Japan's Underwater Pyramids

Anyone studied this with deep insight? In the video at 6:00 you can see the sharp edges of the cliffs indicating they're man-made.

www.youtube.com...

Is this some kind of hoax to get more (paying) skuba divers for these fellows, or could it be something like the Atlantis? Could they be formed by strong currents... even tho it is said to have existed before it was underwater...? And if it's man-made, why isn't there anything that clearly says it, like a statue.

I'm watching 13:50 atm and this clearly shows the rock is in such formations that can't be formed by nature. I want the truth.

Well, the mainstream scientists will tell you that this is a natural geologic formation. And they have plenty of explanations to back up their assertion. So you need to do some research and decide for yourself, as of yet I am undecided.

there are symbols and even carved faces. i doubt its naturally formed.

Lemuria/Mu (2008 English Edition)

well Lemuria or Mu was supposed to be a continent. A group of "pyramids" hardly constitutes that. I tend to believe the natural formation theory. There was a program on that showed some above water rock formations that look man made but aren't either (this program was mainly about the underwater Japanese pyramids though).

still it's not inconceivable that these things formed along time ago and may have been used as a ceremonial spot by peoples prior to the end of the last ice age. I don't think they were built though. Maybe, MAYBE carved a little, esp. with symbols if, like I said, they were used as a ceremonial spot.

Japan's Ancient Underwater "Pyramid" Mystifies Scholars
September 19, 2007
Submerged stone structures lying just below the waters off Yonaguni Jima are actually the ruins of a Japanese Atlantis—an ancient city sunk by an earthquake about 2,000 years ago.

That's the belief of Masaaki Kimura, a marine geologist at the University of the Ryukyus in Japan who has been diving at the site to measure and map its formations for more than 15 years.

Each time he returns to the dive boat, Kimura said, he is more convinced than ever that below him rest the remains of a 5,000-year-old city.

news.nationalgeographic.com...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/c3cdad93f201.jpg[/atsimg]

This is a picture of Graham Hancock diving at waters off Yonaguni in the late nineties, he wrote a book called Underworld about Yonaguni and other underwater structures around the world.

Between 17,000 years ago and 7000 years ago, at the end of the last Ice Age, terrible things happened to the world our ancestors lived in. Great ice caps over northern Europe and north America melted down, huge floods ripped across the earth, sea-level rose by more than 100 metres, and about 25 million square kilometres of formerly habitable lands were swallowed up by the waves.

www.grahamhancock.com...

Back in 1999 when the first articles came out on it, I sent the following e-mail to Discovering Archaeology magazine. I figured they would have heard of it.

To: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, December 05, 1999 9:10 AM
Subject: Underwater pyramids

I have a question. There have been several references (on the internet) lately to pyramids found underwater off of Japan. I have not been able to find any information in any of the mainstream journals about it. The argument is whether they are manmade or natural. I would be grateful for any light you could shed on the topic.
Thank you,
Paula

This was the answer I received: (Short, sweet and to the point)
Dear Paula:
I know very little about the site other than to tell you the features are natural.

Jeff Leach
President, Publisher & Editor-in-Chief
Scientific American Discovering Archaeology
1205 N Oregon St.
El Paso, Texas 79902
tel: (915)533-8503
fax: (915)544-9276
[email protected]
www.discoveringarchaeology.com

Natural formation, my flipper.

reply to post by Pauligirl

Dear Paula:
I know very little about the site other than to tell you the features are natural.

For someone who says he knows very little about the site doesn't mean they are natural, there is much evidence today that prove otherwise. We know in our ancient past that water has risen and there are many cities that are still underwater today.

Wonder what he would say today.

Originally posted by Jonas86
Anyone studied this with deep insight? In the video at 6:00 you can see the sharp edges of the cliffs indicating they're man-made.

www.youtube.com...

Is this some kind of hoax to get more (paying) skuba divers for these fellows, or could it be something like the Atlantis? Could they be formed by strong currents... even tho it is said to have existed before it was underwater...? And if it's man-made, why isn't there anything that clearly says it, like a statue.

I'm watching 13:50 atm and this clearly shows the rock is in such formations that can't be formed by nature. I want the truth.

It is tempting to look at this and to say "human activity" but look again. Notice how all the lines, though straight, are not quite right? The angles do not match as they should in an ordinary construction. I've seen no constructs in meso America with almost parallel lines but not quite or steps of varying individual heights. If I were to build a pyramid/city/fortress or whatever of stone I would not chose the Salvador Dali look that we see here. These seem interesting but they also seem to defy logic in design. It is for this reason that I call them natural formations.

In that part of the world there is lots of metamorphic material in mountains and these that so attract us look to me like slate formations. Slate, as we know, is lots of planar surfaces with interesting angular accents. Usually slate is much thinner than these slabs seem to be but who knows. Why has no one taken samples to study? What kind of rock is it? In that area there is much composit volcanism which often is associated with large metamorphic formations. So here is the argument for slate or another material like it.

Anyone know of rock anaylsis being done?

Originally posted by Aquarius1
reply to post by Pauligirl

 

Dear Paula:
I know very little about the site other than to tell you the features are natural.

For someone who says he knows very little about the site doesn't mean they are natural, there is much evidence today that prove otherwise. We know in our ancient past that water has risen and there are many cities that are still underwater today.

Wonder what he would say today.

I wondered that myself. I may email the magazine again to see if there is anything new.

reply to post by purplemonkeydishwasher


With evidence such as these images, it does make you wonder. I mean, why couldn't there be a lost civilization that the ocean consumed? Over time, water levels move, earthquakes and volcanoes change the ground we walk on. And everyone has heard of the tale of Atlantis. Plato thought it was a real place, and it could have been. Of course, you can take that with as big of a grain of salt as you want, but I personally think that the world is much more interesting with mysterious civilization myths.

reply to post by dct1988


Oh I've long since accepted older civilisations as truth. The Rama Dynasty and the ancient nuclear wars are an interesting chapter in history, as well as the Lost Gold Mines of Tayos.. much to see and learn about!

I am not sure that what we are looking at is an old city - my thinking just off the top from some of the photo's ----almost look like that area was mined way back when for material for a differant city Aren't there really cool old structure near the area? - where did they get the material for those structures? what ya think?

The structures which you see before you have been designed, built and put in place by an intelligent species. Not only is this obvious, but we see very similar and in some cases the exact same design & methods used to construct other ancient megaliths/cities around the globe. A simple google search can confirm this.

Even skeptics whether they be scientists, archaeologists or gelogists agree to this... subconsciously.

good thread. seen it here on ats before but star and flag for you.
pay no attention to the shills
those who have eyes to see can see the truth

am i seeing thing or does the rosetta stone have the shape of a humanoid alien head.

daz__

so if this was all natural,

where is the debris?

the other half of the rocks?

Originally posted by fooks
so if this was all natural,

where is the debris?

the other half of the rocks?

that is a good thought,
you would think there would be smaller rubble below or down current from these structures.

I have the idea that what we see today is just the foundation of what was built thousands of years ago. wood is an excellent building tool mastered around the entire world in most all cultures, I would assume. only problem wood doesn't last forever.

reply to post by purplemonkeydishwasher


I know! They're all so interesting!

Originally posted by -W1LL
only problem wood doesn't last forever.

Viagra!!!!


Anyway, I'm still undecided. These could be geologic formations and yes, geology can be straight lines and angles. Heard of cleavage? However, given the setting it is most likely an Igneous rock of some sort rather than a sedimentary/metamorphic slate (have you seen what water can do to slate?).

On the other hand, with eustasy, it is conceivable that there were earlier 'civilisations' that dwelt near the (then) coast.

Originally posted by aorAki

Originally posted by -W1LL
only problem wood doesn't last forever.

Viagra!!!!


Anyway, I'm still undecided. These could be geologic formations and yes, geology can be straight lines and angles. Heard of cleavage? However, given the setting it is most likely an Igneous rock of some sort rather than a sedimentary/metamorphic slate (have you seen what water can do to slate?).

On the other hand, with eustasy, it is conceivable that there were earlier 'civilisations' that dwelt near the (then) coast.

LOL!!

yes I have seen what water can do to most rocks. and slate would be no only rubble on the coast.

just looking at those rocks they are hard as granite and equally as hard to shape or move.
I have seen straight lines in geology in my time working with dirt and when you come upon a site with flat rocks and right angles its a WOW moment for sure.
I am almost sure that water alone doesnt shape rocks to these flat surfaces and right angles I could look through my thousands of pics and show some glacier formed flat rocks with sharp flat angles but you can tell it was made by nature not like these underwater megaliths they seem level and uniform like the foundation of a building.

I thought cleavage made more of a busty round shape!