The Unusual Earth Orbit Circling Above Our Ancient Past

originally posted by: Hanslune
I've always recommended to search along the banks of existing river that once extended into those areas, people tended to settle around rivers.

I've suggested the same things to people looking for cities on Mars, and even looked around a little myself. Never found anything, though. No building foundations or roads. Things that could be left over when everything else is gone.

originally posted by: Blue Shift

originally posted by: Hanslune
I've always recommended to search along the banks of existing river that once extended into those areas, people tended to settle around rivers.

I've suggested the same things to people looking for cities on Mars, and even looked around a little myself. Never found anything, though. No building foundations or roads. Things that could be left over when everything else is gone.

People tended to stay within about half a kilometer of water. When camped they were then far enough away so they wouldn't attract predators, nor disrupt the animals coming to the water that they would hunt themselves but also to have a steady supply of the necessary item. They also tended to hang about stone resources and other necessary items. Find those and you can find people. However in the case of Digger we already know it was populated as we have recovered stone tools from drags.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: schuyler

The Dogger Banks would also be a good area, it's shallow and fisherman frequently pull things up in their nets.

very true didnt they had a submersible looking around and found a lot of evidence . in camp sites ?

anyhow from 5 to 16 thousand years it was once land ..


not only that as claims where i am from ,
that the glacier that once covered new york was once 2 Miles high.. let alone the whole upper north america

How the Ice Age Shaped New York
Long ago, the region lay under an ice sheet thousands of feet thick. It terminated abruptly in what are now the boroughs, leaving the city with a unique landscape.
www.nytimes.com...

during the last ice age .18,000 years ago

is it any wonder where the melted glacier went ..

too add too the Pot of Doggerland


Stone Age Settlement Found Under English Channel
www.livescience.com...

Erosion on the floor of the English Channel is revealing the remains of a busy Stone Age settlement, from a time when Europe and Britain were still linked by land, a team of archaeologists says.

The site, just off the Isle of Wight, dates back 8,000 years, not long before melting glaciers filled in the Channel and likely drove the settlement's last occupants north to higher ground.

"This is the only site of its kind in the United Kingdom," said Garry Momber, director of the Hampshire and Wight Trust for Maritime Archaeology, which led the recent excavations. "It is important because this is the period when modern people were blossoming, just coming out of the end of the Ice Age, living more like we do today in the valleys and lowlands."

a reply to: Wolfenz

I once read a claim in a book long ago, I can not remember which book as I read a lot back in my teenage years but this one said that there were supposedly possible ruins' of wooden structures off of Greenland on what may once have been an island, it was most probably a stocking filler that authors sometime's make up or include that may not have had any real basis in fact or at best simply been some urban legend repeated thrice over but it is worth considering.

For at least 40.000 years human's have had mind's that were more or less the same as our's, for at least 200.000 years modern type humans with brains about the same size as ours have existed so in all of that time it is possible and even before Agriculture and animal husbandry is accepted to have become the way of life of modern man there were built permanent sites were people lived such as Katal Huyak.


So how many time's did humanity begin to develop complex society, urban society and even learn agriculture and animal husbandry only for natural disaster, environmental change, tribal migration etc to set them back to the beginning, how many time's did people flee as there homelands and perhaps town's and city's were inundated at the end of the last ice age and perhaps during the period of both that glacial maximum and even in the period before into the previous glacial maximum and just perhaps even before that.

It is believed that these people were hunter gatherers and the way they built there city was very similar to some native american cultures, the interesting thing though is to support such a large urban settlement they must have had trade or a very rich source of food to allow them to settle permanently there.

There diet and artwork also suggests that they were farming and husbanding animal's well before the fertile crescent though they were geographically very close to that region and some would argue within it.

Then there are other early sites such as Lepensky Vir and site's on Malta whose dating is controversial.


This would to me at least suggest that human's coming out of the end of the last glacial maximum were NOT simply hunter gatherers but may already have had a full concept of settlement culture, town's and city's.

a reply to: schuyler

That stuff is still there just waiting to be found and not all that deep, either. Would that someone with the resources would also have the interest to see exactly what is there.

Show me the money!

Unfortunately, pure science for the sake of discovery & science alone is becoming a rare thing.

I agree we need people like Paul Allen and...ahem...some governments, as they have the resources to do it.

There is still some pure research going on - in the AI world for one, but ultimately I think everyone is expecting a payoff there too at some point.

Very interesting!

I happened to be thinking on this very subject the other day.

Let’s assume the earth has been about to sustain life for about 4bn years. Some resources I found said 3bn, some said 4.5bn some said 4bn... for the sake of illustration we’ll use 4bn years.

Humans as a species date back ~200,000 years.

That means we could have had 20,000 (4bn/200k) versions offer the human species in that amount of time.

Further,”modern” civilization as we know it has been around for about 6k years. This means we could have had over 600k iterations of “modern” civilization (though I find that unlikely).

I find it entirely plausible, if not likely, that we weren’t the first iteration of the “apex” species on the planet.

The real interesting question to me is - what happened to them? Where did they go? Why?

I also think this line of reasoning supports the idea that it’s possible we have an entire species living underground or under the ocean. Given the amount of time species have had to evolve, it wouldn’t shock me if one of them was subterranean. Why do we not find them? They don’t want us to find them.

As an aside - I think the notion of subterranean civilizations needs a lot more discussion in general both for here, on the moon, mars, etc. we assume life would be on the surface but what if we’re the outlier?

a reply to: EnigmaChaser

Mars HAD a civilization above ground before nuclear war obliterated their magnetic field and cosmic rays came in. Most likely its below ground now.

originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: EnigmaChaser

Mars HAD a civilization above ground before nuclear war obliterated their magnetic field and cosmic rays came in. Most likely its below ground now.

Please explain the mechanism by which nuclear war can "obliterate" the magnetic field of an entire planet.

Harte

originally posted by: EnigmaChaser

Why do we not find them? They don’t want us to find them.

How did they manage to eliminate the fossil record of their ancestors? Our fossil records goes back tens of millions of years for the creatures that became us and for when we separated into the branch that became mammals about 260 MYA so that's a lot of fossils to find and eradicate.

a reply to: Harte
It's possible that Mars lost its magnetosphere early in its history. It was bombarded by radiation from the sun which slowly erode its early atmosphere.

originally posted by: ProphetZoroaster
a reply to: Harte
It's possible that Mars lost its magnetosphere early in its history. It was bombarded by radiation from the sun which slowly erode its early atmosphere.

WHAT???
No nuclear war?

How boring.

Harte

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: ProphetZoroaster
a reply to: Harte
It's possible that Mars lost its magnetosphere early in its history. It was bombarded by radiation from the sun which slowly erode its early atmosphere.

WHAT???
No nuclear war?

How boring.

Harte

Pssssssst, Rupert suggests you look up the Nuclear weapon variant call super 'Sa'na'a'a by the Atlanteans - it doesn't go boom just shssssssh and causes a planet's magnetic field to jump to another planet, in this case by way of the asteroid belt which was a small planet then amd - (you can guess what happened? Yep pooope) then a final jump to J-town

originally posted by: EnigmaChaser
Very interesting!

I happened to be thinking on this very subject the other day.

Let’s assume the earth has been about to sustain life for about 4bn years. Some resources I found said 3bn, some said 4.5bn some said 4bn... for the sake of illustration we’ll use 4bn years.

Humans as a species date back ~200,000 years.

That means we could have had 20,000 (4bn/200k) versions offer the human species in that amount of time.

Further,”modern” civilization as we know it has been around for about 6k years. This means we could have had over 600k iterations of “modern” civilization (though I find that unlikely).

I find it entirely plausible, if not likely, that we weren’t the first iteration of the “apex” species on the planet.

The real interesting question to me is - what happened to them? Where did they go? Why?

I also think this line of reasoning supports the idea that it’s possible we have an entire species living underground or under the ocean. Given the amount of time species have had to evolve, it wouldn’t shock me if one of them was subterranean. Why do we not find them? They don’t want us to find them.

As an aside - I think the notion of subterranean civilizations needs a lot more discussion in general both for here, on the moon, mars, etc. we assume life would be on the surface but what if we’re the outlier?

I totally agree, subterranean civilisations would no doubt be prevalent throughout the universe due to inconsistent planetary climate and astrological threats. Even now we build underground facilities as insurance for our species survival in the event of cataclysmic destruction.

Although there's no evidence i personally believe that its entirely possible a civilisation more advanced than our own could already be underground on Earth. At some point our survival as a species will depend on burying ourselves deep underground or heading into space and the longer a civilisation survives the more likely this scenario will arise.

a reply to: jeep3r

He makes a good point. How would the ancients describe another celestial body in orbit around the earth? They'd build special temples dedicated to that body and create stories about it's wonder. Then one day it's violently removed from orbit and it causes hell all over earth.

a reply to: Grenade

Exactly - we go underground already - and probably more so than we’re aware of.

We’ve only charted ~5% of the ocean floor (at least that’s the largest figure I can recall seeing) which means there’s a lot of surface area that could have lots of things under it or on it and we’re not aware of it.

If I wanted to be left alone, I’d either build something under a really, really deep part of the ocean (very few people could reach me) or in a little travelled but innocuous part of the ocean. I’d avoid areas that could be “interesting” or large natural bodies under the ocean as eyeballs would be drawn to them.

Given the vastness of the ocean this could easily be accomplished if you had the tech - and virtually no one could even find you if they wanted to.

This kind of thing always brings me back to the idea that all sub missions are classified and all things submarine related are closely held secrets. I kind of get the point of that given the missions most subs are said to fulfill but it also makes me wonder what they found “down there” - which could be a lot - yet little to nothing is said at all.

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: EnigmaChaser

Why do we not find them? They don’t want us to find them.

How did they manage to eliminate the fossil record of their ancestors? Our fossil records goes back tens of millions of years for the creatures that became us and for when we separated into the branch that became mammals about 260 MYA so that's a lot of fossils to find and eradicate.

Well, if they’re living under our oceans and we’ve only explored/mapped/documented in detail a small percentage of those oceans then it’s conceivable we simply haven’t found it.

That said, I kind of do but kind of don’t follow the logic you presented. On the one hand, we should have found some record of them. On the other hand, we could be looking in the wrong place. Then we can consider other ancient civilizations where we have found lots of ruins but not lots of remains - and there’s multiple instances of this - hence the question that gets posed frequently of “where did they all go?” Which we can’t truly answer beyond speculation.

Also, if this civilization or civilizations ended 500 million years ago perhaps the organic matter just can’t last that long - or becomes unrecognizable. I’m not an Archeologist so I can’t speak to that but most things have a shelf life - 500 million years seems like enough time to break down most things and turn it to dust.

These are thoughts that don’t really have right answers though - and least not with what we know or are told today.

originally posted by: EnigmaChaser

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: EnigmaChaser

Why do we not find them? They don’t want us to find them.

How did they manage to eliminate the fossil record of their ancestors? Our fossil records goes back tens of millions of years for the creatures that became us and for when we separated into the branch that became mammals about 260 MYA so that's a lot of fossils to find and eradicate.

Well, if they’re living under our oceans and we’ve only explored/mapped/documented in detail a small percentage of those oceans then it’s conceivable we simply haven’t found it.

That said, I kind of do but kind of don’t follow the logic you presented. On the one hand, we should have found some record of them. On the other hand, we could be looking in the wrong place. Then we can consider other ancient civilizations where we have found lots of ruins but not lots of remains - and there’s multiple instances of this - hence the question that gets posed frequently of “where did they all go?” Which we can’t truly answer beyond speculation.

Also, if this civilization or civilizations ended 500 million years ago perhaps the organic matter just can’t last that long - or becomes unrecognizable. I’m not an Archeologist so I can’t speak to that but most things have a shelf life - 500 million years seems like enough time to break down most things and turn it to dust.

These are thoughts that don’t really have right answers though - and least not with what we know or are told today.

Its always possible just not currently plausible or probable. Yes by 500 million years you'd have only fossils but also many thing would still show; in this case modifications of the soil, and of course anything like glass, stone, etc, etc. We just haven't found any such thing. I've been looking for a flowering of culture in the Eemian - but after 50+ years - nada & zilch.

Eemian: en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: EnigmaChaser
a reply to: Grenade

Exactly - we go underground already - and probably more so than we’re aware of.

We’ve only charted ~5% of the ocean floor (at least that’s the largest figure I can recall seeing) which means there’s a lot of surface area that could have lots of things under it or on it and we’re not aware of it.

By satellite, the entire ocean floor has been mapped - which is what "charted" means - to a resolution of 5 km. With sonar, only 10% to 15% has been mapped, but that resolution is 100 m. Older, "sounding" mappings cover an extent of about 20%. But, of course, even 100 meters resolution is enough to miss pretty much anything that could be down there that's not a mountain or a valley. With submarine mapping using sonar - less than 0.05% has been mapped. And by going there, standing on the ocean floor and looking around with cameras, might as well say none of it has been explored, the percentage is so small. Source

originally posted by: EnigmaChaser
This kind of thing always brings me back to the idea that all sub missions are classified and all things submarine related are closely held secrets. I kind of get the point of that given the missions most subs are said to fulfill but it also makes me wonder what they found “down there” - which could be a lot - yet little to nothing is said at all.

The submarines you refer to are almost certainly not looking at the ocean floor anyway.

Harte

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: EnigmaChaser
a reply to: Grenade

Exactly - we go underground already - and probably more so than we’re aware of.

We’ve only charted ~5% of the ocean floor (at least that’s the largest figure I can recall seeing) which means there’s a lot of surface area that could have lots of things under it or on it and we’re not aware of it.

By satellite, the entire ocean floor has been mapped - which is what "charted" means - to a resolution of 5 km. With sonar, only 10% to 15% has been mapped, but that resolution is 100 m. Older, "sounding" mappings cover an extent of about 20%. But, of course, even 100 meters resolution is enough to miss pretty much anything that could be down there that's not a mountain or a valley. With submarine mapping using sonar - less than 0.05% has been mapped. And by going there, standing on the ocean floor and looking around with cameras, might as well say none of it has been explored, the percentage is so small. Source

originally posted by: EnigmaChaser
This kind of thing always brings me back to the idea that all sub missions are classified and all things submarine related are closely held secrets. I kind of get the point of that given the missions most subs are said to fulfill but it also makes me wonder what they found “down there” - which could be a lot - yet little to nothing is said at all.

The submarines you refer to are almost certainly not looking at the ocean floor anyway.

Harte

I appreciate that info - thank you for sharing.

So based on that, it would be fair to say we have “charted” the ocean broadly but in terms of a high level of detail we really haven’t look at much of anything.

It’s a high probability you’re right about the subs. I suppose that having read so many things over the years that most people would find “impossible” or highly improbable - but turned out to be true - that I can’t rule out the USN having found things of interest in our oceans.

I call out the USN specifically as they’re the only entity I can think of with the capabilities and resources to truly “find” things. Maybe there’s nothing to it but my experience says we can’t rule that out entirely.