Submerged city in Pacific Ocean

[Asterix]

Searching the web I found some info and pics supposedly referring to a submerged city in the Pacific.

A mysterious building lies at the bottom of the Pacific Ocean.

Its colossal plazas once sparkled with the pageantry of a vanished people.

Where now fish and scuba divers glide over its ramparts,

priests, astronomers, sailors and kings

from a forgotten epoch once walked.

Before cataclysms of fire and flood engulfed this structure,

it may have been a sacred center of mankind's original homeland.

It may have been the Temple of Mu.

Site is here

Take a look and tell me what you think.

Also, does anyone have any more info about this submerged city?

[Mad Manfred]

Sounds like silliness to me.

BTW, where are the pics?

Edited December 4, 2004 by Mad Manfred

[Asterix]

Sounds like silliness to me.

BTW, where are the pics?

385167[/snapback]

Sounds kinda..fishy to me too.

Pics are in the "tour" section of the site.

Here starts the first one, and by clicking next you get to see the rest. Some of them are not pics actully; they are designs. But there are pics too.

[_hAiLO_]

Whao, those pics are cool. If they were a fraud, then who else could have built a city and submerged it? I'm sure no government in the world would want to spend money and hoax another Atlantis Phenomenon.

At what part of the Pacific were these buildings found?

Those buildings and that submerged city looks 100% authentic...I guess the only way to find out if it really is authentic of faked is to go down and see our selves?

[Asterix]

I found another site.

It's here

It says there that the temple is located near the south-western point of Japan's Ryukyu Islands. Structure is believed to be about 12,000 years old

[Mad Manfred]

"IMD Films", "Mu" and the "too detailed" photographs leads me to believe that this is for a movie?

Fishy

[Asterix]

this is for a movie?

Nah, I don't think so. I've found in the last half an hour quite many details in various sites.

Here's another

[dazdillinjah]

'The TEMPLE of MU' is MOST definitely REAL ... there has been an hour long documentary regarding this on both History & Discovery channels over the last year or so !!!!

To ME this formation is man made & this is IMHO only based only on what Ive seen from the doco .... the only trouble being that they got a highly esteemed archaological expert (cannot recall name) from the States to inspect it & he come to the conclusion that the structures were caused by entirely natural mechanisms ???

[Asterix]

I think it's more than obvious that these formations are man-made.. Just notice the edges and the corners..

[_hAiLO_]

I don't understand how they could be under teh ocean. Could it be that the land those temples are standing on once did not contain water? Or is it another Atlantis?

I agree with Asterix that they are man-made, but I also think that it could be another Atlantis. That city could have been above water before, or aliens dived down and created it themselves.

[Falco Rex]

One thing that nobody seems to have noticed is that while the close up photos and the ones with divers in them seem to be actual photographs; the distance shots are all computer created images..This makes it a bit hard to judge exactly how grand of a city this may have been. But I would certainly doubt it's on the scale of the legendary Mu or Lemuria.

..But..

Were an Empire to have vanished under the sea it's infinitely more likely to have happened in the geologically unstable Pacific instead of the Atlantic. Islands sink there in our own time; so it seems likely it could have happened in ancient times. So overall; I'd give a lot more creedence to the Mu legend than I ever would to Atlantis..

[Asterix]

Were an Empire to have vanished under the sea it's infinitely more likely to have happened in the geologically unstable Pacific instead of the Atlantic. Islands sink there in our own time;

385433[/snapback]

It's true that the Pacific is more unstable than the Atlantic, but that does not mean the Atlantic Ocean is a stable environment. Especially considering the mid-ocean ridge, and the constant changing in elevations etc, I think we can safely say that Atlantic Ocean is, too, a changing environment.

[TheQueenGalaxy]

I believe that this is the Lost city of Mu. What was once above, is now below the ocean. If the crust shifts so that it rises again, thern believe me, other things will go below the ocean. . . like California.

[The Caspian Hare]

Has a geologist or oceanographer looked at these formations and ruled out a natural origin?

[Asterix]

Has a geologist or oceanographer looked at these formations and ruled out a natural origin?

389780[/snapback]

To be honest I didn't take the time to read the full articles, but like I said before, it does look from the photographs (or some of them anyway) that such sharp corners can't be a natural formation...

[Diebytheflyguy]

Ya, heres a link to a thread that was started a loooooong time ago about this.

Source for photos.

Two of Japan's leading researchers on the sites are Kihachiro Aratake, who first discovered the Yonaguni site, and Prof. Masaaki Kimura, a marine geologist with the University of the Ryukyus in Okinawa. Prof.

Kimura has spent several years studying all eight sites, especially Yonaguni, which was found in 1985.

Kimura believes these are monuments made by man, left by an unknown civilization, perhaps from the Asian mainland, home of our oldest civilizations.

He reasons that if the five layers on the Yonaguni site had been carved by nature, you would find debris from the erosion to have collected around the site, but no rock fragments have yet been found.

He adds that there is what look like a road encircling the site as further indication it was used by man. He believes building this monument necessitated a high degree of technology, and some sort of machinery.

How to date these sites? A few possible scenarios have been suggested. The sites may have been submerged when sea levels rose at the end of the last Ice Age as the continental ice sheets melted.

Or, as Japan sits on the Ring of Fire, tectonic activity might have caused subsidence of the land. Or perhaps a combination of subsidence and inundation from rising sea levels, or some catastrophic event, dropped it, intact and upright, into the ocean.

Teruaki Ishii, a professor of geology at Tokyo University, believes the site is partly man-made, partly natural, and suggests a date of 8,000 B.C., contemporary to the ancient civilizations of Mesopotamia and the Indus Valley. Others have suggested a date of 12,000 years. Source

Edited December 8, 2004 by Diebytheflyguy

[Mad Manfred]

Okie dokie, I believe it.

So where exactly in the Pacific is this located? Couldn't be too far off shore...

[Diebytheflyguy]

The people who first found the structure were, I think, 20 miles off- shore, but this city in an article is to be spread 311 miles across the ocean. Thats huge, maybe too big?

Is there any new information on it?

Edited December 9, 2004 by Diebytheflyguy

[tupac amaru]

Having lived on Okinawa (largest island of the Ryukyus), I can verify that the whole area is very earthquake prone with small islands often subsiding or reappearing. I don't know about the 12,000 year figure, but Okinawa has been inhabited by a very advanced culture (bronze age or iron age) for a very long time. This is probably no more than a part of their earlier history. I wouldn't be surprized at a date of 1250 - 1300 BCE!

[Rush63]

The structures, if about 200ft. below sea level, were on dry land during the last ice age. The coastlines all over the world were lower 10,000 yrs. ago.

[koenig212003]

If you want to read about it you might want to pick up the book Underworld by Graham Hancock. Its has decent info. but keep in mind thats its pseudoscience.