On the Origins of Unexplained Maps

Originally posted by letthereaderunderstand
Great post...

Questions

1. Why do people assume that the areas charted were not accessible at the times these maps were made?

2. Why can they use correct proportions when drawing ships on their maps, but can't seem to get the coast line drawn correctly. Do they use "scale"? If so, why do the coastlines look so much different then they are presently? They seemed to be amazing sketch artists and painters. I find it odd that they would of seen such a different world unless it was indeed that different.

3. Do people believe in "Ice Ages" because of science, just like people believe in "the flood" because of religion?

Thanks

Peace

Hey there, I don't know if you have received an answer to number 2 because I have limited time, so I can't scan through the entire thread. In case not, your answer to point 2:

Features and landmass are distorted in the higher latitudes on charts (maps are used on land, charts are used at sea) because the lines of latitude become narrower as your proximity to the poles increases, this is what happens in reality.

Imagine standing at the equator, the distance between lines of latitudes is vast. Now imagine you are standing in the north pole. You could now dance all around the lines of latitude because they all converge at the poles.

However to project and represent an actual spherical image on to a chart will naturally distort the features at higher latitudes...the extremes of north and south have to be stretched in order to fit in to a 4 sided projection.

Thats why Greenland seems like the size of Africa on the modern day map of the world!

I hope this answers one of your questions =).

www.atlantic-cable.com...

Originally posted by Chadwickus

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/351df5c60f95.png[/atsimg]

Is it just me or does the above map depict a functional and existent land-bridge between Queensland and Indonesia? Something that existed only up until the end of the last Ice Age.....

en.wikipedia.org...

The sharing of animal and plant species between Australia-New Guinea and nearby Indonesian islands is another consequence of the early land bridges, which closed when sea levels rose with the end of the last glacial period. The sea level stabilised to near its present levels about 6000 years ago, flooding the land bridge between Australia and New Guinea.

Just some food for thought.......

reply to post by operation mindcrime


You know whats awesome, raven would love this, the South Americans believe in a sasquatch type creature called the mapingari, and giant sloth fossils have been found there.

They suggested maybe in the thick forests it is possible it could still exist and rarely be seen.

As for the maps maybe I will have to make a new thread as I have about 40 and couple I sent in to wikipedia as better resolution maps

I have to cut short though ttyl!

@Kryties

"Is it just me or does the above map depict a functional and existent land-bridge between Queensland and Indonesia? Something that existed only up until the end of the last Ice Age..... "

It's not just you! Why would you assume something like that?

Yes, they were joined, just like Alaska and Asia as peeps would cross over many years ago...around 8000 to 4400.... and as the immense ice melted, the water levels rose. Simple logic.

It's sadenning to see how humans attempt to reason "why the maps depict iceless Antartica?" and "How they could have known/existed" at dates prior to their little institutionalised NWO text books taught them it happened.

Oh well....it's absolutely old news that Amerca was not discovered by Columbus...get over it!

Before the Flood 4400BC people were sailing around the earth! The fact that people today dont understand this....illustrates how humanity has stooped before the separation.

Originally posted by ImperialMaj

@Kryties

"Is it just me or does the above map depict a functional and existent land-bridge between Queensland and Indonesia? Something that existed only up until the end of the last Ice Age..... "

It's not just you! Why would you assume something like that?

It was more a figure of speech than anything.....

[edit on 27/1/2010 by Kryties]

reply to post by serbsta


Interesting read.

However, without reading the entire thread yet, I need to point out that the Oronteus Finaeus map is not in any way representative of an un-glaciated Antarctica. Much of what is shown as 'solid' continent is actually scattered islands. And there would be a broad bay through the center.

Furthermore, if it were even approximately accurate, (due to for example, knowledge from an advanced early civilization or extraterrestrials) it would show the results on the coastlines of melting 90% of the earths fresh water, and of removing all that weight from the Antarctic land mass (the land would rise).

If anything, it is closer to Australia than Antarctica, a much more reasonable conclusion.

reply to post by Odessy

The maps show the coast of Antarctica UNDER the ice (hence why they look a little different topographically now, but match up perfectly when mapping the ground underneath.

No they don't. Much of what is shown as coast line is actually scattered islands. Even after the land mass rises because the weight has lifted and the sea has risen because the ice has melted.

Antarctica would actually look more like this:

Unglaciated Antarctica




[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/237f2e4e2cdc.jpg[/atsimg]

EDIT: phew, took a while to figure out how to get the actual picture in here instead of just the link.





[edit on 27/1/2010 by rnaa]

[edit on 27/1/2010 by rnaa]

reply to post by rnaa


That was the first think that struck me as well but you have to remember that if Antarctica was completely ice free, the total weight of the mass pressing down on the asthenosphere would be way less.

Antarctica has the shape it has because of the weight pressing down on it. So if the map was made before this, the layout would be completly different.

Peace

PS: i haven't given up, i am just working really hard to find more clues. Will get back with more!!

reply to post by operation mindcrime

Antarctica has the shape it has because of the weight pressing down on it. So if the map was made before this, the layout would be completly different.

Yup, and I said so in the two posts just above the one with the map.

Don't forget the sea rise from the melted water too.

The actual subglacial topography differs from a hypothetical ice-free topography because the 293,778,800 cubic kilometers of ice either lies grounded on bedrock or stacked as ice rises on bedrock islands (Drewry 1982, sheet 4). The sheer weight of this ice has depressed Antarctica by hundreds of meters. If the Antarctic ice sheet melted and removed this weight from the crust, isostatic rebound would raise the subglacial topography as much as 950 meters (3100 feet) in the interior to 50 meters (160 feet) along the coast. Furthermore, melting of all of the world's ice, of which Antarctica is 90 percent of the total, would raise sea level by about 80 meters (260 feet)(Drewry 1983, sheet 6).

Source (which is directly discussing claims about this map in the film "The Mysterious Origins of Man")

reply to post by operation mindcrime

PS: I am also unclear about the "Terre de Diemen". With a name like that is bound to be discovered by Abel Tasman but could it be that that is Tasmania?

Indeed, the original name for Tasmania was "Van Diemen's Land".

Does anyone have evidence that these maps were accurately dated?

It's also fishy that these maps have the Roman structured alphabet or our modern day ABC when these maps are supposed to have come from a time period before the Roman Empire, unless they were created from an older batch of sources.

I highly doubt ET has anything to do with this. People always under estimate our ancestors. Trigonometry or triangulation techniques were used to map and chart back in those days.

IF the Piri Reis map is genuine then perhaps a civilization long gone produced the original source maps which were later used by the Turkish Navy.

A ruin of a huge ancient city was recently discovered in South Africa which has a close proximity to Antarctica. It's estimated this city is over 200 000 years old!

www.viewzone.com...

Originally posted by RWM88
Does anyone have evidence that these maps were accurately dated?

Maps like the Piri Reis one emerged around the 15th-16th century, and cartographers in those times admit it concerns copys (of copys of copys) and compilations of older maps (original sources unknown). That's why they match style and language of those days.
They circulated among Portugese and Spanish seafarers back then, they helped rediscovering the 'new world' ... Maps with accurate depiction of the coastline of the entire Americas couldn't have been developed just 5 years after its 'discovery' either...

I believe a lot of the sources for these maps were found in the library of Constantinopel, which held some last remnants of the long lost Library of Alexandria, supposedly the largest known collection of ancient time knowledge in the Mediterranean.


[edit on 27/1/10 by Movhisattva]

There is talk that columbus had a map before he set sail, if so where on earth did he get it from? I am convinced that there is much more to our history than we have been told. This is why I gave up on television and newspapers a long time ago.

I wanted to add that by 'coincedence' I was talking to people the other day about how our ancestors knew more than we realise when it came to charting the earth. I am sure if we knew the facts we would see that our earth was occupied long before we were created.

here is a little informacion to back up these theories

Did Chinese sailors really discover America before Columbus? A new exhibition sets the scene, presenting new evidence that lends support to the assumptions made in "1421: The Year China Discovered America" by Gavin Menzies.

Source

Heres some more information as to why it is thought that columbus knew more than he let on, isn't it strange how the vatican is always involved.

You probably learned a bit about Christopher Columbus at school, but one documented historical fact that you probably overlooked is that Columbus believed his discovery of the New World was necessary in order to fulfil an ancient prophecy.

What exactly did Christopher Columbus mean when, circa 1500 AD, he wrote about America in one of his famous letters: "God made me the messenger of the new heaven and the new earth of which he spoke in the Apocalypse of St John after having spoken of it through the mouth of Isaiah; and he showed me the spot where to find it."[1]
Santa Maria

Christopher Columbus produced a famous book, the "Book of Prophecies"[2], containing over 200 biblical and patristic passages which he compiled, but how many people understand why?

When Columbus made his case to win support from the Vatican and the Spanish monarchy, at the centre of his manifesto was a millennial prophecy about the destiny of the land that he would discover. A "New World" was to arise in the West to fight a final Crusade against the Arab powers of the Middle East.

source

[edit on 27-1-2010 by franspeakfree]

reply to post by Movhisattva


Thanks for the reply

I suspected correctly then about these maps most likely being compiled from much older source maps.

I don't know if you'll find this useful but it may help put things in to perspective for others:

The Arabs invented modern sailing, they also invented the rudder. Back in those days there were multiple centers of knowledge. Modern day Iraq had one of the biggest library's in the known ancient world before it was burned down by the Mongols.

They also calculated the Earth was a sphere with a stick, shadows and mathematics and they also calculated the diameter of the Earth to with in a reasonable amount of error for that time.

The tools and know how existed back then to have a good guess that there was more to the world than the Med, Europe, Asia and Africa.

reply to post by telfyr

I don't agree, these mapmakers couldn't even measure longitude (which happened in 1773 as all of us Dava Sobel fans know)... so, in effect their maps are giant attempts at dead reckoning...
And after looking at the maps I just don't see any evidence that these guys knew any more than we give them credit for.
Still, kudos for the world's great ancient explorers.

reply to post by kenochs


Without longitude you end up with a map like this..

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/files/c7fe83d9e5d7ecdb.jpg[/atsimg]

Makes perfect sense that the Falkland islands are positioned near the south pole.

Peace

[edit on 27/1/2010 by operation mindcrime]

reply to post by kenochs


Sorry mate, that's a mistake that a lot of people get. Ancients had systems that could calculate longitude by time. 360 degrees in a sphere, divide by 15 and that gives us 24 hours for one complete revolution of the Earth. 1 hour for every 15 degrees.
(The Arabs knew the world was a sphere before western civilization. Plus the ancient world traded books, scrolls and knowledge much like we trade oil and gas now a days. That's why Greek architects gained knowledge of building and construction from the Egyptians).

They used a master time, like we have GMT, but back then there master time was probably in the Med or Middle East. They could also have a good idea of Lat as well by using the north star, Polaris. They used a stick like instrument with measurements marked.

Comparing the Local Time with the Master Time and the difference between sun rise, noon and sun set at each location would give them a fairly good idea of where they are, relevant to the location of where the Master Time is situated.

Ancients also knew the Celestial Sphere of the back of there hands, they mapped out, tabulated and even had almanacs for these kinds of things.

what about google map??

is todays view askew too???

reply to post by mellisamouse


Hey I've copied and pasted from a reply I sent to someone before with a similar question:

'Features and landmass are distorted in the higher latitudes on charts (maps are used on land, charts are used at sea) because the lines of latitude become narrower as your proximity to the poles increases, this is what happens in reality.

Imagine standing at the equator, the distance between lines of latitudes is vast. Now imagine you are standing in the north pole. You could now dance all around the lines of latitude because they all converge at the poles.

However to project and represent an actual spherical image on to a chart will naturally distort the features at higher latitudes...the extremes of north and south have to be stretched in order to fit in to a 4 sided projection.

Thats why Greenland seems like the size of Africa on the modern day map of the world!'

Thats for paper maps, but the satellite images on google earth represent what the landmass's actually are due to the fact that you look at a sphere, so none of the land is distorted.

Does that answer your question?