Forbidden archeology Flood myth

a reply to: Arnie123

Sorry, but no. The hydroplate theory has been knocking around since 1980 is inherently implausible. Here's a critique.

a reply to: Arnie123

Nice addition to the the pile of evidence the mechanics and geological evidence fit such a very early onetime event....I do not believe this is a repeating cyclical event.....the hydroplate theory in part explains the presence of water subsurface in massive volumes. IMHO this event was very early in Earths history......the micro-mirroring of the high pressure hydraulic actions use of sediment evidence similar to what he discusses is illuminated a part of the GCDW modeling.

The hydroplate model is explaining an action which formed a scar round the planet and which made coal and oil and which happened earlier than the established GCDW cycles which make the coal and oil we find and use today. I am sure when this big scar was made the hydroplate theorys action happened.This theory does support the formation of the scar......only.....and IMHO the hydraulic forces involved will never be repeated because this scar is birthmark.......it was a one-time event......sure it made coal and oil but not the coal and oil we use and find today.

Lets also remember that these pockets of subsurface water are huge...and when a cyclical GCDW happens the movement of the continents rends big fissures in the earth......opening some small # of these pockets and producing MINI-hydraulic events fractionally mirroring the massive ELE discussed in the hydroplate theory.....but mirroring only on a micro-scale......

Basicly this is a bad video to use to explain how oil is made because it is missive in that this method of making oil during such an ELE was a one-off while the cyclical repeating GCDW model proves oil is a renewable resource with a short shelf-life.

This type of action which ruptures small pockets of high pressure subsurface water happens in multiple spots on a very small scale during a GCDW event in comparison to the masive event/ birthing scar this video explains.

The video is nice in that it describes a step in the GCDW model.....one we dont illuminate in the Coles Notes version oreo cookie jello-pudding model.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
a reply to: Arnie123

Sorry, but no. The hydroplate theory has been knocking around since 1980 is inherently implausible. Here's a critique.

The wiki link is littered references to god, the actual video makes no mention of any gods. However, I can see why, creation sciences and all.

It does seem plausible. A quick experiment of two cups, one filled with water, the other with a small hole. When you compresses the top cup down, the water from the bottom cup shoots up through the hole.

Like I said, *seems plausible. This is beyond me though so I'll yeild at the first scientific link.

a reply to: one4all

From what I understand of Hydroplate, a large deluge of mud, muck and brine covered the lands, taking with it massive amounts of organic material, vegetation and animals, the result, many of them trap beneath the surface, through heat and pressure, those pockets became oil deposits.

Seems very interedting. Many some parts are correct, but others misrepresented and prolly in some other explainations. The Mid atlantic ridge DOES circle our globe like a baseball stitch...

originally posted by: Arnie123
a reply to: one4all

From what I understand of Hydroplate, a large deluge of mud, muck and brine covered the lands, taking with it massive amounts of organic material, vegetation and animals, the result, many of them trap beneath the surface, through heat and pressure, those pockets became oil deposits.

Seems very interedting. Many some parts are correct, but others misrepresented and prolly in some other explainations. The Mid atlantic ridge DOES circle our globe like a baseball stitch...

This is what is postulated in the video....but we must understand that this was a MACRO example of the process which explains how oil is made...this was a one-time event......on a MICRO scale example of this process we experience routinely a cyclical event which produces the oil we find and use today.....this event is a Global Continental Displacement Wave which happens every 3657 years....and it produces the exact same oil/coal making processes .

The hydroplate theory explains the one-time event causing the scar around the planet and it explains how oil is made "one single time but not the only time".....for this hydroplate theory produced oil is NOT the oil we find and use today.....this video could mistakenly lead you to believe that all oil was made at one time during this massive ELE....and that would be incorrect because oil is a renewable resource supported by a repeating cyclical dynamic and the ELE involved in the theory was a one-off which will not repeat which by proxy produced oil.

I'm not sure that people seem to understand how inherently implausible the hydroplate theory is. It would require levels of energy that would also destroy the planet. It's also based on an implausible premise, the existence of a god.

originally posted by: Arnie123
a reply to: one4all

From what I understand of Hydroplate, a large deluge of mud, muck and brine covered the lands, taking with it massive amounts of organic material, vegetation and animals, the result, many of them trap beneath the surface, through heat and pressure, those pockets became oil deposits.

Seems very interedting. Many some parts are correct, but others misrepresented and prolly in some other explainations. The Mid atlantic ridge DOES circle our globe like a baseball stitch...

LOL.....I wish I was a fly-on-the-wall when AngryCymreag read your post.....because the geological reality of the mid-Atlantic ridge circling the globe like a baseball stitch ...is an EXACT example of the geologic templates used to build the Global Continental Displacement Wave model......unavoidable undeniable tangible reality or proof upon which we may read the only truths possible.

a reply to: AngryCymraeg
It is not implausible,
It's freakin IMPOSSIBLE
Hydroplate theory is Feces.

originally posted by: one4all

originally posted by: Arnie123
a reply to: one4all

From what I understand of Hydroplate, a large deluge of mud, muck and brine covered the lands, taking with it massive amounts of organic material, vegetation and animals, the result, many of them trap beneath the surface, through heat and pressure, those pockets became oil deposits.

Seems very interedting. Many some parts are correct, but others misrepresented and prolly in some other explainations. The Mid atlantic ridge DOES circle our globe like a baseball stitch...

LOL.....I wish I was a fly-on-the-wall when AngryCymreag read your post.....because the geological reality of the mid-Atlantic ridge circling the globe like a baseball stitch ...is an EXACT example of the geologic templates used to build the Global Continental Displacement Wave model......unavoidable undeniable tangible reality or proof upon which we may read the only truths possible.

Running from the North Atlantic down to the tip of South America isn't quite circling the globe though. Bisecting a hemisphere perhaps but that's not circling the globe or evidence for your hypothetical scenario.

originally posted by: peter vlar

originally posted by: one4all

originally posted by: Arnie123
a reply to: one4all

From what I understand of Hydroplate, a large deluge of mud, muck and brine covered the lands, taking with it massive amounts of organic material, vegetation and animals, the result, many of them trap beneath the surface, through heat and pressure, those pockets became oil deposits.

Seems very interedting. Many some parts are correct, but others misrepresented and prolly in some other explainations. The Mid atlantic ridge DOES circle our globe like a baseball stitch...

LOL.....I wish I was a fly-on-the-wall when AngryCymreag read your post.....because the geological reality of the mid-Atlantic ridge circling the globe like a baseball stitch ...is an EXACT example of the geologic templates used to build the Global Continental Displacement Wave model......unavoidable undeniable tangible reality or proof upon which we may read the only truths possible.

Running from the North Atlantic down to the tip of South America isn't quite circling the globe though. Bisecting a hemisphere perhaps but that's not circling the globe or evidence for your hypothetical scenario.

Peter.... the point is proven that geologic evidence of what earth has been through abounds and it is the only "real proof" available hence MUST be where we begin ....cease and desist the Devils Advocate routine it detracts from your warm glowing personality pal.

...bisecting perhaps but not circling.....come on now.......yes technically you are correct.....you have difficulty parsing generic concepts....and Peter yes ...yes....this type of geological scarring is by proxy directly correlating to the GCDW model......please stop referring to anything as being "MY hypothetical scenario"......because nothing is original to me all of this data is already in the public domain.....by continually referring to it as mine you pull everyone away from the public domain sources of the data.....

I am going to begin referring to using geologic proof in proving out the GCDW model as the "Peter Principal" in honor of your influences.


The Hydroplate Theory explains the process of using satllite data to recognise geological patterns or scars....it in part correctly describes causality of some types of geological scarring and the process by which oil is made....the ONLY POSSIBLE way for oil to be made.

Wow a lot of people like this topic....check out this link.
the-red-thread.net...

originally posted by: one4all

originally posted by: peter vlar

originally posted by: one4all

originally posted by: Arnie123
a reply to: one4all

From what I understand of Hydroplate, a large deluge of mud, muck and brine covered the lands, taking with it massive amounts of organic material, vegetation and animals, the result, many of them trap beneath the surface, through heat and pressure, those pockets became oil deposits.

Seems very interedting. Many some parts are correct, but others misrepresented and prolly in some other explainations. The Mid atlantic ridge DOES circle our globe like a baseball stitch...

LOL.....I wish I was a fly-on-the-wall when AngryCymreag read your post.....because the geological reality of the mid-Atlantic ridge circling the globe like a baseball stitch ...is an EXACT example of the geologic templates used to build the Global Continental Displacement Wave model......unavoidable undeniable tangible reality or proof upon which we may read the only truths possible.

Running from the North Atlantic down to the tip of South America isn't quite circling the globe though. Bisecting a hemisphere perhaps but that's not circling the globe or evidence for your hypothetical scenario.

Peter.... the point is proven that geologic evidence of what earth has been through abounds and it is the only "real proof" available hence MUST be where we begin ....cease and desist the Devils Advocate routine it detracts from your warm glowing personality pal.

...bisecting perhaps but not circling.....come on now.......yes technically you are correct.....you have difficulty parsing generic concepts....and Peter yes ...yes....this type of geological scarring is by proxy directly correlating to the GCDW model......please stop referring to anything as being "MY hypothetical scenario"......because nothing is original to me all of this data is already in the public domain.....by continually referring to it as mine you pull everyone away from the public domain sources of the data.....

I am going to begin referring to using geologic proof in proving out the GCDW model as the "Peter Principal" in honor of your influences.


The Hydroplate Theory explains the process of using satllite data to recognise geological patterns or scars....it in part correctly describes causality of some types of geological scarring and the process by which oil is made....the ONLY POSSIBLE way for oil to be made.

See, here's the thing.

Saying that geological evidence is the only "real proof" we have is only true if you discount the words of many ancient civilizations.

For example, H.P. Blavatsky parroted the teachings of ancient Tibetans when she accurately described the mid-Atlantic ridge unusual bathymetry in the late 19th century. Modern Science "discovered" and accepted this in the 1950's.

Those ancient Tibetans must've had some supernatural underwater breathing abilities to know that.



The Piri Reis map is another example among many.

originally posted by: AgarthaSeed

See, here's the thing.

Saying that geological evidence is the only "real proof" we have is only true if you discount the words of many ancient civilizations.

For example, H.P. Blavatsky parroted the teachings of ancient Tibetans when she accurately described the mid-Atlantic ridge unusual bathymetry in the late 19th century. Modern Science "discovered" and accepted this in the 1950's.

Those ancient Tibetans must've had some supernatural underwater breathing abilities to know that.

Never happened.

Just prior to Blavatsky writing "Isis Unveiled", an international task force, led by the British ship Challenger and the U.S. Dolphin, obtained the first map of the ocean floor. They lowered buckets on ropes until they contacted the bottom. In the twentieth century, sonar was invented to locate enemy submarines and later it acquired the peace-time use of mapping more accurately the ocean floor. Now satellites have obtained the same information. An article in "Discover Magazine" March 1996, displays this ocean feature with colored maps obtained indirectly - a satellite detected gravity that implied ocean bottom features.
Blavatsky used the then recently obtained information on the floor of the Atlantic to justify her position on Atlantis. She says the mid-atlantic ridge is a remnant of that continent.

"No more striking confirmation of our position could be given, than the fact that the ELEVATED RIDGE in the Atlantic basin, 9,000 feet in height, which runs for some two or three thousand miles southwards from a point near the British Islands, first slopes towards South America, then shifts almost at right angles to proceed in a SOUTH-EASTERLY line toward the African coast, whence it runs on southward to Tristan d'Acunha. This ridge is a remnant of an Atlantic continent.(SDii333)
Ignatius Donnelly's seminal work, "Atlantis: the Antediluvian World", published in 1882, has a map showing this ridge and what was known of it in his day. Blavatsky, however, claims to have knowledge beyond that provided by the research of the good ship Challenger."
She says:
"and, could it [the ridge] be traced further [past the island of Tristan d'Acunha], [it] would establish the reality of a submarine horse-shoe junction with a  former continent in the Indian Ocean." (Cf. chart adapted from the "Challenger" and "Dolphin" soundings in Mr. Donnelly's, "Atlantis, the Antediluvian World," p. 47) [The map on page 47 that she references, was omitted in later printings of Donnelly's book but is rescued from a 1900 edition and made available by the hot-link above.]
Before examining 20th century knowledge on this point, we should note her exact words. We may think casually that she is making a prediction. But then she might have said "the ridge will be found and it will go along this path ..." - as though she were visualizing the future scene with clairvoyance. Instead she said "could it be traced further ...". Her language suggests she has no specific knowledge on whether or not it will be possible to trace it further. Rather, she simply has knowledgeSource

Harte

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: AgarthaSeed

See, here's the thing.

Saying that geological evidence is the only "real proof" we have is only true if you discount the words of many ancient civilizations.

For example, H.P. Blavatsky parroted the teachings of ancient Tibetans when she accurately described the mid-Atlantic ridge unusual bathymetry in the late 19th century. Modern Science "discovered" and accepted this in the 1950's.

Those ancient Tibetans must've had some supernatural underwater breathing abilities to know that.

Never happened.

Just prior to Blavatsky writing "Isis Unveiled", an international task force, led by the British ship Challenger and the U.S. Dolphin, obtained the first map of the ocean floor. They lowered buckets on ropes until they contacted the bottom. In the twentieth century, sonar was invented to locate enemy submarines and later it acquired the peace-time use of mapping more accurately the ocean floor. Now satellites have obtained the same information. An article in "Discover Magazine" March 1996, displays this ocean feature with colored maps obtained indirectly - a satellite detected gravity that implied ocean bottom features.
Blavatsky used the then recently obtained information on the floor of the Atlantic to justify her position on Atlantis. She says the mid-atlantic ridge is a remnant of that continent.

"No more striking confirmation of our position could be given, than the fact that the ELEVATED RIDGE in the Atlantic basin, 9,000 feet in height, which runs for some two or three thousand miles southwards from a point near the British Islands, first slopes towards South America, then shifts almost at right angles to proceed in a SOUTH-EASTERLY line toward the African coast, whence it runs on southward to Tristan d'Acunha. This ridge is a remnant of an Atlantic continent.(SDii333)
Ignatius Donnelly's seminal work, "Atlantis: the Antediluvian World", published in 1882, has a map showing this ridge and what was known of it in his day. Blavatsky, however, claims to have knowledge beyond that provided by the research of the good ship Challenger."
She says:
"and, could it [the ridge] be traced further [past the island of Tristan d'Acunha], [it] would establish the reality of a submarine horse-shoe junction with a  former continent in the Indian Ocean." (Cf. chart adapted from the "Challenger" and "Dolphin" soundings in Mr. Donnelly's, "Atlantis, the Antediluvian World," p. 47) [The map on page 47 that she references, was omitted in later printings of Donnelly's book but is rescued from a 1900 edition and made available by the hot-link above.]
Before examining 20th century knowledge on this point, we should note her exact words. We may think casually that she is making a prediction. But then she might have said "the ridge will be found and it will go along this path ..." - as though she were visualizing the future scene with clairvoyance. Instead she said "could it be traced further ...". Her language suggests she has no specific knowledge on whether or not it will be possible to trace it further. Rather, she simply has knowledgeSource

Harte

Come on Harte. I expect better sources from you. This tract is from Blavatsky.net and is written by an astrologer, not a researcher or academic. Hence, why she's placing emphasis on whether Blavatsky was making a prediction or a suggestion.

Blavatsky was making neither. She was making a statement because this information was known by her and other initiates of the time. Saying "it could be traced further" isn't ambiguous enough for an argument.

As for the British task force dropping buckets into the ocean, I was aware of that and I think you'd agree that this method couldn't and didn't accurately map the mid-Atlantic ridge like Blavatsky did, but rather merely acknowledge it's existence.

originally posted by: AgarthaSeed

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: AgarthaSeed

See, here's the thing.

Saying that geological evidence is the only "real proof" we have is only true if you discount the words of many ancient civilizations.

For example, H.P. Blavatsky parroted the teachings of ancient Tibetans when she accurately described the mid-Atlantic ridge unusual bathymetry in the late 19th century. Modern Science "discovered" and accepted this in the 1950's.

Those ancient Tibetans must've had some supernatural underwater breathing abilities to know that.

Never happened.

Just prior to Blavatsky writing "Isis Unveiled", an international task force, led by the British ship Challenger and the U.S. Dolphin, obtained the first map of the ocean floor. They lowered buckets on ropes until they contacted the bottom. In the twentieth century, sonar was invented to locate enemy submarines and later it acquired the peace-time use of mapping more accurately the ocean floor. Now satellites have obtained the same information. An article in "Discover Magazine" March 1996, displays this ocean feature with colored maps obtained indirectly - a satellite detected gravity that implied ocean bottom features.
Blavatsky used the then recently obtained information on the floor of the Atlantic to justify her position on Atlantis. She says the mid-atlantic ridge is a remnant of that continent.

"No more striking confirmation of our position could be given, than the fact that the ELEVATED RIDGE in the Atlantic basin, 9,000 feet in height, which runs for some two or three thousand miles southwards from a point near the British Islands, first slopes towards South America, then shifts almost at right angles to proceed in a SOUTH-EASTERLY line toward the African coast, whence it runs on southward to Tristan d'Acunha. This ridge is a remnant of an Atlantic continent.(SDii333)
Ignatius Donnelly's seminal work, "Atlantis: the Antediluvian World", published in 1882, has a map showing this ridge and what was known of it in his day. Blavatsky, however, claims to have knowledge beyond that provided by the research of the good ship Challenger."
She says:
"and, could it [the ridge] be traced further [past the island of Tristan d'Acunha], [it] would establish the reality of a submarine horse-shoe junction with a  former continent in the Indian Ocean." (Cf. chart adapted from the "Challenger" and "Dolphin" soundings in Mr. Donnelly's, "Atlantis, the Antediluvian World," p. 47) [The map on page 47 that she references, was omitted in later printings of Donnelly's book but is rescued from a 1900 edition and made available by the hot-link above.]
Before examining 20th century knowledge on this point, we should note her exact words. We may think casually that she is making a prediction. But then she might have said "the ridge will be found and it will go along this path ..." - as though she were visualizing the future scene with clairvoyance. Instead she said "could it be traced further ...". Her language suggests she has no specific knowledge on whether or not it will be possible to trace it further. Rather, she simply has knowledgeSource

Harte

Come on Harte. I expect better sources from you. This tract is from Blavatsky.net and is written by an astrologer, not a researcher or academic. Hence, why she's placing emphasis on whether Blavatsky was making a prediction or a suggestion.

Blavatsky was making neither. She was making a statement because this information was known by her and other initiates of the time. Saying "it could be traced further" isn't ambiguous enough for an argument.

As for the British task force dropping buckets into the ocean, I was aware of that and I think you'd agree that this method couldn't and didn't accurately map the mid-Atlantic ridge like Blavatsky did, but rather merely acknowledge it's existence.

The point was, the early mapping occurred before Blavatski wrote that.

And the source quotes Blavatski. No way I'm reading through her idiot books to find those quotes for you when they're available much quicker some where else, like at the source I used.

So what I said stands.

It never happened.

Harte

a reply to: AgarthaSeed

Good point and it is remiss to not point out that Geological evidence is in a constant state of flux....which brings us round to the "timeline issue" again......you see it is as difficult to parse the geological epochs or stages of earths evolution into an accurate chronological order.....however the GCDW model explains this by illustrating history geological or otherwise in a circular overlaying format as opposed to a linear straight line......if we insist on demanding difficult to untangle micro-details in terms of timeline issues we overlook the generic macro-details....... the GCDW model gives us a macro/generic overview of recent changes.

It is ultimately the timeline issue which derails most people from seeing the big picture.

The timeline issue affects the production of chronological linear models of Language...and Cultural cycles by proxy in the same ways it impacts efforts to pigeon-hole geological times in a linear manner.

The general GCDW model focus is to provide data on the last Planetary Catastrophe which knocked all of humanity back to more or less the stone age....after which Humanity began picking up the pieces of its devestated world one painfull piece at a time based on an exponentially growing inverted conical model.....resulting in an epiclly low beginning of the rebuild building into a lightening fast technological evolution which we now are in the prime of IMHO.

This model can be proven to be repeatable...and this allows us to begin to untangle "some" of the circular layers of Humanities One True History.....and then attatch these evidences to cultures and languages which align with them.

Oral histories survive the best post-event...and over the year decades centuries and epochs billions of bits and pieces of differing "layers" of previous cycles are "found" and usually hidden from everyone to gain advantages for the few discoverers.This is why different old maps show different topologies....and all are correct....because massive changes actually happen over a very very short time period.....for example there could be a multiple real tangible accurate global maps in existance which display vastly differing planetary topology.....a major change every 3657 years ...and we begin to see how easy it is for say secret societies to posses OVERLAPPING evidences of same source but divergent technologies .....they will never stop searching because they know what is to be found.

Add to this the fact that high altitude aerial visual are required to map with the accuracy we see "laced" throughout the circular layering and interwaving of our history.Add to this evidence from Damon T. Berry which shows us....cave paintings are illustrating sattelite views among other things such as celestial knowledge.....and we can see people trying to pass forward...CONCEPTS.....time-capsules of knowledge which future people may use to advance themselves.


Atlantis could have existed 10,000 years ago....GCDW models show a 3657ish cycle.....basiclly whatever topography we see on land and on the ocean floors is the result of the last GCDW impact......just because we find scarring showing us plate subductions or sinkings does not in any way connect such evidence to "Atlantis"......yes it shows evidence of the last GCDW impact and that some un-named cycle of humanity was wiped out but we have no way of knowing if Atlantis was already written history when this event happened or not.

Sure you can map the ocean floors and earths surface....and yes we will see evidence of the most recent changes....but we still have no way to incorporate them into a macro-model timeline so we may chronologiclly map them....at least not in a linear manner.

This area illuminates itself within the CGDW model template.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: toysforadults

I'm repeating facts that point to this,actual evidence,I don't speculate like you apparently are

originally posted by: Arnie123

It does seem plausible. A quick experiment of two cups, one filled with water, the other with a small hole. When you compresses the top cup down, the water from the bottom cup shoots up through the hole.

Geology doesn't work that way.

In fact, we have MILLIONS of places where there is water underground and a hole develops above it (Karst formations) - some are very big. What happens when the rock falls down (or subsides) is that it breaks into rubble because rocks aren't the same as paper cups.

This isn't "breaking into huge chunks"... it's smashing into fist and car sized pieces.

That kind of evidence would be pretty easy to spot... you'd have these huge areas with rubble at the bottom and heavy water erosion around the hole. If it didn't squirt but just fell, you'd have a huge hole and rubble at the bottom.

But not enough rubble to force the water up (think of tossing rocks into a well or putting marbles into a glass of water.)

Karst formations (Karts tinkholes) are found all over the world in areas where there's limestone (ancient sea beds)... in Florida, they swallow up cars and houses.

originally posted by: one4all
a reply to: AgarthaSeed

Good point and it is remiss to not point out that Geological evidence is in a constant state of flux....which brings us round to the "timeline issue" again......you see it is as difficult to parse the geological epochs or stages of earths evolution into an accurate chronological order.....

HUH???

No, seriously... on what basis do you make this claim? Earth's history is very clearly laid out in the rocks... you can walk past any road cut or drive through mountains and see it written there for you. Or look at drill cores. It really couldn't be any plainer.