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 SLAYER69
They found "Slightly higher than average" radiation and a bunch of human skeletal remains lying huddled together face down in the streets and which showed no sign of scavenger mutilation/molestation of the bodies.
So, what does one deduce from that?
Originally posted by FissionSurplus
It does seem that the oldest cities are now under water,
Achievements like this would have no place in smaller settlements where survival took priority. I imagine after a couple of generations the achievments they once made would have faded into myth being that the information was passed down orally.
"They had cities ordered into grids, with exquisite plumbing, which was not encountered again until the Romans," Read more: www.foxnews.com...
The Tărtăria tablets are three tablets, discovered in 1961 by archaeologist Nicolae Vlassa at a Neolithic site in the village of Tărtăria (about 30 km (19 mi) from Alba Iulia), in Romania.[1] The tablets, dated to around 5300 BC[2], bear incised symbols - the Vinča symbols - and have been the subject of considerable controversy among archaeologists, some of whom claim that the symbols represent the earliest known form of writing in the world.
Originally posted by benrl
Humanity in its current form has been around some 200-250k years, civilization rose in the the last 10k... Something seems off about that to me...
Thats from the current smartest of us is no smarter than the smartest man 250k years ago, we may have more "knowledge" but actual brain powers the same...
So it took humanity 200k years to get off is ass and do something? I think not.
Originally posted by FatherLukeDuke
Originally posted by FissionSurplus
It does seem that the oldest cities are now under water,
Really? Such as?
Originally posted by antar
reply to post by SLAYER69
I am always looking for connections to the truth about our climate, so thanks for the thread, I do however think it rather odd that back then they could not survive a mini ice age better than people today.
An early nuclear war.Beside radio activity there was also evidense of very high temps on the stones.
Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by FissionSurplus
They found "Slightly higher than average" radiation and a bunch of human skeletal remains lying huddled together face down in the streets and which showed no sign of scavenger mutilation/molestation of the bodies.
So, what does one deduce from that?edit on 1-6-2012 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by SLAYER69
Many feel [as do I] that the areas cultural beginnings happened offshore in a now submerged location just off the coast where when at around 9,000 or 10,000 BC the Coastlines were flooded out by the last of the ice age melt off. The people simply moved inland up the river valley where they began again.
Your thoughts?edit on 1-6-2012 by SLAYER69 because: 9,0000 or 10,0000 BC? Changed to the correct esitmated age LOL
Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by FissionSurplus
They found "Slightly higher than average" radiation and a bunch of human skeletal remains lying huddled together face down in the streets and which showed no sign of scavenger mutilation/molestation of the bodies.
So, what does one deduce from that?edit on 1-6-2012 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)