Lost Roman Map has ATLANTIS at Eye of Sahara Africa! (Richat Structure)

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: bluesfreak

After all, if you saw something that you knew was wrong, wouldn't you rush to correct it?

Funny though, how when other experts give their input , they are not treated as experts giving their opinion in the same manner.
I have had several run ins with Harte over the use of lathe work in AE.
I am a machinist and I see circular uniform striations every day at work - the resultant tool mark signature of lathe work.
I have seen these forensic markings on many AE bowls , with my own eyes too in museums here, and yet all you hear from these gatekeepers is the mantra
“ they didn’t have lathes “ .

Now I’m not trying to say that I wish a ‘victory ‘ over Harte , and want to make him kneel and say there were lathes (he probably sees it that way) I know what I’m looking at ,
but the disrespect of other expert opinion by these three is not very academic at all.
Byrd is never rude I might add.
But your point isn’t exactly correct, I’m afraid .
a reply to: Hooke

The fact is, there is not a single whit of evidence that lathes were used in ancient Egypt.
Cold hard fact.

You know, if you turn the tool and not the part, it's not a lathe.

Harte

That's because "ancient Egypt" didn't use lathes to make those vases, because they DIDN'T MAKE THOSE VASES.

Jesus, you're thick.

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: JoeRelentless

originally posted by: Hooke

originally posted by: liammc
Very interesting topic.... just wondering though as I have been browsing this forum for years now, why is it the same 3 people all the time who are forever "debunking" stuff on this forum?

It's like they are being paid to do it or something. Very strange.

Or, possibly, if they have years of experience in teaching and/or archaeology (which possibly at least some of them have), they recognise when something is mistaken or incorrect, and point it out.

After all, if you saw something that you knew was wrong, wouldn't you rush to correct it?

Years of experience teaching theories based on flimsy evidence and obvious conjecture derived from cherry picked incomplete records doesn't make you an expert worthy of pointing out anything as wrong.
History is full of examples of self riteous turds forcing their truths on everyone, sometimes for decades or even centuries...until they were proven wrong.
In fact, it's the norm rather than not.

Proven wrong by scientists and historians who, according to your own belief, are all liars.

Harte

Nope.
Proven wrong by visionaries that looked outside of the box and were likely viciously attacked for it until the gatekeepers died off or the evidence was so overwhelming they had no choice but to shut up and accept it.

Nice poor interpretation though...the exact qualification that makes you a follower instead of a leader in your field.

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: LABTECH767
a reply to: bluesfreak

It's a good point actually, most archaeologists are NOT engineers, stone masons or otherwise skilled so there interpretation is ALWAYS speculative although stick a lot of speculation together and you have a model, make enough of your colleagues and enough of the less informed believe your Speculation is how it really was and pretty soon you have an established model of the past.

.

Which is why you always have expert consultants with those skills at digs.

Is that right?
Hand picked because they agree with premise or ones that will actually challenge your cobbled together interpretation?

a reply to: Hanslune

You can move me to whatever status you want.
Your opinion of me holds as much water as your other opinions.
None.
The math on the pyramid construction based on the information provided by mainstream archeology (if it's not a monopoly of ideas, how does it have a mainstream?) is impossible, making every assertion about its who, when, and how up for debate.

100 blocks every 5 minutes? For a year? So you've taken a ridiculous premise and turned it into full tard. Brilliant. You can't explain how they managed ONE block every 4.5 minutes, so your answer is 100 every 5 minutes. And I'm the troll, lol. I'll take troll over stunningly brain dead any day of the week.

Harte’s brain “numbers, numbers , numbers..”
whilst forgetting he is dealing with OBJECTS that need to i be made .
A different ball game .
He can’t be serious about 100 blocks every five minutes .
Especially when he gives no explanation as to the delivery system for that . Just saying ‘multiple ramps’ means nothing . How? Was there a one way system in place?
Please explain how this would be achieved.

I’ve been in machine shops where the gaffer wants machines moved or readied for a sale.
I’ve moved a 2 tonne machine using steel rollers on a hard concrete floor with several guys all working together .
You wouldn’t believe how difficult it was .
I’ve helped with a 5 tonne machine being moved in the same manner, and that was insane . We had to move it across the shop floor and up onto a raised riser.
Steel rollers , a ramp, all kinds of straps and levers.
It took us most of the day and afterwards everyone agreed it was probably too dangerous to have done it the way we did .
The dead weight of objects in this weight range is hard to conceive unless you’ve tried it .
To get even the slightest movement of it with rollers underneath on a smooth concrete floor seemed impossible to us at first . So levers it was.
We inched this thing along the floor about 40 ft and up a ramp. The most dangerous part , even though it was strapped etc it was stupid amd crazy .
It took us over five hours I would say .

The two tonne machine was smaller but strangely as difficult. Inched along too .
I imagine levering in a two tonne block into a gap, or butting up to another block would be extremely difficult.
I don’t believe it’s something you could achieve in a matter of minutes. No way .
We had a crane too , on a gantry in the machine shop, but the gaffer said “ the old guys who got it in here didn’t have this crane “ and got the rollers out .
We didn’t have to roll it from a quarry and up a few levels of a pyramid either . a reply to:

The fact is, there is not a single whit of evidence that lathes were used in ancient Egypt. Cold hard fact. You know, if you turn the tool and not the part, it's not a lathe. Harte

You know , when you turn the tool , and not the workpiece you can’t get the even striations seen in bowls and vases, you can’t get the perfect circularity , as these are the forensics of the Lathe.
The lathe cuts by using a single point which creates a purely circular striation because the workpiece is spinning .
That type of forensic marking cannot be replicated without a single point.

Such a shame you have the ego to want to debate a lathe operator on the operation of lathes and their resultant tool marks . Let’s go….

YOU may say there were no lathes ,
But the objects say there were.

This from a lathe expert, take it as you will ,
Im here to deny your engineering ignorance , which is quite vast, it seems.

Oh, and good luck with those three sprits tonight , Harte, I hear the Ghost of Christmas Future will appear to you in the form of Graham Hancock .


a reply to: Harte

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: JoeRelentless

originally posted by: Hooke

originally posted by: liammc
Very interesting topic.... just wondering though as I have been browsing this forum for years now, why is it the same 3 people all the time who are forever "debunking" stuff on this forum?

It's like they are being paid to do it or something. Very strange.

Or, possibly, if they have years of experience in teaching and/or archaeology (which possibly at least some of them have), they recognise when something is mistaken or incorrect, and point it out.

After all, if you saw something that you knew was wrong, wouldn't you rush to correct it?

Years of experience teaching theories based on flimsy evidence and obvious conjecture derived from cherry picked incomplete records doesn't make you an expert worthy of pointing out anything as wrong.
History is full of examples of self riteous turds forcing their truths on everyone, sometimes for decades or even centuries...until they were proven wrong.
In fact, it's the norm rather than not.

Proven wrong by scientists and historians who, according to your own belief, are all liars.

Harte

You may as well give up Harte, Joe has obviously seen a youtube video so he knows, beyond any doubt whatsoever, that everything he says is right and anyone who disagrees is either stupid, ignorant or deliberately covering up the truth. Admit it, you've been beat

Seeing as you are a geologist , im surprised at your responses if I’m honest .
The whole of science is based on (supposedly ) open discourse and speculation.
The first person in here to get insulting is always Harte. Always has been always will be .

Are you aware of the recent challenges to the official Missoula Flood theory?
They are all worthy questions and point out the true failings of the hypothesis as presented by mainstream Geology.
It seems more likely that huge drumlin fields further north indicate immense water descending from the north sub glacially, instead of it ‘just’ being a 2000ft high ice dam freezing amd refreezing up to 90 times ( the volume of water required to do the scablands damage ) during a period of warming.
The kind of evidence that is routinely derided on here as it challenges a dogma .

Ps- I think that the geological processes exist at the Azores Plateau for what is described by Plato at the time period he describes.
Do you agree?
I’m going to go with a ‘no’ but you might surprise me! a reply to: AndyMayhew

originally posted by: bluesfreak

The kind of evidence that is routinely derided on here as it challenges a dogma .

It's the sort of evidence that is routinely derided on here by some, yes. But not by the likes of Harte, Hans, Byrd etal. I'll have to look into this new hypothesis. It clearly doesn't support a global catastrophe though, so many will, of course, dismiss it out of hand.

Ps- I think that the geological processes exist at the Azores Plateau for what is described by Plato at the time period he describes.
Do you agree?
I’m going to go with a ‘no’ but you might surprise me! a reply to: AndyMayhew

In my opinion, the Azore's Plateau fails the test by the simple problem of how, when and why did a short-lived landmass in the midst of an ocean become populated by so much fauna and flora, let alone humans, from Africa and Europe.

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: JoeRelentless

originally posted by: Hooke

originally posted by: liammc
Very interesting topic.... just wondering though as I have been browsing this forum for years now, why is it the same 3 people all the time who are forever "debunking" stuff on this forum?

It's like they are being paid to do it or something. Very strange.

Or, possibly, if they have years of experience in teaching and/or archaeology (which possibly at least some of them have), they recognise when something is mistaken or incorrect, and point it out.

After all, if you saw something that you knew was wrong, wouldn't you rush to correct it?

Years of experience teaching theories based on flimsy evidence and obvious conjecture derived from cherry picked incomplete records doesn't make you an expert worthy of pointing out anything as wrong.
History is full of examples of self riteous turds forcing their truths on everyone, sometimes for decades or even centuries...until they were proven wrong.
In fact, it's the norm rather than not.

Proven wrong by scientists and historians who, according to your own belief, are all liars.

Harte

You may as well give up Harte, Joe has obviously seen a youtube video so he knows, beyond any doubt whatsoever, that everything he says is right and anyone who disagrees is either stupid, ignorant or deliberately covering up the truth. Admit it, you've been beat

Don't need to watch a video on YouTube to see the holes in the official narrative.
Don't need to watch a video on YouTube to see that scientific institutions are dysfunctional and self crippling dens of ego driven narcissists either.
All you need to do is to listen to them talk.

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

originally posted by: bluesfreak

The kind of evidence that is routinely derided on here as it challenges a dogma .

It's the sort of evidence that is routinely derided on here by some, yes. But not by the likes of Harte, Hans, Byrd etal. I'll have to look into this new hypothesis. It clearly doesn't support a global catastrophe though, so many will, of course, dismiss it out of hand.

Ps- I think that the geological processes exist at the Azores Plateau for what is described by Plato at the time period he describes.
Do you agree?
I’m going to go with a ‘no’ but you might surprise me! a reply to: AndyMayhew

In my opinion, the Azore's Plateau fails the test by the simple problem of how, when and why did a short-lived landmass in the midst of an ocean become populated by so much fauna and flora, let alone humans, from Africa and Europe.

It doesn't support a global cataclysm on its own.
But being a geologist, you know that isn't the only pro- cat evidence because you don't get your information from YouTube like I do...
cometresearchgroup.org...

a reply to: bluesfreak

Are you aware of the recent challenges to the official Missoula Flood theory?
They are all worthy questions and point out the true failings of the hypothesis as presented by mainstream Geology.

I didnt realize how bad the situation was/is when it comes to the stranglehold "academia" has on common sense and logic. It is it's own breed of mind control...

All of it based on assumptions that have never been seen to happen, in our lifetimes. All of it must be thrown out, especially the dating process using "strata".

A experiment was conducted, scientifically, to prove strata building was not as assumed. The land based dating is in error. The strata were formed far quicker than science assumed.

The overlooked mechanism is not the water, but the unbelievable amounts of water involved, in periodic occurrences.
You look at one event (tree), but can not see, the ocean (Forest). The amount of slide Jimmy pointed out in the ocean, had to be moved by "MASSIVE" amounts of water.

Please review the Experiment in detail. Then scale it up...



All of the water throughout time required to produce all the global strata is still here. We call it, "Oceans". And it all can be traced back to its origins, because the ocean beds are dated differently than land based strata. 70-80 million years. That is when the Strata building actually started. The wiping out of the Dinosaurs, and the beginning of the drop in the Oxygen content confirm this. Another conformation is many dinosaur bone beds are found as if they were washed into Log jams, by flooding.

bluesfreak, its a completely different history than what we were taught.

a reply to: All Seeing Eye

There is clear visual evidence of major flooding across the Sahara in the direction of the richat.
Whether it truly is from flooding remains to be seen, but I tend to trust the guys that were right about the scablands etc.

In regards to the usual suspects, well...
Education doesn't imply intelligence.

Hard to deny it by reading the posts of the self assigned arbiters of the sciences on this forum.

In a time where the entire world's knowledge is available at the click of a mouse button to anyone who's interested, we still have the dinosaur academic priesthood acting as if they have some super complex behind the scenes information none of us have access to or could even understand...

If you dare call into question their authority, you are an uppity peasant that gets foolish ideas from YouTube or Wikipedia.

Attacking the inquisitor instead of the query or the information being presented.

Not one of them has addressed the calculations I posted on the impossibility of the 20 year build timeline for the great pyramid in another thread on here.

I'm still waiting on a coherent explanation that doesn't involve me being a new member with no history, and a troll.

As if being a new member with no history negates the question or implies I haven't been a past member or long time lurker that was just fed up with the intellectually dishonest bullying.

Like I said before...not a terribly creative or clever bunch.

a reply to: JoeRelentless

There is clear visual evidence of major flooding across the Sahara in the direction of the richat.

Oh, I agree completely. All one has to do is note the large building blocks that are scattered outside of the rings to the south to see that. Washed there by a massive wave of mud and derbies making their way to the ocean. Larger heavier items would fall out first, and the lighter items later, maybe even making into the ocean.

There is another area to the north that I have not shown or discusses previously because it required a considerable amount of thought, in fact 2 or so years. It too was hit by massive amounts of water and had the telltale building blocks scattered about. Except, some of these blocks were on the other side of a bluff, hill. It was confusing because they are in a run off, but how did they get their?. Then, I saw it. Let me show you the area.

El Beyrdh, 26 miles to the north.



Each one of the yellow pins represents a building block. You will note a tear drop shaped area to the right that runs generally east west. This area has been marked out and plotted. I suspect it is the original location of a building or structure. It appears as though it was blasted with a steam of, water, sending the blocks in various directions opposite of the direction the blast of water came from. The volume and force of the water actually blasted some of the blocks over the bute, hill, landing where you see them. What made me see this was the discoloration of the soil, between the building blocks and the bute itself. It had washed some of the topsoil over with the blocks.



This is a closeup of the Tear drop area. Note the same type of structures here, as in the second ring of the Eye.




The yellow pins to the extreme left are another separate site, with building blocks. All the Building blocks weather here or at the Eye, all, have fences around them. Which indicates "Someone" has knowledge of what they are, or what they represent, or, at the very least, something that needs to be identified...

So yes, I agree, great flooding. But this Flood, appears to have been focused, directed...

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye
a reply to: JoeRelentless

There is clear visual evidence of major flooding across the Sahara in the direction of the richat.

Oh, I agree completely. All one has to do is note the large building blocks that are scattered outside of the rings to the south to see that. Washed there by a massive wave of mud and derbies making their way to the ocean. Larger heavier items would fall out first, and the lighter items later, maybe even making into the ocean.

There is another area to the north that I have not shown or discusses previously because it required a considerable amount of thought, in fact 2 or so years. It too was hit by massive amounts of water and had the telltale building blocks scattered about. Except, some of these blocks were on the other side of a bluff, hill. It was confusing because they are in a run off, but how did they get their?. Then, I saw it. Let me show you the area.

El Beyrdh, 26 miles to the north.

Each one of the yellow pins represents a building block. You will note a tear drop shaped area to the right that runs generally east west. This area has been marked out and plotted. I suspect it is the original location of a building or structure. It appears as though it was blasted with a steam of, water, sending the blocks in various directions opposite of the direction the blast of water came from. The volume and force of the water actually blasted some of the blocks over the bute, hill, landing where you see them. What made me see this was the discoloration of the soil, between the building blocks and the bute itself. It had washed some of the topsoil over with the blocks.

This is a closeup of the Tear drop area. Note the same type of structures here, as in the second ring of the Eye.

The yellow pins to the extreme left are another separate site, with building blocks. All the Building blocks weather here or at the Eye, all, have fences around them. Which indicates "Someone" has knowledge of what they are, or what they represent, or, at the very least, something that needs to be identified...

So yes, I agree, great flooding. But this Flood, appears to have been focused, directed...

I don't know about directed.
It's a low lying area, so that's where a surge would go.

a reply to: JoeRelentless

Yes, I do agree, low lying area. I see it as a northern port for the Ringed City. There are a couple of ruins in the area besides the building blocks. The rivers go down hill into the waterfalls when the water is running, so there was a running river, if not a small bay. Its how the building blocks are laying, and how they were Blown over that bute. If it were just a flat flood the blocks would be closer together trailing away in the opposite direction that the waters came.

Another reason I believe it was directed was the erosion pattern in the Center Island.



Do you see the different colored layers that are missing its dark brown patina? Its as if it were "sand blasted". That erosion had to come from above.. I suspect the water had sand in it.

This is a Ring from another part of Africa. This is what the Richat should look like, untouched.


I know how insane that might sound, but dont forget "god" (Anunnaki Anu) took credit for the flood. And if they were real live flesh and blood, they didn't have a magic wand. They had "Technology". And I can see it, and how they did it.

And to top it off, they left their mark, as if to challenge us to figure it out...



Well, I figured it out. I just cant get anyone to get interested. Its too Fringe, its too out of the norm, its unbelievable. But that is exactly how it happened. And has happened for the last 70 mil years. They lied to us big time!

Not many have read Enki's lost book, and, research the Richat. But in that book he gives clue's and hints, but also tells us "The Secrets of Heaven and Earth will not be revealed to mankind". (He left a secret society here to make sure, we wouldn't find out) So he edited to leave out pertinent facts that would lead us to discover those secrets, and added disinformation. I have those secrets. And no one gives a dam...

Your looking at "Heaven"





Enki told us how they directed water..................

They are the ones keeping us in ignorance...........

Merry Christmas.

I'm always up for a new Atlantis theory or rumination but I wouldn't bet the farm on the richat like this guy seems to be doing. This dude kinda screams 'oh look at my theory, i really want to rub shoulders with guys like Randall and Graham at conventions, that would be cool'. The richat is worth studying further of-course but I'm not buying Atlantis was at that location.

a reply to: All Seeing Eye

"looking at Heaven"

In the myth of the descent of Ishtar , the Anunnaki are called the deities of the underworld , who , living in a separate part of the Underworld , determine the fate of the souls of the dead .

"Look for the girl with sun in her eyes, and she's gone"

And I thought the egg thing was ....

originally posted by: Bordon81
a reply to: All Seeing Eye

"looking at Heaven"

In the myth of the descent of Ishtar , the Anunnaki are called the deities of the underworld , who , living in a separate part of the Underworld , determine the fate of the souls of the dead .

"Look for the girl with sun in her eyes, and she's gone"

And I thought the egg thing was ....

"From heaven to earth they came", Anunnaki.

"4 Thou shalt make thee no graven image, neither any similitude of things that are in heaven above, neither that are in the earth beneath, nor that are in the waters under the earth.

5 Thou shalt not [a]bow down to them, neither serve them: for I am the Lord thy God, a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, upon the third generation and upon the fourth of them that hate me:

6 And showing mercy unto [c]thousands to them that love me, and keep my commandments."

The above statement appears to be, true. But out of the original context, time, place. You have to ask yourself why this lord god felt it necessary to warn mankind that making "engraved" images of themselves would not be accepted. We are now finding pre flood "engraved" images that do reflect them, and it is shocking.

"Heaven above" translates to the ancient moon worship and the beings that go to and fro from heaven. Does our government have the photos taken (Graven Images) on the moon? The bible warned them, not to. Tell me again why we never went back, to heaven, err, the moon.

"In the Earth beneath" Is this a reference to the "DUMS" Deep underground military bases, and the numerous underground cities? And technically a "Hollow Earth" would be included. But yet if we dig deep enough into the records they tell us, yes this is true. In fact if you go far enough back we find records that tell us, it is where we come from, the Garden of Paradise. Thousands of years passed but yet we still remembered via cargo cult religions such as mummification that reflected certain truths that our souls are eternal.

"Waters under the earth" Finally the government (Navy) has gone forward and admitted there are "Object" going into and coming out of the waters. Tic Tocs, I believe they called them. These videos (Graven images) are borderline. I suppose if you dont record the "Pilots" your within biblical edict.

Admiral Byrd also is said to have gone to the "Garden" and documented what was encountered. Even said he met the "King of the World" and had a nice visit. But to go public with this would quite literally rock the biblical boat.

It is not a happenstance or coincidence that all the people to give testament, or lack of, of their contact with "Others", Aliens, ancient beings, have one thing in common. They all belonged to the same brotherhood, the same blood oath, the same ancient moon worshiping religion, who love the KJV bible. The bible that has hidden so much truth, and exposed so much truth at the same time. And reflects the truth of the following "A half truth, is a whole lie".

We, humanity, can not make decisions based in false information, what to think, what to believe, what to feel. For to do so, as we have, would lead to nothing more than enslavement by ignorance. Enslaved to false ideologies, realities, and even morality. What is right and true hidden by what is wrong, and evil. We end up destroying ourselves due to ignorance. A ignorance that is enforced and guided by that ancient moon worshiping, brotherhood, doing the bidding of a masquerading god. Or, so it would seem.

So, we live the life of lies, believe in falsities and fairy tales, worship false gods, and kill one another in ignorance. When we reach the pearly gates, who shall judge us? Shall we be treated as smart monkeys who are not worthy of any consideration? Was it our faults we were lied to? Who has the greater sin? " deities of the underworld , who , living in a separate part of the Underworld , determine the fate of the souls of the dead . " Who are these Deities? And by what right do they sit in judgment?

And I thought the egg thing was ....

The egg thing as in, life is on the inside of the egg, not the outside, thing? Yes, imagine logic so simple, so old, and so true. Geode, a hollow rock translates to "Earth Like" in ancient Greek. Ahh, but dont let that cloud your "Brotherhood" teachings, that, that egg, has molten lava inside........ What fools we have been.


So, lets look at that as a reality. Supposing not all were thrown out of the garden, what would they think? Obviously they chose to view the lord god as that and worshiped and loved him as the passage stated. They, would be loved, pampered, given everything they desired, as long as the love lasted. But do not raise your head, do not question, do not make waves, and its a perfect long life. In time I suppose boredom would set in as their are no real challenges to occupy them. One thing living in the garden is, you do not see the same sky, we do. You can not see the orbiting "Heaven", as we do. You, generally, must believe what you are told, and to a extent, not so different than we who live on the outside of the egg. A Soul who occupies flesh...

In the back of my mind it come forward occasionally that all of us have been captured (Spiritually) and held hostage by a force that turned its back on the Divine. We all to one extent or another suffer from Stockholm syndrome. Maybe because we can to one degree or another relate to the tormented and tortured life of our captors. Who really knows...

Time, will tell.....

So whats up with the Masonic jamboree at the South pole??

a reply to: All Seeing Eye

The egg thing as in, life is on the inside of the egg, not the outside, thing?

Actually it was in reference to lyrics from a different song.

You said no strings could secure you at the station

Jonathon Swift vexing rather than diverting attention away from the little endian?