Slashdot Mirror
Sunken City Found Off Of India
Raindeer writes "A city only known from old myths about seven pagodas and thought by Western scientists not have existed, was found off the coast of India. The myths speak of six temples submerged beneath the waves with the seventh temple still standing on the seashore. The myths also state that a large city once stood here which was so beautiful the gods became jealous and sent a flood that swallowed it up entirely in a single day. " With the purported discovery of a city off of Cuba, as well as the the finding of Herakleion underwater archaeology is doing well.
no one doubts the flood. Hell, there have been many theories about how the story originated. It most likely did happen.
I don't see how the finding of this city (or any other city) or that some city was flooded proves there is a god, and He created us.
Let's see how quickly the evolutionists try to cover this one up.
Well, scientists have been proven wrong numerous times before, that's the difference between science and pseudo-science, you can't prove pseude-science wrong because they are based on a belive in themselves. (I.e. you can walk through that wall if you stop beliving it's there (and all of scientology's 'technology'))
The evolutionists will simply adapt to new facts (if there is anything that needs adapting, that is)
Science is a process, not a belive.
echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln80~Psnlbx]16isb572CCB9AE9DB03273snlbxq' |dc
Say no to software patents.
if I heard a legend about 7 temples, and the 7th temple was not only already discovered standing on land, but also one of the most photographed temples in India, then I'd be inclined to believe the other 6 temples existed
George W. Bush is one of the first surviving septuplets (don't believe the lies about the McCaughey septuplets being the first). George W. Bush exists and has been photographed many times, therefore his six identical brothers also exist.
Call me wacky
You're wacky.
Humans evolved to their current form (more or less) almost half a million years ago. That leaves plenty of time for societies to rise up and disappear into dust in a relative blink of an eye. It seems we only remember those who leave massive monuments that endure across the millennia.
I know it seems impossible right now, but I wonder if we will be forgotten 10,000 years from now. I bet those who build the pyramids thought they had the universe under their thumbs, just like we do today. Call me pessimistic, but somehow I don't see our civilization as the enduring type.
Maybe a day will come when people worship our telecommunications "gods" as they glide across the sky.
The tricky thing with archaeology is you have to actually have evidence of such things as dates.
That always buggers up the hypothesis that human cities have been around for a long time. Since C14 dating needs organic material and other dating methods are less accurate (other than tree-ring dating), you need to have organic material preserved. This means a specific chemical/depositional environment (anerobic is great--like the Black Sea).
Underwater arch has the BEST potential for making stunning discoveries that re-write the history books because of the preservation potential of many of these areas (and the lack of later humans trampling all over the earlier strata).
The only thing left to ponder is HOW this city got there. That will take some talented surficial geologists (not the oil finding structural kind our Uni't tend to produce) and a bit of luck. Looking forward to hearing more about this and the site off Cuba.
I forget...are we at war with Eurasia or East Asia?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,682 031,00.html
Curiously, the expedition does not seem to include any professional archaeologists:
http://www.india-atlantis.org/
Graham Hancock, the most prominent member of the expedition, is well known for what might kindly be described as 'fringe' theories of ancient civilizations, Faces on Mars, etc:
http://www.grahamhancock.com/
For a critical view, see:
http://www.ramtops.demon.co.uk/
Carving blocks of stone , building roads etc isn't rocket science
Isn't it? Have you ever tried it? No fair using carbon-steel tools, either. For that matter, have you ever tried chipping flint to make stone tools? Or tried tanning and cutting a hide to make clothing? Again, no scissors, please.
In fact many of the "simple" technologies that we consider trivial because we can now do so much more are really anything but trivial. They were far from obvious and took a long time to develop and perfect.
And the idea of a road had to have been a blindingly brilliant insight at first. I mean, everyone knew how nice it was when a nice, broad, smooth path went where you wanted to go, but the idea of cutting and scraping the land to *make* it that way so that you could move people and goods easily... that can't have been obvious. Many of the peoples conquered by the Romans were both puzzled and awed by the Roman army's focus on and ability to construct roads. The whole road-building idea was *not* obvious, much less the techniques used to do it. But it was an extremely powerful idea, and a major part of why Rome was able to dominate so much of the world.
Heck, if I was the Cro-Magnon patent examiner, I'd have granted "Method for using rock and compacted soil for constructing broad and smooth artificial pathways to improve travel and transportation of people, goods, livestock and armies", wouldn't you?
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
You are right to be open minded about such things.
... without significant evidence they are just that ... claims. I think it is quite possible ancient civilizations have risen and fallen, and had their every trace eradicated by glaciers, erosion, and who knows what else. However, without physical evidence one should view these things as hypothetical possibilities, not probabilities. As for the alien slant I agree with you entirely ... show me the alien, or stop wasting my time with nonsense. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
... when some natural catastrophe (possibly a yellowstone-like so-called super-volcano, possibly disease or climatic change) nearly wiped the species out.
However, others are right to be skeptical of many of the claims
Other interesting things are that geneticists have worked out that ALL current human beings are descended from around 2,000 humans at a point around 80,000 years ago.
Clarification. IIRC all humans are descended from a few thousand humans 80,000
However, everyone outside of Africa is believed to be descended from about 500 people who emigrated more recently. That's right, something like 90-95% of human genetic diversity is in Africa. The rest of us, be we European, Native American, Asian, or whatever, are all much more similar, having only 5-10% of the genetic diversity. I'll leave it as an excercize to the reader as to which group some future humans, having survived some arbitrary change in survival requirements and conditions, is most likely to come from (hint, the math can be done by any 10th grade algebra student).
That is why humanity is not like other animals like dogs for which there are a myriad of different shapes and forms.
First, dogs are not naturally occuring creatures. They were bred for specific characteristics and traits, indeed inbred extensively, which is why there are so many varieties of dogs, some taking very odd form. A better example would have been different wolves, or bears, whose differences exist because of natural selection and not human intervention.
Second, that bottleneck is one possible contributing factor to humankinds homogeneous nature. Other factors which may have been more important were the destruction of the Neanderthal and perhaps other intelligent primates we don't know about (i.e. the ethnic cleansing of a differing kind of primates, leaving homo sap alone to dominate the world), our ability to modify our environment (easing some evolutionary pressures that wolves and bears must endure), and probably numerous other things as well.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
Mahabalipuram (or Mamallapuram) is now a moderately large town and a pretty nice resort. I grew up not far from there (in Vellore, Tamil Nadu). I've seen the seventh temple - there are lots of very nice temples and rock-carvings by the seaside. Anyway, the existence of six submerged temples has always been taught as fact, at least when I was in school, and I think that preliminary diving expeditions had already found evidence of a submerged city there. The new discovery doesn't really surprise me.
India has another submerged city : Dwaraka, the legendary abode of Krishna, located (probably) off the west coast a little north of Mumbai (formerly Bombay). I'm pretty sure archaeologists have found some submerged ruins in that area as well, but nothing specific.
My other sig is also a
Anything that involves Graham Hancock's Fingerprints of the Gods (his degree is, by the way, in sociology, not anything related to archaeology or history), I'd take a barrel full of salt before believing. For a debunking of the book, see http://www.intersurf.com/~chalcedony/wildside.shtm l.
Basically the man is a fraud. His basic premise is "I think this based on my naive intuition - I am well informed, so I don't have to do any research into the technical aspects of archaeology, nor do I need to actually prove my theory with any evidence. It's up to the archaeologists to disprove my theory. However, what they say is only subjective opinion (not based on a lifetime or multiple lifetimes of research and discovery, of course).