Quote:
Originally Posted by progressive25
Are these unknown markings found on a stone tablet and given in 1868 to British Army Col. James Churchwood by a Hindu holy man in India the remnants of a lost ancient civilization and continent?
|
Continents don't sink. Sorry, but it is physically impossible. Don't get me wrong, I do sympathize and I fully reject the current paradigm that is foisted on us by Academia: "Everything Is Beautiful."
The evidence is overwhelming and more than compelling and one is forced to accept one of two possible conclusions, either that extra-terrestrials were active on Earth of the Past or human civilization was incredibly advanced in Earth of the Past.
We cannot accept the latter as true because that destroys the "Everything Is Beautiful" Paradigm. Man does not slowly progress persevering on to higher and higher civilization, rather man reaches a certain level and then his civilization is destroyed by some celestial calamity, earth-based catastrophe or his own self-undoing and that is just too horrible for most people to accept because what is the end result of our current civilization? It too will be destroyed by some celestial calamity, earth-based catastrophe or our own self-undoing.
Yes, it is true that barren Maulden Island in the middle of nowhere in the Pacific Ocean has basalt roads leading right up to the ocean's edge.
And, yes, it is also true that Maulden Island is not volcanic.
And, yes, it is also true that the nearest source of basalt rock is more than 1,800 miles away.
But, yes, it is also true that no one is interested in solving that mystery because it would open doors that no one wants to open and destroy the "Everything Is Beautiful" Paradigm
Yes, it is also true that barren Maulden Island has numerous buildings and other structures, which naturally of course, christian archeaologists call "temples."
And, yes, it is also true that those structures are made of granite blocks with the majority weighing about 2 tons and others up to 30 tons.
And, yes, it is also true that there is no granite anywhere on barren Maulden Island and that the nearest possible source of granite is more than 3,000 miles away.
But, it is is also true that no one is interested in solving that mystery either for the exact same reason.
Yes, it is true that there are very large and very, very, very, very, very ancient ruins in Roratonga.
And, yes, it is true that those very large and extremely ancient ruins consist of several hundred granite and other stone structures that could have conceivably housed a population approaching 1 Million people by estimates of university trained archaeologists on expeditions sponsored by universities who inspected the ruins decades ago (please note that these structures were multi-level -- that is to say they were 2,3,4,5 and 6 story buildings).
So, yes, it is absolutely, irrefutably, undeniable that those ruins, that ancient city is more than 12,000 years old.
How do we know? Because all the structures are either submerged or partially submerged. In for that to happen, then would have be built at a time when the sea levels were 600 to 800 feet lower than they are today, and the only time known history when the sea levels were that low is circa 10,000 BCE, and we know that the average air temperature of Earth rose 7° F in 54 years and we know that the sea levels rose to within 100 feet of their current level within a space of less than 100 years and that they rose to the present level over the course of the several centuries after that.
And if we go back 12,000 years ago, there was no Persian Gulf, it was a river valley where four rivers, the Karun, Tigris, Euphrates and Kuwait Rivers merged at a large delta marsh-land and then fell over a beautiful cataract and flowed out the Persian River Valley through a large gorge that we now call the Strait of Hormuz and then about another 90 miles south before it reached what is now the Indian Ocean.
And there was no Bahamas Island either. It was a large island continent a little smaller than present-day Australia, and the only thing that separated Cuba from Florida was a one mile strait, not 90 miles of ocean.
I mention that only because many, especially Academia, like to denigrate, so they intentionally and willfully mistranslated texts for the express purpose of denigrating and debasing.
Plato never says Atlantis sank. It doesn't matter whether you use
Koine Greek or Attica Greek, the text quite clearly says that Atlantis was inundated. There is a huge difference between something that is inundated and something that sank.
New Orleans was inundated during Hurricane Katrina, but it did not sink.
Likewise, Plato said Atlantis was inundated; it was flooded, and that of course could have happened, if the sea level suddenly rose 500-700 feet like it did 12,000 years ago.
Are there submerged structures around barren Maulden Island? Probably, but one has the guts or courage to look, because that would violate the hideous "Everything Is Beautiful" Paradigm.
Anyway, my point is you need to get the science right, otherwise by regurgitating the nonsense by the Academia 'tards all you're doing is playing right into their hands.
Continents don't sink, but they can be flooded and buried underwater.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
After all, what would the large, reliable sources of food (including meat protein) and fresh water be on such a remote place with the precipitation typical of low-lying Pacific islands? This is not like the mountainous Hawaiian island chain, where their vertical layout traps rainfall. 
