Science Proving 'Global Flood Myth' true - Dating for Prehistoric Civilization Legitimized!

So i was about to doze off for some sleep, and something struck me that i thought i needed to get posted while it was fresh in my mind.

There are VAST underground bodies of water.

HUGE Underground Ocean Found In Eastern Asia

These are not closed systems (i doubt Lake Vostok is some sealed off, remote lake, honestly). They (like Ted Stevens internet) are connected by a series of tubes. Underground rivers, streams, etc. There are places in New Mexico where you can hear the water, or river, rushing underneath. In my hometown we have a HUGE underground spring that feeds off the Edwards Aquifer.

If you displace that kind of water, to cause such a great tsunami, you will displace in ALL directions.

So these underground water systems would also be affected, right? One of the underlying currents of all flood myth stories is the ground opening up, or the firmament opening up...but the waters not only spill from the sky, they also spill up from under the Earth, bubbling up (or exploding up) from below as the displaced water sought global equilibrium.

Bear in mind, we are not talking about your Indonesian tsunami here. This isn't the result of a landslide. It is the result of a major and significan displacement of water by a near conttinental sized mass of ice/water.

I would also expect to see earthquakes and new fault lines caused by the pressures of these subterranean bodies of water. As well, one could expect, reasonably, that volcanic activity might peak, at least regionally, as you introduce greater amounts of water (steam is a major cause of volcanic pressure).

It should be noted that there are some volcanic explosions that have been shown to release significant amounts of iridium, among other elements commonly attributed to extraterrestrial bodies. This one fact has the ability to skew any data that we may try to glean from such geological analysis.

The bottom line of what i am getting at here, i think, is that the causative relationship arising from the initial impact event could likely result in all manner of cataclysms (when applied vs a thought experiment, anyway). Any search for answers should be expanded to include such possibility.


BTW, if anyone would like to review a VERY extensive listing of various flood myths:

www.talkorigins.org...

from a biblical point of view, it is interesting how similar some of the indian stories are...right down to the 40 days and 40 nights (a tribe in Oklahoma/Arkansas). Of course, from the perspective of this thread, the 40 days being repeated might end up being interesting.

I am awaiting some input from a meteorologist. He is out chasing storms now, so getting his attention is proving difficult. But i am curious how long any water ejected into the atmosphere in Marusek's supposition would last. I can accept a 40 day rain. But how long did it take for this rain to fall? Minutes? Days? Centuries? The flood stories seem to be either missing any possible cometary/meteor type material, or they speak metaphorically due to not understanding what they observed. The "turtle" imagery repeated among Amerinds is interesting as well.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


BFFT - Do people often tell you your mind works in mysterious and wonderful ways? If not, they should, and just in case they don't, allow me to rectify.... YOUR MIND WORKS IN WONDERFUL AND MYSTERIOUS WAYS!

EDIT TO REPLY TO OPTIMUS AND HANS:

i think that what the op and furrytexan are getting at hans is that the airblast meteor hitting the icepack and causing massive global coastal flooding is the basis for most flood myths. which i think is a very good theory.

optimus primal -- Welcome and thanks for being able to not only understand, but explain what is being put forth.

Hans says - 1963 that research by Eugene Merle Shoemaker conclusively proved this hypothesis - that earth is being affected by impact events.

Okay. That is not, to my mind, relevant to the topic but I'll take your word for it. I agree many people have said asteroids have hit earth and there is evidence they did so. How is that salient to the conversatrion? And can we move past this and talk about the topic and data? Cheers!

[edit on 1-8-2008 by TheWayISeeIt]

In the biblical flood account it mentions that the mantel and the fountains of the deep were broken. Considering that this refers too high altitude water and underground water, having a comet / astroid impact causing the flood is my belief. To include a possible bombardment accompanying the main impact. Though I was under the impression the impact point was what we now call the Yucatan Peninsula.

On impact, it fractured the crust and forcing water high into the atmosphere. Some falling in torrents as rain and some a ice giving us flash frozen mammoths, plants and other items. Uplifting of the crust and in some cases folding it over upon itself. Global earthquakes, volcanos, massive storms etc. all forming an almost total ELE at around 10,000 to 11,000 BC.

Ya I know not very scientific but the best I can do at the moment from memory.

If a glacial sheet on N. America is hit by a meteor or comet, obviously the heat and impact will melt large amounts of ice, half possible would be steam, another half of effected ice would be water, but certainly the effected area couldn't change water globally, the meteor necessary to do that would also certainly destroy part of the earth as well, also is there evidence of the exact size and thickness of the ice/water before this supposed event? Certainly the flood myths are in multiple religious books, Indian, christian, native American, so on, so there probably is something there, but the force necessary to do this would have destroyed part of earth itself, and not just a crater, could there be a different event to describe this happening worldwide? A continent sized Meteor would have the velocity and mass build up that would destroy the earth itself, and i believe they recently found a very old Egyptian port, that isn't very far from being on dry land as it is, not enough for a change to the oceans that a global flood would bring about?

Sometime over ten years ago I read a book which did a great job of pinpointing the date and cause most likely for the 9500BC ELE. This is the title.
"Cataclysm : Compelling Evidence of a Cosmic Catastrophe in 9500 B. C."
By D S Allan and J B Delair.

Derek S Allan is a researcher, specialising in palaeogeography and cartographic evidence for climatic and land-form change in recent geological times, particularly in the Arctic. J Bernard Delair, a geological surveyor and researcher with wide commercial field experience and author of numerous technical reports, has a special interest in the present distribution of animals, plants and attendant geophysical problems of early Holocene times.

Here are two links about it. The first one is where I got the above information from. To see other people now learning about the event which this book so expertly examines makes me feel good. There is clearly a growing number of people who agree that the orthodox view of that time period and what occured then is woefully unsupported by the physical evidence. It is nice to see that ancient cultures worldwide may not all have been wrong after all.

www.knowledge.co.uk...

www.compulsivereader.com...

Originally posted by BlackGuardXIII
Sometime over ten years ago I read a book which did a great job of pinpointing the date and cause most likely for the 9500BC ELE. This is the title.
"Cataclysm : Compelling Evidence of a Cosmic Catastrophe in 9500 B. C."
By D S Allan and J B Delair.

Possibly the worst book on the subject every written. Sitchin is miles better!

I started to do a critical appraisal of the book a few years back but quickly gave up .... here's a bit of it though:

1) On page 15 we read that:

Studies have shown that at 10,178BC, or over 12,000 years ago, the celestial pole was inclined at an angle of 30° from its present position. This in turn strongly suggests that the terrestrial axis was then orientated differently from today

Ref: Noel, M and DH Tarling 1975 “The Laschamp Geomagnetic Event” Nature Vol 253 pp705-706

Problem is, the Laschamp Geomagnetic Event, as the name suggests, was a geomagnetic excursion – the position of the magnetic N Pole changed, as it sometimes does. There is no evidence whatsoever that the celestial or terrestrial pole was inclined differently to today (allowing for precessional changes)

2) Page 26

Reference to the Gobi basin being occupied by a sea called the Great Han Sai within human memory, and that the entire basin lat 2-3,000 ft lower. No reference given

Assertions that elevation of Tibetan plateau occurred at end of Pleistocene, in association with uplift in other ranges – only reference Flint R F 1947 GlacialGeology and the Pleistocene Epoch

Subsequent assertions of post ice age uplift of mountain ranges based of interpretation of reference to such events occurring ‘recently’ – without apparent understanding of geological significance of this terminology – or based on early 20th century texts. Lack of late 20th century studies is telling.

3) On page 28 is it reported that the Atlas mountains formerly extended into the present Atlantic Ocean at least as far as the Canary Islands, with subsidence of this occurring in late Pleistocene or early Holocene times – reference Gentil, L 1914 La Geologie du Maroc.

Numerous other ‘evidence’ of orogenic uplift in late or post glacial times based entirely on similar early 20th century texts, too numerous to mention but all long superceded by new research and discoveries.

It seems incredible that apparently intelligent people such as Allan and Delair should based their theories on the opinions of writers from 60 years ago – whilst comprehensively dismissing or ignoring all subsequent research and opinion.

4) Reference to the sudden end of the YD as evidence of a sudden end to the last ice age is disingenuous – the YD occurred several thousand years after the LGM and glacial retreat was well underway before the brief re-advance postulated during the YD. Further disingenuity is shown by use of outdated maps of the extent of northern hemisphere glaciation – it’s now commonly known not to extended over Siberia. This in turn throws into question comments about the lack of glaciation in the currently coldest part of the N Hemisphere. The lack of a map showing current N hemisphere glaciation is noticeable in every single book purporting to offer an alternative explanation for the ice age. The fact that current N hemisphere glaciation is ‘lop sided’, centred around the Atlantic and extends south of the Arctic Circle in some region, yet is entirely absent for all landmass within the arctic circle in Alaska/Siberia is an inconvenience authors of such books choose to conveniently ignore.

5) On page 43 that appear to think that the YD and Allerod are one and the same, and offer evidence of “a pronounced cooling of surface waters during Younger Dryas times” in the Sulu sea as proof that, contrary to expectations, temps fell at the end of the YD …. !

6) Page 52/53

As an expert on glaciology they use H H Howorth. Amazingly they could find no better expert in the 90 years since Howorth wrote Ice or Water? In 1905 ….

7) On page 58, after the inevitable quotations of Hibben (one would think he was the only person ever to look at or opiniate on the Alaskan Muck!) we read, incredibly, in reference to John Tyndall in 1883, that his remarks respecting great heat being required for the formation of widespread ice-sheets are still correct and have been upheld by nearly all later geophysicists. Well, not far out - none would actually be more accurate. I can only assume Allan and Delair have not read any book or paper on the ice ages published in the past 50 years….

8) Page 59

Quoting Nilsson, H 1953 Synthetische Artbildung: Grundlinen einer exakten Biologie they claim that lignite deposits at Geiseltal in Germany contain the bones of giant constrictor snakes, East African salamanders, crocodiles, South American condor, an Indo-Australian bird, marsupial mammals, apes as well as fungi and algae impressed on leaves that are only today found on plants in Brazil, the Cameroons and Java. Intriguing indeed, though this doesn’t sound like lignite to me. This at least requires clarification. Allen and Delair conclude that only hurricanes and tidal waves could have reduced such a collection of disparate animals (but fail to explain how such events pick up different animals from all over the world to drop in one small spot). They make similar claims regarding the range of bird species found at La Brea (ignoring, of course, any possibility that such birds may just possibly have not all be interred there at the same time)


9) One fundamental problem with their theory which does not seem to be addressed is, if such a cataclysmic event occurred, how do so many species in so many places survive? Bearing in mind that they assert than much of the pre 9,500BC land masses of the world are now deep ocean, major mountain ranges did not exist (where did mountain adapted species live?) and much of what is now land was previously the seabed. Entire bioclimes shifted thousands of miles. Overnight. And yet there was no genetic bottleneck amongst currently known species; whilst a few became extinct, the vast majority suffered no trauma whatsoever. Massive hurricanes and monster tidal waves swept the earth. And left almost all species happily living on where they were beforehand, as if nothing had ever happened. And whilst one might argue over the reliability of dating techniques, the fact remains that there is no evidence whatsoever that any species became extinct specifically at this time and nearly all the recovered ‘flash frozen’ fauna of N America and Alaska dates to before this date – often by several tens of thousands of years. Are all the dates wrong? And how credible is an argument that the dates must be wrong because we know that they actually died 9,500 years ago and the reason we know that is because, well, er, um …… that’s when our conjecture says they must have died. Such circular reasoning does not go down well outside of certain conspiracy forums …

Originally posted by Ruggeder
If a glacial sheet on N. America is hit by a meteor or comet, obviously the heat and impact will melt large amounts of ice, half possible would be steam, another half of effected ice would be water, but certainly the effected area couldn't change water globally, the meteor necessary to do that would also certainly destroy part of the earth as well, also is there evidence of the exact size and thickness of the ice/water before this supposed event? Certainly the flood myths are in multiple religious books, Indian, christian, native American, so on, so there probably is something there, but the force necessary to do this would have destroyed part of earth itself, and not just a crater, could there be a different event to describe this happening worldwide? A continent sized Meteor would have the velocity and mass build up that would destroy the earth itself, and i believe they recently found a very old Egyptian port, that isn't very far from being on dry land as it is, not enough for a change to the oceans that a global flood would bring about?

it seems you may not fully understand.

The supposition here is that it is a comet ranging from 1-4 miles (i would suppose its original size to be in the magnitude of 4+ miles). This comet begins to break apart. Remember, we are talking about a comet, travelling 200k mph (vs a meteor at 25k mph).

As this comet begins to break up due to the stresses of its approach to Earth and the inner solar system, it rains down a firestorm of destruction across the globe. Not 1 single impact. Hundreds of thousands of impacts, with 1 posibly being left in the 2 mile range. The dust particles traling this loose amalgamation of former cometary material rains down on earth for thousands of years to follow (possibly being seen as an annual meteor shower, a la Leonid, terrifying the remaining humans).

The primary impacter (aforementioned 2 mile cometary fragment) either strikes the northern glacial sheet, or explodes directly above it. The resulting energy blasts vaporized water high into the atmosphere, as well as breaking of huge, island sized pieces of ice which results in a tsunami.

The cometary impacts may well have been localized across the N. Atlantic and N. America. This is evidenced (Carolina Bays, etc mentioned above). And this single event could bring into focus the majority of ancient mythos, as well as explaining the damaged collective psyche that humanity seems to have.

Knowing how thick the ice shelf was at that time is difficult. I would remind all readers, however, that if we are talking about an ice age civilization, it is only logical that the civilization would be well out on the continental shelf.

Originally posted by TheWayISeeIt
Nevertheless in the course of that debate the topic expanded and I began to find very recent mainstream research papers which when considered together makes for some v. compelling evidence that the Ice Age ended in sudden catastrophe that created conditions very much like those that are described in the Great Flood of not only the bible, but almost every other civilization known to man.

Wasn't that already proven years ago?

reply to post by pstrron


The Yucatan impact was long, long prior. That would be on the magnitude of millions, if it happened. Google: Chixclub Impact.

Something else i was thinking about this morning, and thought might be relevant at some point:

To me, it seems only natural to look for traces of human civilization along the coast lines. I would not be surprised to find that ancient man spent most of his lifetime near water, and didn't move inland as a general rule. Yes, i know that archaeological information does not support this fully. But consider a theory i ran across several years back.

The theory proposes an oceanic basis for humans, based on our physiology. Most land animals have fat dispersion that is more intramuscular. Humans have this layers of subcutaneous fat. Unless you are like me, you may not have too many opportunities to study body fat (i just check the mirror). But it would appear that humans certainly DO have a definite propensity to developing a fat layer similar to aquatic mammals, not land mammals.

There were other comparisons of morphology. I cannot recall who came up with the idea, and a cursory search of Google didn't help me recall.

TWISI...i think that i heard something about the underground water somewhere along the way over the last year. Maybe even Undo or Zorgon, while discussing "Stargates are Real".

[edit on 1/8/08 by Hanslune]

[edit on 1/8/08 by Hanslune]

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


It's morning here, just read through last nights posts -- you guys are smart -- and thought I would just add, for clarification what the stats of the official theory is currently.

The 2007-2008 theory that it being proved out right now (see previous links) contends that the comet was 2 1/2 - 3 miles in diameter at time of detonation at Earths surafce. They say it is possible there could have been smaller pieces and they would have detonated in various places over two continents. It references the 'black-mat' the Clovis are found beneath as evidence of the magnitude of the original blast.

They estimate that the blast force at 10 Million Megatons. A hydrogen bomb is the equivalent of about 100 to 1,000 megatons. The 1908 Tunguska blast which had an 800 sq. mi. radial pattern of destruction, is estimated that Tunguska was around 10 - 12 megatons. So we are talking about detonation power that is one millon times stronger than Tunguska.


EDIT TO ADD: A RESPONSE FROM MARUSEK IN QUESTION TO WHETHER HE BELIEVES THIS EVENT WOULD PROVE HIS THEORY ON PAGE 3.


[edit on 1-8-2008 by TheWayISeeIt]

reply to post by Hanslune


Helloooo Hans - I see, your in fighting form again this AM.

Hans says - What civilization and what has been legitmized and how?

Is it me, or are you just being willfully obtuse? Is anybody else struggling with the title of this thread like Hans? It seems pretty clear what is being put forth and you just wanna pull my pig-tails. Fine, I'll squeal and slap at your hand, because as unlikely as it may seem, I like you.

(spoken slooowly) The title is implying that based on recent evidence there is now reason to believe that prehistoric high-cultures would have been wiped out and their remains would mostly be buried beneath hundreds of feet of sediment and sand in the ocean floor. Which is where we should be looking for them.

It is no longer possible to rely on the 'geological science says its impossible, where's the evidence argument' any more. It is geologically possible and the evidence of it is turning up in our oceans. They can be dated as ending with the Pleistocene era with this cataclysmic event that would create scenarios that mirror all known flood myths.

[edit on 1/8/08 by Hanslune]

My comments were in regards to your thinking you had a new theory and Marursek is top dog. That doesn't appear to be correct.

reply to post by Hanslune


Well he just gave three presentaions at the 2007 Planetary Defense Conference Click here to see the company he keeps:

They were titled:

"Comet Threat Mitigation Approaches & Challenges" LINKTO PAPER

"Comet and Asteroid Threat Impact Analysis"
LINK TO PAPER

and "Impact Disaster Preparedness Planning" "LINK

That good enough for you?

EDIT TO ADD:

Hans says- What you don't seem to comprehend is that localized earth movement leave traces in the geology of the area affected. So local by locale you can tell what has occured.

I will leave you with two things the LINK and his 'Final Thoughts' at the end of the paper:

Final Thoughts:

Remnants of the Ice Age civilizations exist but they are buried under many feet of silt and sand, four hundred feet below sea level, far too deep for most divers. I predict that some of the greatest archeological discoveries in the 21st century will be uncovered off the coastlines, buried hundreds of feet underwater.

[edit on 1-8-2008 by TheWayISeeIt]

I'd like to add a few things here. TWISI said:

The 2007-2008 theory that it being proved out right now (see previous links) contends that the comet was 2 1/2 - 3 miles in diameter at time of detonation at Earths surface.

The article actually says:

two and a half to three miles in diameter, that detonated 30 to 60 miles above the earth

Emphases mine. That's a rather large gap.

From the "Final Thoughts:

Remnants of the Ice Age civilizations exist but they are buried under many feet of silt and sand, four hundred feet below sea level, far too deep for most divers. I predict that some of the greatest archeological discoveries in the 21st century will be uncovered off the coastlines, buried hundreds of feet underwater.

It should be noted that the four hundred foot increase in sea level is the peak increase starting from a point around 16,000 BC. At the time of the possible impact we're talking about, 11,000 - 9,000 BC, the sea level was around 80 meters lower. Remains should be easier to find than what the above quote suggests.

cormac

With regards Firestone's impact theory for the event that triggered the Younger Dryas, there are plenty of doubts

Don't assume just because someone presents a hypothesis that you like that it's necessarily correct

[edit on 1-8-2008 by Essan]

Hey cormac -- glad you are here! It is true they inititally stated what they call an impact at 30-60 miles above in 2007, but I think they moved away from that assesment as certain to their theory in the last year. The language they used to describe the event changed from explosion to impact in reagrds to the Earth's surface, although there is no doubt we are talking about a detonation. I am digging around right now and will let you know if I can find any reference pro or con to the distance.

I would like to point out, again, one thing that doesn't change is that they estimate the force at 10,000,000 Megatons. Once you get your head around, I don't mean you per se, the size of that force it seems that there are a lot of variables of destruction that could occur.

Since Marusek's forte is specifically comet impact, as you can see from my previous post, I think it merits the conversation we are having here. -- looking at the recently accepted theory of comet impact in N.A. and what Marusek says the geological implications of that would be and seeing what we can find in line of possible corroborating data or theories in support of his position. (see: many of BFFT's posts)

It's fun, it's interesting and, I think, most of us are all learning things along the way. It's also exciting to think that there may be unconsidered geological implications in support of the Global Flood Myth -- which I think even the most hard core debunker must find somewhat anamolous i.e. virtually every known culture having one, and most of which talk about the destruction of civilizations.

ESSAN - Welcome and I will read your link.
Cheers!



[edit on 1-8-2008 by TheWayISeeIt]

vulcan.wr.usgs.gov...

From: U.S. National Park Service Website, Ice Age Floods, 2002
During the Pleistocene Epoch Ice Age, beginning about 2.5 million years ago, virtually all of southwestern Canada was repeatedly glaciated by ice sheets that also covered much of Alaska, northern Washington, Idaho, Montana, and the rest of northern United States. In North America, the most recent glacial event is the Wisconsin glaciation, which began about 80,000 years ago and ended around 10,000 years ago.

vulcan.wr.usgs.gov...

From: U.S. National Park Service Website, Ice Age Floods, 2002
During the last Ice Age, a finger of the Cordilleran ice sheet crept southward into the Idaho Panhandle, blocking the Clark Fork River and creating Glacial Lake Missoula. As the waters rose behind this 2,000-foot ice dam, they flooded the valleys of western Montana. At its greatest extent, Glacial Lake Missoula stretched eastward a distance of some 200 miles, essentially creating an inland sea.

Periodically, the ice dam would fail. These failures were often catastrophic, resulting in a large flood of ice- and dirt-filled water that would rush down the Columbia River drainage, across northern Idaho and eastern and central Washington, through the Columbia River Gorge, back up into Oregon's Willamette Valley, and finally pour into the Pacific Ocean at the mouth of the Columbia River.

The glacial lake, at its maximum height and extent, contained more than 500 cubic miles of water. When Glacial Lake Missoula burst through the ice dam and exploded downstream, it did so at a rate 10 times the combined flow of all the rivers of the world. This towering mass of water and ice literally shook the ground as it thundered towards the Pacific Ocean, stripping away thick soils and cutting deep canyons in the underlying bedrock. With flood waters roaring across the landscape at speeds approaching 65 miles per hour, the lake would have drained in as little as 48 hours.

But the Cordilleran ice sheet continued moving south and blocking the Clark Fork River again and again, creating other Glacial Lake Missoulas. Over thousands of years, the lake filling, dam failure, and flooding were repeated dozens of times, leaving a lasting mark on the landscape of the Northwest. Many of the distinguishing features of the Ice Age Floods remain throughout the region today.

Together, these two interwoven stories of the catastrophic floods and the formation of Glacial Lake Missoula are referred to as the "Ice Age Floods."

If you read the indian myths, they report that there were earthquakes and then floods. This is a MASSIVE undertone to the incident they portrayed (see previous linkage to the flood myths). Above, the USGS reports that the glacial dam bursting cause s massive release of water, so much so that it made the earth rumble.

On the other side of the continent:

www.newswise.com...

Newswise — Imagine a lake three times the size of the present-day Lake Ontario breaking through a dam and flooding down the Hudson River Valley past New York City and into the North Atlantic. The results would be catastrophic if it happened today, but it did happen some 13,400 years ago during the retreat of glaciers over North America and may have triggered a brief cooling known as the Intra-Allerod Cold Period.

i would point out that it is somewhat suppositional that this event could be the trigger to the associated cooling period.


More to come. Gotta run.

reply to post by Essan

Essan -

Thanks for the link to the response papers from the GSA on Hall of Maat. It was fun to read and reinforces my point of learning things along the way being the larger part of the pleasure of debating on ATS.

The back-and-forth was interesting, I don't think that Isham and Pinter ultimately managed to break the back of the theory (and their bitchy tone did not really help them either, IMO) and all of this was written last Spring, before the last set of data that supported the theory a few weeks ago.

Do you think the results just released knocks some air out of Pinter abnd Ishams critique?

Don't assume just because someone presents a hypothesis that you like that it's necessarily correct

Okay, I won't. Will you aknowledge that it is not a hypothesis, but a full blown theory?