Archeology and Ancient Human Activity

[tholden]

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... -maze.html

Alexis Okeowo in México City
for National Geographic News
August 22, 2008

A labyrinth filled with stone temples and pyramids in 14 caves—some underwater—have been uncovered on Mexico's Yucatán Peninsula, archaeologists announced last week.

The discovery has experts wondering whether Maya legend inspired the construction of the underground complex—or vice versa......

[MGmirkin]

A colleague online just forwarded this interesting tidbit:

(Oldest Skeleton in Americas Found in Underwater Cave?)
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... etons.html
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2074119/posts

Cheers,
~Michael Gmirkin

[mague]

(TURKEY: DISCOVERY OF 12,000-YEAR-OLD TEMPLE COMPLEX COULD ALTER THEORY OF HUMAN DEVELOPMENT)
http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/i ... 708a.shtml

"Look at this", he says, pointing at a photo of an exquisitely carved sculpture showing an animal, half-human, half-lion. "It’s a sphinx, thousands of years before Egypt. Southeastern Turkey, northern Syria - this region saw the wedding night of our civilization."

Cheers,
~Michael Gmirkin

Does this count as sphinx ?
http://www.geo.de/GEO/kultur/geschichte/4821.html?t=img&p=2&pageview=
Here is the article.
http://archaeology.about.com/od/hterms/g/hohle_fels.htm

The three figurines are of a horse's head (or possibly a bear), a water bird of some sort possibly in flight, and a "Lowenmensch", a half lion/half human figurine. Previously, a similar lion/human sculpture (although much larger) was found at the Hohlenstein-Stadel site, an Aurignacian period site in the Lone Valley of Germany. The horse's head at Hohle Fels came from a level dated about 30,000 years old; the other two are from an older occupation in the cave, ca. 31-33,000 years ago.

[goodsamaritan]

I was just awestruck by the latest video: Symbols of an ancient sky part 4. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gnrkn_T5l6s

In the video it says before this great conjunction, there were NO PLANETS being recorded or told stories about as gods.

My question is:

When were the planets first recorded by the ancients?
Which ancients first recorded the planets?
Around what year was this great conjunction?

[StevenJay]

Actually, what I hear is that, at the time of the great conjunction, the planets seen in the ancient sky weren't perceived as planets, but as gods. People of that erea had no other point of reference, nor was there a need for one. It was a time of innocence. In fact, it's not hard to imagine that the stars themselves may have been washed out by the unwavering glow of the "gods." It wasn't until after the great "end of the world" catastrophy that humans, suffering from the deeply ingrained mass psychosis of such monumental destruction, began to perceive the heavens, as well as themelves, differently than their ancestors had.

As for the exact time-frame in which the grand conjunction, and its eventual break-up took place, I don't know how that could ever be definitively nailed down, since apparently, all of the forensic evidence was either destroyed or altered by the event (a detail which, from a spiritual point of view, I find to be very intriguing in and of itself).

The way I see it is, if we really want to know all there is to know about those earlier times in our history, we're probably gonna have to consult whatever beings who may have whitnessed and chronicled it all. And I have no doubt that we're literally surrounded by them.

Of course, this is purely intuitive conjecture on my part. . . but, damn - it just feels so "right!"

[allynh]

I'd like to know where Mercury and the Moon were during the event as well.

Mercury was the messenger of the gods, with wings on his feet. That would mean Mercury was moving all over the sky at the time.

Was the Moon in orbit around the Earth at the time. What is the earliest record of the Moon, its phases, time of orbit around the Earth, i.e., how long was the lunar month then compared to now.

When did Mars get the two moons. Does the ancient record name the two Phobos and Deimos or is that a modern convention. Did the ancients actually see those moons join up with Mars.

There are a heck of a lot of questions I'd like answered to make the Saturn Event clearer, including how the Growing Earth/Planet Theory fits in, but then that's just me and my heretical questions.

I look forward to the DVD coming out so that I can ask more.

[Total Science]

When were the planets first recorded by the ancients?

That question is wonderful however absolutely impossible to answer scientifically.

A similar question, which actually can be answered, and which you might want to ask instead is: what is the first recorded historical example of planetary observations which have survived Holocene impacts, fire, and deluge?

The answer to that question is the Venus Tablet of Ammisaduqa which records the irregular cometary orbit of Venus.

Which ancients first recorded the planets?

Impossible to know since those ancients are long gone. In recorded history it would be: Atlanteans, Babylonians, and Egyptians.

The first planetary scientist I know by name besides Sonchis of Sais would have to be Democritus.

"He [Democritus] said that the ordered worlds are boundless and differ in size, and that in some there is neither sun nor moon, but that in others, both are greater than with us, and yet with others more in number. And that the intervals between the ordered worlds are unequal, here more and there less, and that some increase, others flourish and others decay, and here they come into being and there they are eclipsed. But that they are destroyed by colliding with one another. And that some ordered worlds are bare of animals and plants and all water." -- Hippolytus, priest, Refutation of All Heresies: On Democritus, 2nd century

[Total Science]

the planets seen in the ancient sky weren't perceived as planets, but as gods.

"Since the stars come into existence in the aether, it is reasonable that they possess sensation and intelligence. And from this it follows that the stars are to be reckoned as gods. For it may be observed that the inhabitants of those countries in which the air is pure and rarefied have keener wits and greater powers of understanding than persons who live an a dense and heavy climate.... It is therefore likely that the stars possess surpassing intelligence, since they inhabit the ethereal region of the world. Again, the consciousness and intelligence of the stars is most clearly evinced by their order and regularity ... the stars move of their own free will and because of their intelligence and divinity.... Not yet can it be said that some stronger force compels the heavenly bodies to travel in a manner contrary to their nature, for what stronger force can there be? It remains therefore that the motion of the heavenly bodies is voluntary...Therefore the existence of the gods is so manifest that I can scarcely deem one who denies it to be of sound mind." -- Cicero

[Total Science]

Was the Moon in orbit around the Earth at the time.

"...the pre-Hellenic Pelasgian inhabitants of Arcadia called themselves Proselenes, because they boasted that they came into the country before the Moon accompanied the Earth. Pre-Hellenic and pre-lunarian were synonymous." -- Alexander Von Humboldt, geologist, 1851

"'The stars did not yet revolve in the heavens; the Danaides had not yet appeared, nor the race of Deucalion; the Arcadians alone existed, those of whom it is said that they lived before the Moon, eating acorns upon the mountains." -- Apollonios Rhodios, librarian, ~246 B.C.

What is the earliest record of the Moon, its phases, time of orbit around the Earth, i.e., how long was the lunar month then compared to now.

I would also like to know the answer to this.

When did Mars get the two moons. Does the ancient record name the two Phobos and Deimos or is that a modern convention. Did the ancients actually see those moons join up with Mars.

"As I have shown in Worlds in Collision ('The Steeds of Mars') the poets Homer and Virgil knew of the trabants of Mars, visualized as his steeds, named Deimos (Terror) and Phobos (Rout). Kepler referred to the satellites of Mars as being 'burning' or 'flaming', the same way the ancients had referred to the steeds of Mars." -- Immanuel Velikovsky, cosmologist, ~1960-70

including how the Growing Earth/Planet Theory fits in, but then that's just me and my heretical questions.

Expanding Earth fits in because Electric Universe and Plasma Cosmology are the mechanisms for the accumulation of matter in the atmosphere and in the core of astronomical bodies, e.g. the positive electron holes discovered by NASA's Friedmann Freund where you have solar plasma, so-called solar-wind, and cosmic rays, aka charged particles aka electricity, travelling along magnetic field lines, creating an aurora, going through the mantle's positive electron holes (p-holes) where matter accumulates at the core causing daily earthquakes and the long term expansion, perhaps with short term pulsation, of the Earth.

[Lloyd]

* In this post: http://thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=1599#p18865 I quote from my website where I paraphrase some of what Cardona et al said in Kronos magazine in the 1980s. There I mentioned that DC said Saturn was probably always visible and its observation was recorded by humans at least 20 thousand years ago. At first it was probably not thought to be anything special, like a god, because it merely looked like a large red ball in the northern sky. DC said it flared up occasionally, every few centuries or millennia, and at those times it may have been thought to be special, but probably not a god, because it didn't yet have a human-like form. After each flare-up of Saturn, the ancients gave it a new name, because it looked different each time.
* I read somewhere that DC said Saturn flared up about 11,000 years ago, its second last episode. Then, centuries or millennia later, the Venus comet appeared, leaving a circle of plasma or smoke around Saturn, which was called the Ouroboros, or snake biting its tail. Venus settled in the center of the face of Saturn. Originally, Saturn, Venus and Mars were all red or maroon colored, so Venus and Mars may have been there all along, but were not distinguishable from Saturn. However, I think DC said Venus was said by the ancients to have been shot out of Saturn.
* I think the best guess so far is that Venus first appeared between 5,000 and 11,000 years ago. Here's a good discussion of the origin of Venus at http://www.kronia.com/thoth/thoVI-08.txt. Perhaps after the 11,000 BP flare-up, both Saturn and Venus gradually changed color - Saturn from red to yellow and Venus from red to white - while Mars remained red. I don't know what color menstrual blood is supposed to be, whether red or maroon, depending on how long it sets, but that's what the ancients called the sky: an ocean, a cauldron, and menstrual blood. I suppose the red glow mode of Saturn as an electrified brown dwarf star is what they were seeing. Being initially far outside the solar system, the daylight may have been dimmer than it is now, but there was no darkness.
* DC said Jupiter was associated with Saturn for millennia before the breakup of the Saturn system, but it was not visible from the northern hemisphere on Earth. I don't know what his arguments are for saying that, but I tend to accept what he says, because he seems to have good evidence for most everything he says.
* I think Mars first appeared right after Venus did.
* Allyn said:

I'd like to know where Mercury and the Moon were during the event as well. Mercury was the messenger of the gods, with wings on his feet. That would mean Mercury was moving all over the sky at the time.

* I don't think the god Mercury was actually the planet Mercury. Instead, I think it was Mars. I think DC has said that there were 7 or 9 small objects seen near Saturn during the latter part of the Saturn age. Those objects would have been its larger moons. Our Moon and Mercury were likely either moons of Saturn or of Jupiter.

[Lloyd]

* One of the biggest elephants in the living room that folks don't seem to have noticed much yet, is the missing land where the oceans are now.
* I believe our main EU theorists think that 5,000 years or so ago there were no oceans to speak of and that electric discharge machining, EDM, removed all that land during one of the catastrophic events around the time of the breakup of the Saturn System. There are TPODs about Valles Marineris on Mars and the Grand Canyon on Earth, which mention their theory that EDM removed the layers of rock where those canyons now are and pulled much of it into space. There may have been mention somewhere also of the Atlantic Ocean basin having been carved out in the same way, but by a much larger lightning bolt. But I don't think there's been mention of that also having happened in the Pacific. Has there?
* At any rate, do you all realize what that theory would mean? For one thing it means that there would have been many more land animals and plants on Earth, maybe at least 3 times what there are now. Likewise, there may have been a lot of human populations in those now-missing land areas. So an awful lot of plants, animals and even humans and their dwellings etc may have been vaporized when the EDM occurred.
* It would certainly be interesting to find ancient documents or archeological finds that would clearly refer to such now-missing areas or the people that lived there. Has anyone heard of any hint of any such evidence? Or do you know of any evidence that may favor or tend to refute this EDM theory?
* Maybe humans who survived such a catastrophe didn't know a lot of people in the missing areas and so weren't aware of how large an area of the Earth's surface and its inhabitants were destroyed.

[Lloyd]

* Since my thread on Missing Land where the oceans now are was moved here [without informing me], I read some of the previous messages here. And I noticed that Ted said:

A labyrinth filled with stone temples and pyramids in 14 caves—some underwater—have been uncovered on Mexico's Yucatán Peninsula

* My guess is that these caves were carved out electrically at about the same time that the famous Chicxulub crater was formed electrically.
* Here are TPODs that discuss caves.
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2007/ ... averns.htm
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2007/ ... apipes.htm
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2007/ ... tepuis.htm
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2004/ ... -tubes.htm
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/ ... record.htm

* Michael quoted BBC News as follows:

Deep below the sea, off the north coast of Northern Ireland, a dramatic geological mystery has been discovered. Huge cliffs, vast basins and plateaus, a lake and even rivers have been found. But so far no-one is certain what caused them to end up like this deep under the sea. [...] One of the most striking details is a large lake or crater on what was once the top of huge cliffs towering above the plateau below. The streams and rivers that fed it are still clearly defined. And that raises one of the mysteries. Why did coastal erosion not obliterate all that detail as the sea slow[ly] rose over the land?

* The idea of sudden inundation, as by a Great Flood, seems probable, but I imagine the streams and rivers, like the crater lake, were carved electrically, before the ocean basins were filled by the flood, and were not actually streams and rivers.

[Joe Keenan]

One of my interests is pre-Columbian/Norse/Irish/Basque movement of Europeans to the New World. Read a book called, Ancient Encounters that was a serious examination of the subject, plenty of incongruous anthropology (5000 year old African remains in South America, 9000 year old Caucasian remains in Oregon, Clovis remains, stuff like that) supports the possibility this occurred. Assuming this occurred one naturally asks, “How did they sail the oceans?” I figured they didn’t, they hugged coast lines like mariners always did. This points to an Arctic crossing. Assuming lower sea levels as was supposed to exist at the time of the last Ice Age, I wondered what the geography would look like, I found this:

http://geology.com/world/arctic-ocean-map.shtml

As you can see from the second illustration much of the Arctic is 400 feet or less under water, land area increases tremendously with a lower water level. Again, assuming an ice free sea, movement between the old and new world becomes easy. Looking again at the map I took notice of the dark blue regions, to my biased eyes it appears “carved” or “machined.” I also came across this, the authors attribute it to underwater volcanoes, perhaps a massive electrical impact or discharge is better?

http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic ... /Under_Ice

[bdw000]

Hey, neat stuff.

I would guess that the explanation will be that ocean currents carved out those channels.

And yet, the Bering strait does not have any channel (at least in this pic), and I thought that it had the largest flow of water through the smallest space anywhere in the world. I am no expert. It does look like the makers of this pic may not have been interested in the Bering strait, so maybe they just left that part out.

[Joe Keenan]

I posted some info on another thread regrading a geologists assertion Ireland is the geographical model for Atlantis, one of the responders brought up Hapgood's theory of crustal displacement. I wonder if the movement of the crust could of caused the indicated "scarring"? Perhaps a massive polar discharge occurred during displacement? Regarding the Bearing Straight and the lack of an indicated deep channel, perhaps this indicates a young age for the straight? Perhaps, as the displacement occurred the area now occupied by the straight collapsed?