Was there an atomic war roughly 10,000 years ago?

Originally posted by Shadys321
this topic has ALWAYS intrigued me. I'm not necessarily saying this is the smoking gun, if you will, but it is interesting none the less.

I will be keeping an eye on this thread.

No, it's certainly not the smoking gun, it's the radioactive smoking skeletons they found buried beneath ten thousand years of dirt.

hmmm if you think about it must've been. I recall on the Show Ancient Aliens on the history channel. The episode about underground cities i think. the elders of the ancient people were saying that the people of that time hid in underground cities because there were wars happening in the sky and that Huge beams of light were seen on the ground causing the ground to shake and destroyed everything sounds like a Nuclear war to me. possibly Extraterrestrial factions fighting each other.

reply to post by captainnotsoobvious



I do think you need to make more use of the on line dictionary! Debate is to engage by

DISCUSSING opposing view points...........something it is apparent you are unable to do,

everything you have written has been totally dismissive about others post's.

Everyone but you post's 'nonsense' the OP's verses are a hoax according to you [however

he is only quoting something he has read on the internet ] and asking for others opinions on it

You state "there is NO evidence of radiation " - I have however read on many different sites

that there IS evidence of it. So could you be wrong? you don't seem to have provided

any links which say there is NO evidence of radiation?

By the way have you been there?

Interesting. I was just reading an article at physorg.com about new evidence for when "humans" began to leave Africa and settle around the Arabian Peninsula.
Most theory's estimate that humans around this time traveled out of Africa 40 000 to 70 000 years ago. But evidence is showing this occurred around 106, 000 or more.
Article can be found here: www.physorg.com...

If what is reported in the article posted, wouldn't there be evidence of radiation around? Not too mentioned carcasses of animals and such?

Originally posted by Dmonix
Interesting. I was just reading an article at physorg.com about new evidence for when "humans" began to leave Africa and settle around the Arabian Peninsula.
Most theory's estimate that humans around this time traveled out of Africa 40 000 to 70 000 years ago. But evidence is showing this occurred around 106, 000 or more.
Article can be found here: www.physorg.com...

If what is reported in the article posted, wouldn't there be evidence of radiation around? Not too mentioned carcasses of animals and such?

If that's the link I think it is ( I can't get the link to work) it refers to anatomically modern humans (us) which would have been about the last wave of alot of waves of human migration out of Africa. There were earlier migrations from Africa though I don't know if that earlier migration headed to the Arabian Peninsula

reply to post by captainnotsoobvious


Hypocritical spam troll.

You are personally attacking me with garbage and twisting my words over nothing that is even related to this thread, and then you start spamming me with more nonsense picking out of context quotes for the sake bringing me down to your level, what is it... just stop. You did not even read the post you replied to in which i stated "you are not reading my posts". Can we go back on topic now... i really do not care for your ignorant attitude. Its okay for you to say i am the "the rudest person" on this site. But that is your problem, and i think you are also the problem... i had a look at some of your other posts and it is all the same.

Stop attacking me with spam.

reply to post by InsideYourMind


First off, it's not spam.

Second, I'm not "attacking you"

Third, you absolutely refuse to respond to any actual points, like say you're complete misunderstand of what a "theory" is, of your misrepresentation of what people's response to the thread has been, or even your own insulting and aggressive behaviour towards me.

This endless deflection is, of course, because you have no reply to this points.

This OP is a hoax. You defended the right to "theorise" about something which was not based on an observation, but was instead, and has been pointed out to you, repeatedly, a hoax. In other words, you've fallen for a scam. You've then defended your right to seriously discuss the merit of the scam, and when it was shown to you, repeatedly, that you were completely ridiculous in your approach to this topic (contradictory statements, basic misunderstanding of the words your using, unwillingness to change your mind) you became aggressive and took the whole thing to a personal level.

In case you still don't get it:

The quotes in the OP were faked.
They were faked to sell books.
They have been thoroughly debunked.
There's no physical or evidence to contradict that position.
Many people on this thread believe(d) them to be true. Many others defended the right to discuss them as if they were factual, as if there was evidence that made them seem plausible.

A scientific theory is based on empirical evidence. No evidence (i.e. observation) means no theory.

As far as my posts go, if you want them to stop, either: respond to the content of my posts (i.e. don't deflect by calling me a troll - as I'm quite obviously not - or by saying any response you disagree with is "spam") or don't respond at all.

Finally, here;s the definition of spam:

"Send the same message indiscriminately to (large numbers of recipients) on the Internet."

More specifically:

"Forum spam is the creating of messages that are advertisements on Internet forums. It is generally done by automated spambots. Most forum spam consists of links to external sites, with the dual goals of increasing search engine visibility in highly competitive areas such as weight loss, pharmaceuticals, gambling, pornography, real estate or loans, and generating more traffic for these commercial websites. Some of these links contain code to track the spambot's identity; if a sale goes through, when the spammer behind the spambot works on commission."

My message is neither indiscriminate nor being sent to a large numbers of people. I am not a bot and my links (when I include them) are not commercial in nature. So... not spam.

My posts are typically very specific and in your case aimed very precisely at one person: you.

reply to post by eletheia


[rolls eyes]

de·bate/diˈbāt/
Noun: A formal discussion on a particular topic in a public meeting or legislative assembly, in which opposing arguments are put forward.
Verb: Argue about (a subject), esp. in a formal manner.
Synonyms:
noun. discussion - dispute - argument - disputation
verb. dispute - discuss - argue - deliberate - canvass

As far as being dismissive goes:

I am dismissive of hoaxes, as should we all be.
I am dismissive of ludicrous assertions (e.g. scientific theories aren't based on evidence), for good reason
I am dismissive of inaccurate claims, as lies and misinformation are not useful in any discussion

I know there's a lot of people that want to pretend all points of view are equally valuable, but lies are not as valuable as the truth.

You can claim the "theory" that the sun is ice cold is a valid position, but I would dismiss that as complete silliness. That dismissiveness may not seem "nice," but believe me, being honest about reality is a much nicer long term approach, when the alternative is encouraging delusion.

You guys, the two of you that seem to want to pretend that discussing fantasy as reality is somehow beneficial to someone, and who think that embracing ignorance is a reasonable attitude, both refuse to actually address the core points here:

The OP is a HOAX.
There's no evidence it really happened, not in literature or archaeology, or science.

Originally posted by yourboycal2

"...(it was) a single projectile

reply to post by ElectricUniverse


Worse yet, the text is a fake. So...

BTW, this subject has been discussed many times.

If you are interested in more info about it, here is a thread I remade, about an older thread I started several years ago about this topic.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by captainnotsoobvious


Worse yet, the text is a fake. So...

The text is a fake?... really? So you are claiming that the thousands of year old Vedas do not exist?...

Chronology

Main article: Vedic period

The Vedas are among the oldest sacred texts. The Samhitas date to roughly 1500–1000 BCE, and the "circum-Vedic" texts, as well as the redaction of the Samhitas, date to c. 1000-500 BCE, resulting in a Vedic period, spanning the mid 2nd to mid 1st millennium BCE, or the Late Bronze Age and the Iron Age.[19] The Vedic period reaches its peak only after the composition of the mantra texts, with the establishment of the various shakhas all over Northern India which annotated the mantra samhitas with Brahmana discussions of their meaning, and reaches its end in the age of Buddha and Panini and the rise of the Mahajanapadas (archaeologically, Northern Black Polished Ware). Michael Witzel gives a time span of c. 1500 BCE to c. 500-400 BCE. Witzel makes special reference to the Near Eastern Mitanni material of the 14th c. BCE the only epigraphic record of Indo-Aryan contemporary to the Rigvedic period. He gives 150 BCE (Patañjali) as a terminus ante quem for all Vedic Sanskrit literature, and 1200 BCE (the early Iron Age) as terminus post quem for the Atharvaveda.[20]
...

en.wikipedia.org...

The section of the Vedas that explains this occurrence, and many more is called the Mahabharata.

Traditionally, the authorship of the Mahabharata is attributed to Vyasa. There have been many attempts to unravel its historical growth and compositional layers. The oldest preserved parts of the text are not thought to be appreciably older than around 400 BCE, though the origins of the story probably fall between the 8th and 9th centuries BCE.(2) The text probably reached its final form by the early Gupta period (ca. fourth century CE).(3) The title may be translated as "the great tale of the Bhārata dynasty". According to the Mahabharata itself, the tale is extended from a shorter version of 24,000 verses called simply Bhārata.(4)

en.wikipedia.org...

Before the Vedas were finally put into written form it passed down through generations of Hindus in oral form which makes this probably the oldest sacred scripture that we know so far.

You really need some REAL PROOF for your claim, which sorry to say your claim is not true.

I wrote a thread on this very topic...here's some potential evidence I found while browsing the web that could help back the OP's claim:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
BTW, this subject has been discussed many times.

If you are interested in more info about it, here is a thread I remade, about an older thread I started several years ago about this topic.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Seems we both made one Very good thread you made there I must say

Originally posted by AllUrChips

Not likely. The work that goes into and science to it all, its all but impossible. This could be caused by an impact of a meteor or comet perhaps. That is what some scientist have said happened in Sodom and Gorrorah.

edit on 26-11-2011 by AllUrChips because: (no reason given)

Why would it be impossible for this event to be describing an ancient atomic war?

BTW, what in the world do you mean by "the work that goes into and science to it all"? That sentence makes no sense at all to me.

reply to post by BlackPoison94


You put a lot of work on that thread, well done.

I bookmarked your thread to read it later. Good job.

reply to post by ElectricUniverse


Go back and read the thread.

As has been clearly outlined, the quote in the OP is a HOAX.

It is not in the original text.

It's not a mistranslation, it's a fabrication.

reply to post by ElectricUniverse


The description is a HOAX.

Originally posted by Raivan31
reply to post by drivers1492

 

Also maybe it wasn't a 'nuke' but there's still other technological possibilities and any other more natural possibilities don't seem to fit either so what were left with is a bunch of highly irradiated skeletons.

So how and why?

There must be a reason. where did all of that radiation come from? how did such high levels build up in people before they died?

I am just wondering...we have no idea if the radiation built-up in those people BEFORE they died. We just know that the area is highly irradiated. Could this not stem from the existance of the natural reactors under the surface in that particular area as discussed in previous posts? Coupled with escape routes for any leaking radiation through, say, volcanic eruptions, would this not mean constant exposure to high radiation and accumulation in soil, rock and other organic matter (including human and animal remains) over time? Then everything in the area would have been highly radioactive and persistantly so for as long as there is a hot-spot reactor there? Or am I missing something?

reply to post by Alexandra9


The area is NOT highly radioactive. The quotes in the OP are fake. They are not in the Mahabharata. They were faked by some French guys to sell books.