that you linked cormac, also if any man made structure exists there it definitely has to be older then the time the whole place sank.

http://www.archaeologyonline.net/artifacts/cambay.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The supposed disc-shaped structure looks a little like the one in the Baltic sea. Not sure everything they've found are structures. They should be able to find some better evidence than simply stones IMO before getting all exited.

Edited by Immunetoplacebo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The results of the analysis clearly reveal that there is one to one match between the archaeological material and Cambay bed sediments.

All that that means is that the material tested originates from that geographical area. And we know how these samples were acquired, by core sampling and by dredging. The latter of which is not part of the acceptable archaeological protocol at any underwater site.

The ternary and Binary plots of both the materials show clustering of all samples in one place indicating the samples are of same host chemistry and are insitu i.e. that the archaeological material are not transported but are made from locally available material only.

Evidently the writer of this article doesn’t actually know what “insitu” means, to whit:

Adj.

1. in-situ - being in the original position; not having been moved; "the archeologists could date the vase because it was in-situ"; "an in-situ investigator"

Unmoved, unaltered, unchanged - remaining in an original state; "persisting unaltered through time"

http://www.thefreedi...ary.com/in-situ

All these indicate that they are genuine artifacts, made from locally available material and are insitu.

Again, the writer clearly doesn’t understand what "insitu" means.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as anyone with any expertise can tell, there is actually nothing remarkable there.

Read this.

With regard to the supposed "pottery" dredged up out of the ocean sediment there, read this to see why it's not pottery at all.

A piece of wood was dredged up out of the ocean floor and dated to 7500 BC.

In an area that receives the drainage from almost a third of the Indian subcontinent, are we to be astonished that there may be some old pieces of wood buried under the silt?

Sorry, Patel, but it seems there's nothing there.

Harte

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are stories constantly about underwater ruins off India and in the Atlantic, and I've never seen one that was an authentic ruined city of stone. There are several ruins off the coasts of Greece,the MIddle East and Egypt that had slowly been covered by rising waters over the last 3000 years, but those are not mysterious. There are also underwater archeological sites from before and during the ice age, but these were small settlements or camps, AFAIK.

The more popular stories are...

- Yonaguni - a underwater rock... maybe man carved a little, but no evidence of a settlement has been found, and it is not a structure.

- Dwarka in the Bay of Cambray - No real evidence shows this is a city. Bits of wood, stone, pottery and maybe some other things were sent off for testing in 2004 and nothing about this was ever updated. Seemingly the evidence probably shows this is not a city, but a Reef, with debris from the neighboring coastal communities, or the thousands of fishing boats that trawl the area, being found among the rocks/corals.

- Atlantis off Cuba - Only known from aerial photos. Totally shows anchor drag marks and rocks poking out of the sand.

- Pyramids in the Carribean - Found once and never found again, by anyone, even with bottom reading sonar and aerial photographs and treasure hunters boating all over the Carribean all the time.

- Bimini Road in Bahamas - Corals....

I've just never seen any good evidence to show any of these are true.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In an area that receives the drainage from almost a third of the Indian subcontinent, are we to be astonished that there may be some old pieces of wood buried under the silt?

Exactly. With wave action and various drainages into that area, it would be remarkable if remnants of previous civilizations going back 4000 years were NOT found in the sediments off the coast.

And the dredging they did was not fine tuned or done with care. From what I've read, they only did so twice and both times basically just dragged the bottom and then examined what they found. If they found a glass coca-cola bottle, and a brass spearhead together, they obviously would toss aside the bottle and then say the spearhead is 3000 years old, so all things found were 3000 years old, conviently ignoring that modern trash is mixed in with the artifacts.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly. With wave action and various drainages into that area, it would be remarkable if remnants of previous civilizations going back 4000 years were NOT found in the sediments off the coast.

And the dredging they did was not fine tuned or done with care. From what I've read, they only did so twice and both times basically just dragged the bottom and then examined what they found. If they found a glass coca-cola bottle, and a brass spearhead together, they obviously would toss aside the bottle and then say the spearhead is 3000 years old, so all things found were 3000 years old, conviently ignoring that modern trash is mixed in with the artifacts.

The "cities" are located along popular sea-lanes in ancient times as far as I can tell. Lots of ships would have sunk in the area, spreading cargo all over the place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly. With wave action and various drainages into that area, it would be remarkable if remnants of previous civilizations going back 4000 years were NOT found in the sediments off the coast.

And the dredging they did was not fine tuned or done with care. From what I've read, they only did so twice and both times basically just dragged the bottom and then examined what they found. If they found a glass coca-cola bottle, and a brass spearhead together, they obviously would toss aside the bottle and then say the spearhead is 3000 years old, so all things found were 3000 years old, conviently ignoring that modern trash is mixed in with the artifacts.

Modern trash being mixed with old relics is not going to impact the radio carbon-dating of old relics. I understand that there can be an issue with dating the samples they found by dredging the sea-floor but what still surprises me is the man-made structures which resemble advanced cities,can this be refuted?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

As far as anyone with any expertise can tell, there is actually nothing remarkable there.

Read this.

With regard to the supposed "pottery" dredged up out of the ocean sediment there, read thisto see why it's not pottery at all.

A piece of wood was dredged up out of the ocean floor and dated to 7500 BC.

In an area that receives the drainage from almost a third of the Indian subcontinent, are we to be astonished that there may be some old pieces of wood buried under the silt?

Sorry, Patel, but it seems there's nothing there.

Harte

Not relying on the artifacts pulled out from the site but what are the man made structures under the sea which look like planned advanced cities.You have raised good amount of ambiguity regarding the dating of the artifacts dredged out but any comments on the structures that in the highest probability are there underwater in a location which was last above ground thousands of years ago.Not only in cambay but in many spots around the world around modern coastlines.

Btw- i am not claiming to have anything,would just like to know more about these findings

Edited by Harsh86_Patel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.