Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Atlantis


stevemagegod
 Share

Recommended Posts

You mean like acres of vitrified sand - green glass? It's there. It's in sheets, not zig zag like lightning strikes, no mounds to show a crater impact and it's 99% pure.

My previous article in The Canadian , in which I reflected upon my book Worlds Before Our Own, provoked dozens of inquiries from readers. Some stated that one of the cable channels -- some thought it was the History Channel; others, Discovery; still others, National Geographic -- had presented “proof” that the “fused green glass” to be found in various areas had been created by meteoric air blasts rather than prehistoric nuclear wars.

I remain open to many theories of Earth‘s prehistory. One of those individuals prompted to write to me, who had the advantage of having actually read Worlds Before Our Own, stated that I present “in a clear and lucid style, information concerning anomalous archeological finds without the hyperbole usually associated with this type of material.”

While patches of “fused green glass” may in certain instances have been caused by air blasts from meteors, I wonder if such a natural phenomenon could have created all twenty-eight fields of blackened and shattered stones that cover as many as 7000 miles each in western Arabia. The stones are densely grouped, as if they might be the remains of cities, sharp-edged, and burned black. Experts have decreed that they are not volcanic in origin, but appear to date from the period when Arabia was thought to be a lush and fruitful land that suddenly became scorched into an instant desert.

What we know today as the Sahara Desert was once a tropical region of heavy vegetation, abundant rainfall, and several large rivers. Scientists have discovered areas of the desert in which soils which once knew the cultivated influence of plow and farmer are now covered by a thin layer of sand. Researchers have also found an enormous reservoir of water below the parched desert area. The source of such a large deposit of water could only have been the heavy rains from the period of time before a fiery devastation consumed the lush vegetation of the area.

On December 25, 2007, it was confirmed by a French scientist that excavations at the area of Khamis Bani Sa’ad in Tehema district of Hodeidah province have yielded over a thousand rare archaeological pieces dating back to 300,000 B.C.E. Before a dramatic climate change, the inhabitants at that time had been fishermen and had domesticated a number of animals no longer to be found in the region, including a species of horse currently found only in Middle Asia.

The Red Chinese have conducted atomic tests near Lob Nor Lake in the Gobi Desert, which have left large patches of the area covered with vitreous sand. But the Gobi has a number of other areas of glassy sand which have been known for thousands of years.

Albion W. Hart, one of the first engineers to graduate from Massachusetts Institute of Technology, was assigned a project in the interior of Africa. While he and his men were traveling to an almost inaccessible region, they had first to cross a great expanse of desert. At the time, he was puzzled and quite unable to explain a large area of greenish glass which covered the sands as far as he could see.

"Later on during his life," wrote Margarethe Casson in Rocks and Minerals (No. 396, 1972), "he passed by the White Sands area after the first atomic explosion there, and he recognized the same type of silica fusion which he had seen fifty years earlier in the African desert."

In 1947, in the Euphrates valley of southern Iraq, where certain traditions place the Garden of Eden and where the ancient inhabitants of Sumer encountered the man-god Ea, exploratory digging unearthed a layer of fused, green glass. Archaeologists could not restrain themselves from noting the resemblance that the several-thousand-year-old fused glass bore to the desert floor at White Sands, New Mexico, after the first nuclear blasts in modem times had melted sand and rock.

http://www.marcjager.com/green-glass.html

Well using Brad Steiger as a source is never going to help you. Nor is ridiculous conjecture about nuclear explosions 25 million years ago which as a concept truly silly.

And a blast wave from a meteor strike could do it easily. If you want nuclear, show the material that would be left from an explosion not some moronic "we knows what is really happening from our bunker" piece of conjecture that is just copying of other similarly written rubbish.

Source quality is extremely important and your source is of no value nor does it even offer answers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course the person I quote is no use as far as you're concerned Mattshark - no one ever is. I had more information of the green glass of Libya when I was on Robert Sarmast's forum, but again that was my old computer that crashed. I've been looking for it this morning to no avail, hoping I'd find the information I had before. Have to go now, but will try again when I get back. And whether you like Brad Steriger or not, there IS sheets of vitrified sand in Libya, and the nuclear explosions weren't 25 million years ago.

Agonaces, you might want to check out Doug Fisher's work on verifying the old maps.

http://atlantisonline.smfforfree2.com/index.php/topic,18910.30/topicseen.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They located, mapped and confirmed the crater that resulted from the meteor that created this "Libyan Desert Glass" more than two years ago.

Documentation has already appeared in Science Journals (peer-reviewed) as well as made for TV documentaries (Nat Geo mag and television channel.)

But, of course, the fringers haven't uopdated their ridiculous websites to include this very pertinent information, have they?

Harte

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.larryjzimmerman.com/lost/coctrans.htm

Sounds positive to me.

The whole idea here is that if the Egyptians had cocaine, and the only place to get it was S. America, then it follows that they made it to S. America or someone from there made it to Egypt, therefore, S. America must be Atlantis. Except Atlantis sunk, although there are those who say only the temple city sunk, therefore the land should still be there.

There is only one little problem with the cocaine theory, which I mentionned in an earlier post :

Balabanova found cocaine in only one group of mummies, other than South American mummies, her very first batch from the Munich Museum. Their levels were much lower than in South American mummies. The Munich mummies are not a homogenous group either, ages and origins vary widely. No other Old World mummies have revealed cocaine. It would be a tad weird if these and only these mummies were exposed to the drug and then, totally by hazard, gathered in Munich. A simpler explanation is that they were exposed after being brought together at the museum. Could it be that maybe someone was "snorting a line" in the Munich Museum mummy room?

Finding the cocaine traces is one thing, I'm not contesting that part at all, but finding them on only one group of mummies, from the same museum, is highly suspicious in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They located, mapped and confirmed the crater that resulted from the meteor that created this "Libyan Desert Glass" more than two years ago.

Documentation has already appeared in Science Journals (peer-reviewed) as well as made for TV documentaries (Nat Geo mag and television channel.)

But, of course, the fringers haven't uopdated their ridiculous websites to include this very pertinent information, have they?

Harte

Then why didn't you post a link so we could up-date?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is only one little problem with the cocaine theory, which I mentionned in an earlier post :

Balabanova found cocaine in only one group of mummies, other than South American mummies, her very first batch from the Munich Museum. Their levels were much lower than in South American mummies. The Munich mummies are not a homogenous group either, ages and origins vary widely. No other Old World mummies have revealed cocaine. It would be a tad weird if these and only these mummies were exposed to the drug and then, totally by hazard, gathered in Munich. A simpler explanation is that they were exposed after being brought together at the museum. Could it be that maybe someone was "snorting a line" in the Munich Museum mummy room?

Finding the cocaine traces is one thing, I'm not contesting that part at all, but finding them on only one group of mummies, from the same museum, is highly suspicious in my opinion.

She tested tissue from 134 naturally preserved bodies from an excavated cemetery in the Sudan, once part of the Egyptian empire. Although from a later period, the bodies were still many centuries before Columbus discovered the Americas. About a third of them tested positive for nicotine and cocaine.

Balabanova was mystified by the presence of cocaine in Africa but thought she might have a way of explaining the nicotine. As well as Egypt and the Sudan, she tested bodies from China, Germany and Austria, spanning a period from 3700BC to 1100AD. A percentage of bodies from all these other regions also contained nicotine.

Egypt:89%

Sudan:90%

China:62.5%

Germany:34%

Austria 100%

"I continued to work on it because I wanted to be sure of my results, and after 3000 samples I, was absolutely certain that the tobacco plant was known in Europe and Africa long before Columbus."

Far from being solved, the mytery that began in Egypt was spreading. Balabanova was suggesting that an unknown type of tobacco had grown in Europe, Africa and Asia thousands of years ago. But every schoolchild knows that tobacco was discovered in the New World. She was asking for a substantial slice of botany and history to be completely rewritten. Would anyone back her up?

Dr Balabonova had told us that we might find the secret of the mysterious presence of nicotine and cocaine in Egyptan mummies in the ancient plants of Africa. Perhaps there had been drug plants which the Egyptians had used but had vanished along with their civilisation. This led to a much more basic question. Were the Egyptians, the great Pharaos and pyramid builders really users and abusers of drugs?

http://www.larryjzimmerman.com/lost/coctrans.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

checkmate, gin and yahtzee.

Not so fast. smoking-marijuana-031.gif

Let's not get our cannabis in a knot just yet. I've e-mailed this Christian Koerberl to ask him a few questions. I think what he says sounds kind of weak. We're talking 6400 sq. km. here, with a pure rate of 95-99%. Seems to me, a meteor would show more than miniscule traces in an overall area that large. But, since I'm no PhD on the subject, just figured I'd ask 814.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Far from being solved, the mytery that began in Egypt was spreading. Balabanova was suggesting that an unknown type of tobacco had grown in Europe, Africa and Asia thousands of years ago. But every schoolchild knows that tobacco was discovered in the New World. She was asking for a substantial slice of botany and history to be completely rewritten. Would anyone back her up?

Dr Balabonova had told us that we might find the secret of the mysterious presence of nicotine and cocaine in Egyptan mummies in the ancient plants of Africa. Perhaps there had been drug plants which the Egyptians had used but had vanished along with their civilisation. This led to a much more basic question. Were the Egyptians, the great Pharaos and pyramid builders really users and abusers of drugs?

All of which should have shot the "cocaine and nicotine found in Egyptian mummies came from South America" angle all to hell, as there is no evidence that this is true. Especially considering that both can be found in various concentrations amongst Old World plants. Even if true that it wasn't due to modern contamination, the real question would be how either was used and whether it was during the life of the individual or post-mortem, and in what concentrations.

cormac

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All of which should have shot the "cocaine and nicotine found in Egyptian mummies came from South America" angle all to hell, as there is no evidence that this is true. Especially considering that both can be found in various concentrations amongst Old World plants. Even if true that it wasn't due to modern contamination, the real question would be how either was used and whether it was during the life of the individual or post-mortem, and in what concentrations.

cormac

Post mortem would make sense because nicotine is a potent insecticide (in fact used as such- even in museums- until the invention of DDT (we should have stuck to nicotine in retrospective). I don't see why embalmed Egyptian bodies should have had a less problem with insects than others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cormac

Especially considering that both can be found in various concentrations amongst Old World plants. Even if true that it wasn't due to modern contamination, the real question would be how either was used and whether it was during the life of the individual or post-mortem, and in what concentrations.

First sentence. Apparently not to explain the high quantities she found in the mummies.

Second sentence - Aren't you forgetting something? She explicitly did the hair test to make sure the drugs were found IN the hair not ON it, which would show that the person DID consume the drugs, and obviously in large quantities. Therefore the conundrum.

So, anxious to ensure that her tests on the mummies were beyond reproach, she used this very technique - it's called the hair shaft test. Drugs and other substances consumed by humans get into the hair protein, where they stay for months, or after death - forever. Hair samples can be washed in alcohol and the washing solution itself then tested. If the testing solution is clear, but the hair tests positive, then the drug must be inside the hair shaft, which means the person consumed it during their lifetime. It's considered proof against contamination before or after death.

http://www.larryjzimmerman.com/lost/coctrans.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First sentence. Apparently not to explain the high quantities she found in the mummies.

Second sentence - Aren't you forgetting something? She explicitly did the hair test to make sure the drugs were found IN the hair not ON it, which would show that the person DID consume the drugs, and obviously in large quantities. Therefore the conundrum.

http://www.larryjzimmerman.com/lost/coctrans.htm

No, I'm not forgetting anything. From the Hall of Ma'at:

SB: The influence of environmental factors on the substances deposed in the different body tissues post-mortem has not yet been clarified. Ambient moisture, decomposition processes and embalming practice may play a role. We have demonstrated that in artificially mummified bodies from ancient Egypt the nicotine concentrations were significantly higher than those found in the naturally mummified bodies. This indicates that the alkaloid was, possibly, used post-mortem at the embalming procedure. In addition, in the artificially mummified bodies the levels of cotinine, the first nicotine metabolite, were also lower than those measured in naturally mummified bodies. This indicated that nicotine was used ante-mortem and metabolised to cotinine.

Which makes the claim contradictory, IMO.

SB: The presence of drugs in hair demonstrates its use ante-mortem. The drugs are transferred in the hair shafts approximately one month after use. The investigated artificially mummified Egyptians were unfortunately without hair.
SB: The results indicated that the drugs were used ante, or possibly, post-mortem, in religious rituals, as medication or at the embalming procedure and not as cocaine users.
Although there is good evidence to indicate that nicotine may have been identified in mummies following its application as an insecticide there is an alternative explanation which Balabanova favours. This is that the origin of the nicotine is the result of a post mortem application to the mummy, which may have occurred during the process of embalming. [29] In this study Balabanova compared the amounts of nicotine identified in artificially and naturally mummified bodies from ancient Egypt with the amounts found in modern-day humans. The highest nicotine concentrations were found in artificially mummified Egyptians (mean value = 1330ng/g) compared with 47ng/g in natural mummies, 77ng/g in European bronze age remains and 38ng/g in modern day accident victims. However the ratio of nicotine to its metabolised component cotinine indicates that the high concentrations of nicotine in artificial mummies is due to the embalming process. Artificially mummified bodies contain on average 3.4% cotinine compared to 40.3% in natural mummified bodies, 34.3% in European bronze age remains and 596% in modern day accident victims. This is indicative that the nicotine in the artificial mummies was not through its consumption whilst they were alive but through its post mortem application.

cormac

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello? Aren't we all here getting a bit of topic?

OK, I will give it a try: the Atlantians were drug addicts, created a lot of mayhem in ancient times, and the ancient Greeks kicked their a****, being the politically correct pricks they were.

rolleyes.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello? Aren't we all here getting a bit of topic?

OK, I will give it a try: the Atlantians were drug addicts, created a lot of mayhem in ancient times, and the ancient Greeks kicked their a****, being the politically correct pricks they were.

rolleyes.gif

Yeh...they kicked them with the help of the Egyptians... 10000 BC? roight!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then why didn't you post a link so we could up-date?

Qoais,

I apologize for that. I'm having trouble with my browser here at sc hool.

Sometimes it won't let me open a link in a new window and at the same time the cut and paste function just stops.

I see QM linked to a study showing the glass was meteoric in origin.

Here's a linkto some info on the crater.

There are more informative websites on this, I just picked this one because of the date (2006).

It's called the Kebira Crater. I'm sure if you google those two words you'll find all you need to know about the site.

Like I said, the National Geographic Channel has been showing a documentary on it.

Harte

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've heard of some city in the middle east that is supposedly irradiated.

Is it still "Some City" or has it been named and located at some point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've heard of some city in the middle east that is supposedly irradiated.

Is it still "Some City" or has it been named and located at some point?

Must be Dimona... the Israelis have a nuclear reactor there...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Harappa and Mohenjo Daro.

That would be the Indus Valley... a little off the mid. East.

ED; one should have a look ate this map if one needs an explanation for radioactivity in the Indus Valley

Edited by questionmark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That would be the Indus Valley... a little off the mid. East.

I know where they are located, but the one asking may not have known, exactly.

I just guessed what s/he really was looking for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nifty, I thought it was a made up reference, to be honest. Though this is a list of radiation involved plants, at least they are cities with radioactivity.

Edited by ShadowSot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems this "impact crater" hypothesis isn't completely accepted.

Kebira Crater

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Kebira Crater

Kebira Crater (Arabic: فوهة كبيرة‎) is the name that has recently been proposed for a circular topographic feature in the Sahara desert. The center of the feature lies in Libya, but the eastern edge extends into Egypt. Its discovery from satellite images was announced in March 2006 by researchers Dr. Farouk El-Baz and Dr. Eman Ghoneim from the Center for Remote Sensing at Boston University, who propose that it may be an eroded impact crater (astrobleme). They suggest that the crater's original appearance has been obscured by wind and water erosion over time. Detailed field work will be required in order to test the impact hypothesis.

[edit]Characteristics

The feature has two rings, the outer of which is 31 kilometres (19 mi) in diameter. If it is an impact crater, it is bigger than the largest confirmed impact crater in the region, the Oasis crater in Libya, which is approximately half the size, with a diameter of approximately 18 kilometres (11 mi). It is estimated that a meteorite large enough to have created a Kebira sized crater would have been roughly 1 kilometre (0.75 mi) in diameter. As of 2007, the date of the putative impact has not been determined, but it has been speculated that it may be related to the yellow-green silica glass fragments, known as "Libyan desert glass", that can be found across part of Egypt's Libyan Desert.

There have been skeptical reactions to the news reports because it is based on speculation about remote sensing data. The Impact Field Studies Group's Impact Database (formerly Suspected Earth Impact Sites, SEIS) list rates this as improbable for an impact origin. The catalog notes that the observed circular area was visible in Google Earth as having a flat top in the center, indicating similar geology to the surrounding area.[1] An impact site should be an isolated area of different geology from its surroundings.[2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kebira_Crater

Link to comment
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
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.