It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Karmayogi11
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/1fdafb8f8549.jpg[/atsimg]
At the southern end of Madagascar lie four enormous wedge-shaped sediment deposits, called chevrons, that are composed of material from the ocean floor. Each covers twice the area of Manhattan with sediment as deep as the Chrysler Building is high.
Originally posted by Harte
The problem is, tsunamis don't cover up a city and then stay there, they wash back out. The city has to actually sink below sea level in order to stay underwater.
Harte
Because that part of the Indo-Australian plate is in a subduction zone, and has been sinking off and on for tens of thousands of years, it's not really necessary to have an impact in order to explain the sunken ruins off Dwarka.
But obviously it could have helped cause the city to sink.
The problem is, tsunamis don't cover up a city and then stay there, they wash back out. The city has to actually sink below sea level in order to stay underwater.
Harte
SB 11.30.4: Śukadeva Gosvāmī said: Having observed many disturbing signs in the sky, on the earth and in outer space, Lord Kṛṣṇa addressed the Yadus assembled in the Sudharmā council hall as follows.
Originally posted by Karmayogi11
reply to post by Harte
Because that part of the Indo-Australian plate is in a subduction zone, and has been sinking off and on for tens of thousands of years, it's not really necessary to have an impact in order to explain the sunken ruins off Dwarka.
But obviously it could have helped cause the city to sink.
The problem is, tsunamis don't cover up a city and then stay there, they wash back out. The city has to actually sink below sea level in order to stay underwater.
Harte
Thanks for the reply Harte it was someone like you I have been waiting for on this post.
Yes you are right about the tsunamis the coast returns to its normal position after the disaster.
This is the section I connect this two events:
SB 11.30.4: Śukadeva Gosvāmī said: Having observed many disturbing signs in the sky, on the earth and in outer space, Lord Kṛṣṇa addressed the Yadus assembled in the Sudharmā council hall as follows.
So a question to you would be: If this comet hits the planet, can it not only cause a Tsunami, maybe also cause this partial sinking of the Indo-Australian plate thru strong earthquakes?
Thanks again!
Originally posted by Karmayogi11
reply to post by Harte
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because that part of the Indo-Australian plate is in a subduction zone, and has been sinking off and on for tens of thousands of years, it's not really necessary to have an impact in order to explain the sunken ruins off Dwarka.
But obviously it could have helped cause the city to sink.
The problem is, tsunamis don't cover up a city and then stay there, they wash back out. The city has to actually sink below sea level in order to stay underwater.
Harte
Thanks for the reply Harte it was someone like you I have been waiting for on this post.
Yes you are right about the tsunamis the coast returns to its normal position after the disaster.
This is the section I connect this two events:
SB 11.30.4: Śukadeva Gosvāmī said: Having observed many disturbing signs in the sky, on the earth and in outer space, Lord Kṛṣṇa addressed the Yadus assembled in the Sudharmā council hall as follows.
So a question to you would be: If this comet hits the planet, can it not only cause a Tsunami, maybe also cause this partial sinking of the Indo-Australian plate thru strong earthquakes?
Thanks again!
Yes, especially in that part of the world, tectonic activity could very well be affected by a large enough impact.
Harte