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 -

Could industry be detected via geology?


Not Invented Here

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Thanos5150 said:

These are general types. The style in which they are fashioned, and sometimes their usage or region they are found, would classify their "industry". Oldowan, Acheulean, Mousterian, Soultrean, Aurignacian, etc-these are tool industries.  

My apologies if my attempt at tongue in cheek humor was misconstrued. I felt the last couple conveyed the sentiment. 

Edited by Jarocal
Piney hides evidence of giants in America
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jarocal said:

Piney hides evidence of giants in America

Hans and Swede made me. :unsure2:

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Piney said:

Hans and Swede made me. :unsure2:

Toe the line my friend or find out what Atlantean 'hand hash' is made of.

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

Toe the line my friend or find out what Atlantean 'hand hash' is made of.

:cry:

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/14/2020 at 11:06 AM, Piney said:

The contamination from various chemicals in plastic is on a planet-wide scale. It is even found in deep ocean water.

Strontium 90 from nuclear testing is another one. It was found in mammal's milk and soils worldwide. 

Strontium 90 has a half life of 28 years. This guy's talking about 400 - 500 million years ago.

Like the paper noted, there's not much exposed at the surface from that far back.

Harte

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/14/2020 at 5:50 PM, Gaden said:

The thing is, people seem to think that things disappear, but, nothing ever goes away. In the case of an industrialized city, everything would still exist. If a factory fell apart over the years, every molecule that made up that factory would still exist. You would have deposits of material entirely different from naturally occurring substances, You would have a mixture of iron, steel, (which does not occur naturally and would be easily detectable), copper, aluminum, concrete, just to name a few. Smelted iron, no matter how old, would look nothing like iron ore. The same is true about aluminum and copper. You would have concrete footings with steel "I" beams in them, If an office building were to collapse, all of these items would exist in their manufactured state, different from their naturally occurring state. In most cases, you would also have a very large deposit of gypsum (sheet rock), The copper wire used for electrical transmission would not look like a copper ore deposit. Add to this that all of these elements would be found in an amalgamated state, so different from naturally occurring ore veins, it would be obvious as to what it evidenced. All activity on this Earth is recorded in the ice at the poles, so, if there had been an industrialized civilization in the past, it would stick out like a sore thumb. The only way that I can think of to erase any of this evidence would be to liquefy the Earth's crust in a major volcanic occurrence the likes of witch happened only at the very beginning of Earth's history, if I recall correctly.

And then a 40 mile high glacier scrapes it all into the sea.

Harte

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Harte said:

And then a 40 mile high glacier scrapes it all into the sea.

Harte

That would be my luck, yeah. 

 But an industrialized civilization wouldn't be isolated. In the examples I gave above, any and all factories would be part of an infrastructure (as I know that you know, Harte). Each factory would be supported by other factories and shops, manufacturing parts and tools to support all of the machinery. You would have Power stations and water treatment plants. What would all of these plants and factories use as an energy source? Most probably coal and evidence of coal mining would show. And, again, evidence of coal burning would show up in the ice at our poles. "Well, Mr. smarty pants, what if they used gas, or solar power, huh, they wouldn't need coal."  Then you have the problem of not being able to make any solar cells, or batteries, or the machinery necessary to build drilling rigs. And, if we are talking 100 + million years ago, then, coal, oil and petroleum gas didn't exist. If the thought is that the Earth has undergone an endless cycle of life and life ending events, then we'd have to discount everything that scientists believe about the history of the Earth, the Sun, the Milky Way Galaxy, and the universe. When you look at a timeline of Earth from creation to no, it doesn't seem to me that there is any time for the development of an industrialized civilization.  The whole premise to makes no sense. We can say with certainty that life was on the Earth around 4 billion years ago, but we somehow missed an entire era? Dinosaurs ruled the Earth for how long? 150 million years or more? Man could not have evolved alongside them, besides, we have the KT boundary and no dinosaur fossils are found above it, and no human fossils are found below it. It seems to me that scientist have done a pretty good job developing the timeline of Earth's history.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Gaden said:

That would be my luck, yeah. 

 But an industrialized civilization wouldn't be isolated. In the examples I gave above, any and all factories would be part of an infrastructure (as I know that you know, Harte). Each factory would be supported by other factories and shops, manufacturing parts and tools to support all of the machinery. You would have Power stations and water treatment plants. What would all of these plants and factories use as an energy source? Most probably coal and evidence of coal mining would show. And, again, evidence of coal burning would show up in the ice at our poles. "Well, Mr. smarty pants, what if they used gas, or solar power, huh, they wouldn't need coal."  Then you have the problem of not being able to make any solar cells, or batteries, or the machinery necessary to build drilling rigs. And, if we are talking 100 + million years ago, then, coal, oil and petroleum gas didn't exist. If the thought is that the Earth has undergone an endless cycle of life and life ending events, then we'd have to discount everything that scientists believe about the history of the Earth, the Sun, the Milky Way Galaxy, and the universe. When you look at a timeline of Earth from creation to no, it doesn't seem to me that there is any time for the development of an industrialized civilization.  The whole premise to makes no sense. We can say with certainty that life was on the Earth around 4 billion years ago, but we somehow missed an entire era? Dinosaurs ruled the Earth for how long? 150 million years or more? Man could not have evolved alongside them, besides, we have the KT boundary and no dinosaur fossils are found above it, and no human fossils are found below it. It seems to me that scientist have done a pretty good job developing the timeline of Earth's history.

All ground to dust by glaciers 300 million years ago. Of course, that dust would be part of the sediment of the ocean floor, which is what the article suggests investigating.

Harte

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/14/2020 at 11:01 PM, Jarocal said:

A rather fatalistic view.

~

Maybe technology has slowly become a crutch where our relative comfort level is now to the point we no longer have the innate driven need as a culture to make the advances.

If I were crass enough (errmm) to put the start and end of this post next to each other I might conclude you were as fatalistic as me! :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Gaden said:

That would be my luck, yeah. 

If the thought is that the Earth has undergone an endless cycle of life and life ending events, then we'd have to discount everything that scientists believe about the history of the Earth, the Sun, the Milky Way Galaxy, and the universe. When you look at a timeline of Earth from creation to no, it doesn't seem to me that there is any time for the development of an industrialized civilization.  The whole premise to makes no sense. We can say with certainty that life was on the Earth around 4 billion years ago, but we somehow missed an entire era? Dinosaurs ruled the Earth for how long? 150 million years or more? Man could not have evolved alongside them, besides, we have the KT boundary and no dinosaur fossils are found above it, and no human fossils are found below it. It seems to me that scientist have done a pretty good job developing the timeline of Earth's history.

So - to be clear - I am not disagreeing with the general thrust of your points. I don't actually think that there is any reason to assume that there was a significant civilisation, global or otherwise - "HSS" or otherwise - before ours. But to play devil's advocate, I think you go a little too far in some of the above.

We certainly wouldn't have to "discount everything that scientists believe about the history of the Earth, the Sun, the Milky Way Galaxy, and the universe" because the latter three tell us little about life on Earth.

"It doesn't seem to me that there is any time for the development of an industrialized civilization"

Our indusrial civilsations is around 220 years old. I've been to the English Midlands where (a generalisation, yes) it kicked off. To my untrained eye it looks pretty agrarian / rural again already. The Palaeogene (referenced in the paper in the OP) lasted 43m years. Let's be as optimistic as we possibly can and say that "history" stretches all the way back to Göbekli Tepe - 12k years ago? So HSS culture / pre-civ / civ is 12,000 years old - so just 2.8% of the Palaeogene alone.

Does that mean that a civ arose (of course, not a Human one) 10's MYA? No. Of course not. Does it mean we can rule it out? No. Not yet anyway.

One answer to the Fermi paradox is that the society-level skills and abilities needed to get to a certain level of civisational development are exactly not the sort of skills and abilities that you need when you have cheap and ubiquitous access to gene editing, nucelar weapons etc.

 

Edited by Not Invented Here
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No need to whisper. We're all grown ups.

Harte

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Not Invented Here said:

So - to be clear - I am not disagreeing with the general thrust of your points. I don't actually think that there is any reason to assume that there was a significant civilisation, global or otherwise - "HSS" or otherwise - before ours. But to play devil's advocate, I think you go a little too far in some of the above.

We certainly wouldn't have to "discount everything that scientists believe about the history of the Earth, the Sun, the Milky Way Galaxy, and the universe" because the latter three tell us little about life on Earth.

"It doesn't seem to me that there is any time for the development of an industrialized civilization"

Our indusrial civilsations is around 220 years old. I've been to the English Midlands where (a generalisation, yes) it kicked off. To my untrained eye it looks pretty agrarian / rural again already. The Palaeogene (referenced in the paper in the OP) lasted 43m years. Let's be as optimistic as we possibly can and say that "history" stretches all the way back to Göbekli Tepe - 12k years ago? So HSS culture / pre-civ / civ is 12,000 years old - so just 2.8% of the Palaeogene alone.

Does that mean that a civ arose (of course, not a Human one) 10's MYA? No. Of course not. Does it mean we can rule it out? No. Not yet anyway.

One answer to the Fermi paradox is that the society-level skills and abilities needed to get to a certain level of civisational development are exactly not the sort of skills and abilities that you need when you have cheap and ubiquitous access to gene editing, nucelar weapons etc.

 

At what point in time would you place an industrial civ other than ours? And how would you get around the time line based on the fossil record?

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/17/2020 at 10:40 PM, Harte said:

And then a 40 mile high glacier scrapes it all into the sea.

Harte

40 miles?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was a long, cold Ice Age.

Besides, things were bigger in the past - just look at dinosaurs and giants.

Harte

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Harte said:

All ground to dust by glaciers 300 million years ago. Of course, that dust would be part of the sediment of the ocean floor, which is what the article suggests investigating.

Harte

 I assume you have proof of heavy glaciation 300 MYA, and a suitable source of energy to support an industrial civ.  I believe that the first land plants evoved around 400 MYA, and assuming it take 100 million years to turn organic matter into oil, I guess you could say technically that there was time for the creation of fuel, but are we to completely dismiss the timeline that has been established?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

1 minute ago, Gaden said:

 I assume you have proof of heavy glaciation 300 MYA, and a suitable source of energy

No, I don't have the energy.

Harte

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Harte said:

It was a long, cold Ice Age.

Besides, things were bigger in the past - just look at dinosaurs and giants.

Harte

 I see, so, we've lost you, you've gone over to the dark side, the side of wild speculation and unsupported musings

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gaden said:

At what point in time would you place an industrial civ other than ours? And how would you get around the time line based on the fossil record?

 

I don’t. The paper quoted in the OP says that the changes seen in the PETM are the same as predicted will be seen for the anthropocene:

PETM  [Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum - 55mya] are of the same sign and comparable magnitude. Some similarities would be expected if the main effect during any event was a significant global warming, however caused. Furthermore, there is evidence at many of these events that warming was driven by a massive input ofexogeneous (biogenic) carbon, either as CO2 or CH4.

Only one bone in a billion gets fossilised. By that calculation the entire fossil legacy of the 300-odd million people alive in the US today will equate to approximately 60 bones – or a little over a quarter of a human skeleton.

Assuming this handful of bones could be buried anywhere in the US’s 9.8 million sq km (3.8 million square miles), then the chances of anyone finding these bones in the future are almost non-existent.

For the UK we’re talking about a single hand spread from Scotland to Brighton.

 

 

Edited by Not Invented Here
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Not Invented Here said:

I don’t.

Only one bone in a billion gets fossilised. By that calculation the entire fossil legacy of the 300-odd million people alive in the US today will equate to approximately 60 bones – or a little over a quarter of a human skeleton.

For the UK we’re talking about a hand.

 

 

 How does that even come close to answering my question?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Not Invented Here said:

I don’t. The paper quoted in the OP says that the changes seen in the PETM are the same as predicted will be seen for the anthropocene:

PETM  [Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum - 55mya] are of the same sign and comparable magnitude. Some similarities would be expected if the main effect during any event was a significant global warming, however caused. Furthermore, there is evidence at many of these events that warming was driven by a massive input ofexogeneous (biogenic) carbon, either as CO2 or CH4.

Only one bone in a billion gets fossilised. By that calculation the entire fossil legacy of the 300-odd million people alive in the US today will equate to approximately 60 bones – or a little over a quarter of a human skeleton.

Assuming this handful of bones could be buried anywhere in the US’s 9.8 million sq km (3.8 million square miles), then the chances of anyone finding these bones in the future are almost non-existent.

For the UK we’re talking about a single hand spread from Scotland to Brighton.

 

 

At what point in time would you place an industrial civ other than ours? And how would you get around the time line based on the fossil record?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/18/2020 at 2:55 PM, Harte said:

All ground to dust by glaciers 300 million years ago. Of course, that dust would be part of the sediment of the ocean floor, which is what the article suggests investigating.

Harte

Glaciers create and deposit geologic structures such as moraines, drumlins, and eskers. These geologic structures are composed of the transported materials and contain the array of materials affected by glacial transport. Such geological structures are routinely studied and, in some cases, dated. They are also utilized to determine the origin point of lithic types that may have been transported many hundreds of miles. For example, Lake Superior Agate has been recovered from moraines in Nebraska, a product of the Nebraskan glacial period. The Nebraskan glaciation is the first of the Pleistocene. The Pleistocene began ~2.6 million years ago, millions of years before H.n., H.s., or H.s.s., etc.

.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Gaden said:

 I see, so, we've lost you, you've gone over to the dark side, the side of wild speculation and unsupported musings

Nobody else is able to, apparently.

Hartre

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Swede said:

Glaciers create and deposit geologic structures such as moraines, drumlins, and eskers. These geologic structures are composed of the transported materials and contain the array of materials affected by glacial transport. Such geological structures are routinely studied and, in some cases, dated. They are also utilized to determine the origin point of lithic types that may have been transported many hundreds of miles. For example, Lake Superior Agate has been recovered from moraines in Nebraska, a product of the Nebraskan glacial period. The Nebraskan glaciation is the first of the Pleistocene. The Pleistocene began ~2.6 million years ago, millions of years before H.n., H.s., or H.s.s., etc.

.

Then another glacier sashays (or, possibly, minces)  past, sweeping all of that into the sea.

Harte

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Harte said:

Then another glacier sashays (or, possibly, minces)  past, sweeping all of that into the sea.

Harte

 It's so very sad to see a once promising mind drawn to the dark light of woo.

 

  • Haha 2
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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.