Ultra-Ancient Civilizations

Part 1

Unofrtunately the forums dissapear many years ago.

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations Part 1
by liangcheng,
Sun Feb 28 21:09:25 1999
This topic may seem somewhat out of place but here is a real curiousity:

During the last ice age, sea level was about 300 feet lower. Mankind has always lived near water and built larger cities near waterways until very recently. Has any effort been made to locate any remains of ultra-ancient cities under the sea near the edge s of the continental shelves close to ancient river channels where they would have been most likely to have been built, and are there any methods of detecting these remnants if they are buried under deep layers of silt?

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by dreamline,
Mon Mar 1 15:10:36 1999
No, there has been no attempt to locate ultra-ancient civilizations. Yes, hypothetically there are methods for which we may locate these cities. There has been some exploring of these ancient cities, but for the most part the archeologists just don't want to know.

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by javierd,
Mon Mar 1 23:48:49 1999
actually, Navy Geosat satellite data has been used to prepare a topographic map of the entire ocean floor of the earth to a resolution of 6 miles, this should show ay anolalies asociated with ancient sites.

I found this web page, on this theme.

http://www.intersurf.com/~heinrich/Atlantis2.html

Very interesting and it has a lot of references.

Javier Delgado

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by moonlady,
Tue Mar 2 08:58:57 1999
Are we looking for Atlantis? I'm not joking - it's something that has fascinated me for years.

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by apple,
Tue Mar 2 15:16:49 1999
liancheng - Do you think that maybe the Chinese have more knowledge of their ancient past than other peoples? How much do you know about ancient Chinese history?

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by armaetno,
Tue Mar 2 16:21:54 1999
People: I must strongly disagree with the comments by Dreamline. Archaeologist not only want to know, but we are always doing research to learn more about ancient societies, and our own. There have been many surveys carried out in the waters near the present shorelines, mostly by underwater archaeologists (a subfield of Arcaheology), of the United States, the Caribbean and many other regions. Many important finds have been reported, mostly sunken ships. But, no real evidence of "Ultra-Ancient Civilizations". It is not that we are hidding something, simply there is nothing of the kind to be reported. Why would we lie? Furthermore, geologists have been able to survey most of the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean, and their maps show nothing that could be interpreted as a "Lost Continent" or civilization. Sorry, but Atlantis is just a myth. Armaetno.

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by moonlady,
Tue Mar 2 17:07:07 1999
Hi, Armaetno! At one time the earth was also thought to be flat and/or the center of the universe. A myth is only a myth until it is found to be the truth. Still hoping! Love, ML

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by liangcheng,
Tue Mar 2 19:26:59 1999
Hmmm... I guess I might have been mis-understood. I wasn't suggesting Atlantis or very large cities. All I was looking for was if there has been any evidence found for ancient port cities which may lie buried by the sea and silt deposits. I don't think there was such a large population back during the ice ages to support any notion of the existance of huge cities with large populations if they existed though.

Even fossil remains on the continental shelf would be interesting, but I suppose a lot of over-lying sand and silt would need to be removed first, and a method of detection for solid objects with similar densities buried beneath deep layers of sand would have to be devised somehow.

Larger scale sonograms, perhaps?

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by javierd,
Wed Mar 3 14:11:08 1999
then probably it will need a touch of luck.

The most ancient city knonw until now is Jericho, tht show human ocupation from about 6,000 years ago, and maybe older.

Probably Jericho would had not been excavated if it had not been mention in the bible, so maybe there are older sites, but i will tkae some luck or something special to atract atention.

Now there is another question.. What is the diference between a prehistoric site, and a low tech and low density civilization?

Althougth i don't expect many surprises from archeological sites, i think there is a lot of interesting thing to be discovered.

And if the site i posted is right, a lot of information and maps are already in the web, and many discovers would be made from confortable offices...

Of course...

it will be needed some field research to confirm that :-)).

Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by liangcheng,
Thu Mar 4 19:17:37 1999
Now for an interesting question relating to ultra-ancient civilizations living during the ice ages in places close to the edge of the continental shelf:

How did the ancestors of the Australian Aboriginals get over to Australia over 60,000 years ago? Obviously they must have had sea worthy boats able to carry both men and women to Australia back then.

So why would it not be reasonable to assume there were some small port cities also existing somewhere on the planet? Afterall people have always tended to stay together in groups, tribes, nations, or whatever.

Food for further thought.

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by javierd,
Tue Mar 9 16:10:38 1999
Curiosly, but i just have read in the spanish version of discover, that there is evidence of presence by h erectus, about 800,000 years ago, in australia.

The must have used some kind of boats to get there, since it need control to get there.

Another interesting thing is that America seem to have been colonized from south to north..

So, i ancient humasn had boats, they did not need the ice bridge between Behring.

Yes, it's very interesting.

But i don't think they would have ports or something like that.

Camps and dweelings probably would be more descriptive.

Javier Delgado

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by aijin,
Wed Mar 10 13:14:20 1999
What mystery about Atlantas? I thought that had been solved with all the finds at Thera (Santorini). This was a very prosperous offshoot of the Minoan civilization.

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by moonlady,
Wed Mar 10 13:42:44 1999
While most in the scientific community find Atlantis to be mythical, there are others who believer that it actually existed. Only time will tell.

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by javierd,
Wed Mar 10 18:10:38 1999
oppps... I made a mistake in my last post :-/

the evidence of homo erectus was found in the isle of Flores "NEAR" Australia.

the diference is importanta, since the isle of flores can be seen from other islands, and Australia not.

So it's a more challenging experience to sail where there is no land on sight.

Thos first inhabitantas of australia should have been very brave people.

Javier Delgado

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by liangcheng,
Fri Mar 12 19:21:49 1999
Javier, I'm glad you cleared that up!

I was having difficulty finding info on this. I've heard about the Homo Erectus findings on Flores, but never even heard any mention of any found in Australia. Still, ocean travel over 800,000 years ago shows Homo Erectus was much smarter than what his species is stereotyped to be by most scientific circles and the people who have been educated by these sources. My guess as to why this is: No metal tools or pottery was used by them, leaving only stone tools which do not rot or corrode. The organic boats would generally not survive the elements of biodegradation so naturally none would be found except by some rare freak accident under the right conditions. But then, would news of such a find be believed or even published? It seems if they find anything on the ocean floor it might be some stray stone tools buried under quite a layer of sand and silt, but that would be like hunting for needles in a haystack.

As for lower sea levels during the ice ages and stone dwellings, there could be a slightly better chance of finding them, assuming they stacked the stone into walls, etc which would be un-mistakably man-made.

Just some thoughts for the moment...

Liangcheng

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by joesdiscoveryscreen,
Sun Mar 14 03:36:25 1999
Evidence of Homo Erectus? 1 found evidence of Homo Erectus? Were the past scientists psychic? How did they know they would eventually find a Homo Erectus so many many years later? Or is it a deformed skull that fits the description of some text book written so many years ago? There has yet to be found any evidence of evolution, it has been taught to us, and we look for proof of it, but it has not been found as I believe such a primative man does not exist. There are no links to evolution of man, but eveyone wants to find it, to make the history books, to prove someone right, but after all the past civilizations found, after all the bodies of the past have been dug, and discovered, there has not been a prehistoric evolving man discovered, and I know there won't be, unless it is fabricated, or another mistaken ape skull or perhaps a deformed skull of a deformed man. Would there not be more evidence of such,, just as dinosaurs have been repeatedly discovered? I wish to finally ask you, why is evolution being taught, when there has yet to be any evidence of it? Just upset I guess and also wondering what the reponse will be, and I thank you for your time and concideration. Thank you.

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by liangcheng,
Sun Mar 14 05:50:30 1999
Smokin Joe

;-)) Liangcheng

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by joesdiscoveryscreen,
Mon Mar 15 02:18:38 1999
Still laughing at your response, ha ha ha. A friend of mine sent me to this website,, and it is pretty kool, and it has concepts that I think deserve a serious look at. I do not know if you have already seen the page, but thought I would pass it on for you to have a look at. the address is : http://www.thepump.org/built.html
And if you haven't been there, or heard of it,, you may find a surprise as I did. I enjoyed the site very much, and hope you do too. PEACE :)

Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by liangcheng,
Mon Mar 15 19:56:13 1999
Aaaah... Water! Cool...

I've heard some similar information in the past but now, finally I have the website to get more details. It seems quite interesting... reminds me a bit of the modern day fellow from Hangzhou, China who plans to straighten the Leaning Tower of Pisa as he has already straightened over 80 pagodas and other buildings throughout Asia.

Thanks for the link.

;-)) Liangcheng

  A little more info on Pisa
by liangcheng,
Mon Mar 15 20:09:36 1999
...just in case you were interested.

A summary of a news paper article from about a month ago:

Seven hundred years of efforts have failed to straighten the Leaning Tower of Pisa. Now news from Hangzhou about a man by the name of Cao Shizhong says he can do the job in 10 months. For over 30 years he has righted more than 80 structures in China, ranging from tottering pagodas to off-balance university buildings. His methods are patented; his vehicle, the Slanting Building Correction Research Institute, is based in the serene old capital of Imperial China.

Hmmm... This could be the start of another thread if I am not careful.

;-)) Liangcheng

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by enlightener,
Mon Mar 15 22:32:36 1999
Hi, Liangcheng, I am Chinese too. I think you are not a creationist right? :). But I think Joe is probably a creationist or something like that. :) "No links to Evolution of Man(including woman ???) ? " It all depends on what is your definition of "links". Maybe you should tell scientists your definition of "links", so they can try to prove that. I know creationists won't believe evolution until someone to be sent back by time machine and get a video tape of evolution, which is not possible to do. Do you have evidence to prove that you have a grand-grand-grand-father? If his corpse does not exist, does that mean your grand-grand-father was directly created from dirt? No links to evolution of man? If I limit the definition of links like you do, I can also say that there is no links between Middle Age man and Modern man. If you have a mummified corpse, that does not prove anything at all. Because it could just be a deformed Ape or Hitler or just a big-frog deformed on large scale. :) Last point is to disprove evolution can not prove creation. Micro-evolution has been observed in labtory. But there is no evidence at all for creation.
  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by joesdiscoveryscreen,
Tue Mar 16 01:22:45 1999
What came first,, the chicken or the egg? Even then, if only one chicken was born, how could it multiply itself? I would offer your own self as evidence of creation, when even still, evolution had to begin with some sort of creation. No matter what, from nothing, came something at some point, (possibly). Should we label it creation? Or evolution of nothing which became something? If we are all from the same omeba, or if many life forms appeared at once, it can be labeled creation, or evolution. I guess it depends on your definition. I was stating that there is no evidence of evolution of man, it was a theory some one thought up to explain where we came from, using logic based on evidence that leans towards such an idea of "evolution". If we evolved from apes, there is no evidence of it, and it can not be proved correct. It is also not possible to prove that creation did not happen, but the fact that we are, leads towards such an occurance, however I also agree, there is no way to prove that it happened. Based on the evidence on hand, I am not a product of evolution, as text books have taught me, and yet it is still being taught. Why can we not "at least" be honest- we do not know where we came from, there is no evidence, only words of a man who claims to have been the mouth of God, and a man who imagined an occurance of evolution. I can prove that the "evolutions" are wrong, right now, as they have no evidence to back thier belief, but a scientist, or anyone, cannot prove that creation did not happen, nor can anyone prove that it did happen, but I offer one to look at one's own self as evidence that some form of creation had to occur in order for one to even consider evolution to begin with, for even thought is created before it evolves. :) thank you..

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by cheesey,
Tue Mar 16 09:21:59 1999
Evolution can be proved you psycho! It can be seen most profoundly in lifeforms that have short life spans and reproduce quickly. How do you think that some forms of bacteria are becoming immune to antibiotics? EVOLUTION.

You fundamentalist wacks always pull that evolve from Apes crap. No one said we evolved from apes....Evolutionary theory states that Apes and Humans have a common ancestor! How do you explain the fact that Humans and Chimps are over 98% iditical genetically. Furthermore, why do you find evolution so blasphemous? Why does it offend you? I think it is a beautiful thing, in fact, if you want to take a religious point of view, I find human evolution from ape-LIKE lifeforms much more miraculous and God-like than two fig leafed clothed idiots running around in a garden!

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by enlightener,
Tue Mar 16 11:55:10 1999
For joe's question about chicken and egg, of course egg came first. If there is a first chicken, it multiplied itself by mating with that kind of bird which it evolved from. Let's call that kind of bird pre-chicken. Pre-chicken is very similar to chicken, but it is not a chicken. Among their children, there will be both chickens and pre-chickens. If chickens are superior to pre-chickens, then they have a bigger chance of surviving. Obviously the first chicken came from the chicken egg. The chicken egg is laid by a pre-chicken. Of course many primitive chemical life forms can appear in short time. The life forms are very likely produced with thunder striking at sea chemicals. And there will be a lot of strikes everyday on earth. You said there is no evidence for evolution. How do you explain the micro-evolution observed by scientists in lab? Your last logic is funny :). You can disprove evolution, because you do not know the evidence or can not understand the evidence. You can prove creation, because you do not know the evidence to disprove it. Suppose there is no evidence to disprove creation,(although there are a great deal), that does not prove creation at all. If I tell you, I am from China. Do you have evidence to disprove that? Does that prove I am from China?

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by joesdiscoveryscreen,
Tue Mar 16 12:05:31 1999
Well, I am not out to win any war of beliefs, since beliefs make up who we are, along with the knowledge of death which lurks to also create a persons character (in my belief). I apologize for causing a fuss, as I can see now that is what I have done. I do wish to question your idea of bacteria becoming immune, thus calling it (evolution), though I would agree it evolved an immune system, I myself would not call it evolution. I only say that because once I had the mumps and I developed an immunity, just as I do with other diseases, but, I do not think that means I have evolved, but, I could be wrong. I must correct myself as far as my beliefs concerning evolution, as I stated that I am not aware of any facts that prove that we evolved, only evidence. Really what we are dealing with,, is intelligence, and perhaps even egos. It is impossible for me to prove that a layer of soil is (1 million- 100) years old, and I do not believe anyone else can prove that it is that old. Since we know that there was a large extintion of Dinosaurs and wildlife, it is possible that time did not occur as it does now. 1 day then, could have equaled 100 years today, and I only state this based on (evidence) of a prehistoric, and unmentioned atmosphere which may have existed that protected the Earth from UV light, free radicals,, and what not. If there was a layer of water that once covered the Earth in the form of ice, and the Earth had a different rotation, it would lend one to consider that 1 day could have been a very very long time. The dinosaurs had small lungs? Flying reptiles could not fly in our current atmosphere? I tend to believe such an atmosphere did exist, and that this atmosphere would explain animal size, biological functions and differences, and even the "Great flood",, which is recorded/documented to have happened by many races of humans on Earth, by scientists who study the Earth layers, and yes by the Bible. If we as humans existed during this time, we would most c ertainly have been different creatures, and perhaps we have adapted to this current world. This may be called,, "evolution". However, to say that these early humans were previously something else, and then something before that? Eventually you end up with an occurance,, a happening,, a creation? Or am I mis-naming what I could also call evolution? Even evolution has to begin somewhere, yes? From nothing, came something--,, to consider that life has always existed would lead one into quite a state of mind, but we all agree to some degree that life or all life did occur at one given moment, and whether it is named "creation" or "evolution" is up to the individual I suppose. I would be much happier to hear the "truth",, which is,, "We do not know where we came from",, since, it is honest and it is a fact,-- there are no real facts to say where we came from, only evidence and (faith)?. PEACE++++ :)

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by cheesey,
Tue Mar 16 14:44:29 1999
Well Joe, You're obviously having trouble understanding what the concept of evolution entails. If you developed an immunity to Mumps; that does not entail evolution, that would simply be the development of an immunity. You are simply one living organism, you cannot evolve. However, bacteria that develop immunities to antibiotics and pass this trait on to their offspring soon create a strain of bacteria with the inherited trait of immunity to antibiotics, This IS evolution. You should pay more attention to scientific texts.

Now, since all living groups of organisms go through evolution, why do you have trouble with the fact that we human beings have gone through it as well. How do you account for humanoid remains found by scientists? I will grant you that piecing together the puzzle of human evolution is tricky and that we do not have all of the answers, but what we do have is a much more logical, plausible, and more sound paradigm that your explaination of POOF! here we are.

I'll also grant you that if we follow evolution back to its beginning, we are still left with something and the question of where did that something come from. You may call it God others may call it something else-Platonic Philosophy calls it the unmoved mover.

However, it is a large step from this to an anthropomorphic God that creates Mankind. Why did he/she create other humanoid figures and let them die out, and then create Man?

Evolution is a scientific fact, we may not be sure of all the conditions, methods, and branches, but living things do go through evolution over time. Why fight this natural thing?

  My two cents (squeezed in)
by liangcheng,
Tue Mar 16 17:10:58 1999
In my opinion 'Crevo' discussions are an exercize in endless futility.

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by joesdiscoveryscreen,
Wed Mar 17 02:35:28 1999
Well, I just wrote a whole thing regarding the responses to my message, and POOF,, it was gone. I wish to first comment on the chicken deal,, heh.. To make a short question eternal,, "What came first, the pre-chicken, or the egg"? I was giving an example of redundancy, not asking a real question, but good answer. I know the story of evolution, first an omeba, which reproduced itself, then spread into other environments, and adapted (evolved) to survive that environment, and those offspring spread into other environments, and did the same thing, and became opposite sexs, and different creatures, which continued to do the same, which makes me and this fly that is buggin me right now,, relatives. Me and the mumps are cousins. A certain plant needs a certain insect to do a certain thing, and the insect needs that plant for a certain thing, one cannot survive without the other. The plant makes leaves that the insect eats, as it spreads the reproductive components of the plant to other plants that recieve them. This insect needs this plant for food, that plant needs that insect for reproduction and perhaps food too, since the insect produces waste which the plant consumes,, they are like one being, yet seperated, and are totally different life forms, how did this evolve? It sounds like design to me, but I will except that I am wrong when it is showed to me. This "natural thing" that you call it, is a process, which occurs because? Survival? Evolution? I do not know, I have not said that I was a creationist, you have labeled me as such. Judgement was, "guilty as charged",, "guilty until proven innocent", well perhaps you thought I was judging you, which I suppose I was. I did not claim to be evolutionist, creationist, anti evolutionist, or anything. Evidence can lead to many directions, you chose one, and defend it, I do not choose, and I question it,, no problem.. What ever..

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by joesdiscoveryscreen,
Wed Mar 17 03:00:23 1999
All of what I wrote in the first place is gone, which reaks havoac on my brain to have to reconstruct what I stated. I perhaps made it too long, but I remembered also, that there is evidence of UFO's, Aliens, and perhaps we are products of manipulated DNA, or maybe or relation with the apes, may just be because we were born on the same planet. I can't help it,, everything you said is a load of crap. I didn't want to argue, but, gee, you just don't get my point, and you labeled me,, and you refered to me as a "creationist" and didn't even read what I wrote. Just because a strain of bacteria becomes immune, and passes that trait to it's offspring, does not conclude that I evolved from a bug or an ape. There are no evolutionary transitions between any animals, there are extinct animals, and living animals, many animals are similar, but remain to themselves as a species unique, and may crossbreed, but in Nature,, crossbreeds typically are not welcome or recognized by it's own or either species, and becomes an alien, an outcast, and does not survive, or reproduce with other crossbreeds, but, odds are odds, and it could (have) happen(ed) I suppose at some point in the animal kingdom. Anyway, you are saying that all animals evolved, but this is not fact, and everything you have brought up so far is "evidence", "theory" and there are no facts. Just because a chameleon changes color, doesn't mean that an owl can. But of coarse,, you may reply,, some more crap about scientific "text", which is also based on evidence, ideas, theories,, while the spiritual "text" has all the same ingredients. I never at any point said awwwwwwwwww,, what's the use,, Liangcheng--- I must agree with you, but I must also attempt to be understood,, even if I confuse myself doing it,, hahaa.. I stand where I stand, and do not choose what way is right, since evidence, theories, and "text" can go in many directions,, just as my own did..

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by kthebom,
Sat Mar 27 01:17:41 1999
"What if" an Ultra civilazation did indeed exisit. I believe there was infact one.I believe it to be connected to egypt. there is a great book you should read by Graham Hancok,"Fingerprints of the Gods". He expores this subject indepth.. I believe that archaeologists have alteady stumbled onto this but refuse to see what is right in front of them case in point:the Sphinx found to be water eroded not wind eroded. there is evedence sitting in front of us that we refuse to look at and untill we open our minds im afraid that we will never know.

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by neutrino,
Sat Mar 27 18:44:25 1999
I think that it is high time that somebody defines the word "civilization." _The American Heritage Dictionary_ defines "civilization" as: "An advanced stage of development in the arts and sciences accompanied by corresponding social, political, and cultural complexity." _The Concise Oxford Dictionary_ defines it as: "An advanced stage or system of social development." One might expect an oral or a written tradition or pictographs (like hieroglyphics) as a prerequsite for such a designation as "civilization." One would expect to find a culture. Wandering nomads do not make a civilization by themselves.

Early hominids were not members of civilizations. One needs a written or oral tradition and a complexity of society and culture to use such a term as "civilization."

Of course, there are other, less exact definitions of civilization but I prefer explicit definition over vague opinions.

neutrino (Skeptic31@aol.com)

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by javierd,
Sat Mar 27 22:06:14 1999
hi kthebom,

have you read the full sphynx thread?

I post some explanations about the water erosion.

And some point about "the finger...".

simply, most of the "evidence" can't be taken very seriosuly. In the book, Hancok simply ignores the explanations he does not like, instead of refuting them.

It's just another book, in the line of "chariots of the Gods" by Daniken.

Javier Delgado

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by kthebom,
Sun Mar 28 14:26:32 1999
Javier.d, i may have gone overboard a bit with Hancok, I in no way take to all of his theories. there was alot of REACHING in that book.. I do beleive the sphynx to be older and the pyramids of giza as well. But im noy buying the whole super race of people either..had a bit of wine when i wrote that sorry! i havent read the thread but im interested in any material connected to the ancient egyptians, olmecs, mayans, ect.. hancoks latest project is our past with mars so im a little nixed on him. I guess im interested more in the how did they do it and why theories.. and as far as chariots of the gods..there are theories and there are delusions,chariots is deffinately the latter.

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by javierd,
Sun Mar 28 23:13:16 1999
There is still to much to know 70 years ago, hittites and Sumerian were unknown, except for a few references.

The archeology has uncovered so many wonders, but its a slow work.

But also there is too much noise.

I found more marvellous the slow but continuous uncovering by Dr. Hawas of the remains of the common people and workers of the Pyramids, with their ways of life. The grafities of the builder of the pryramids, their bread and beer factories etc. this is better than the fireworks of Hancok.

Javier Delgado

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by kthebom,
Mon Mar 29 01:02:04 1999
javierd, i respect hawas. i find him to be the most informative and authoritive on egypt today. My interest lies in the orion cult, the oldest religion to date..i find it funny the similiarities between our "jesus" figurehead and the osiris god a man in the suggested white rob, preaching peace at a time of civil unrest,sporting the beard ,as drawn in history with both jesus and osiris. both tortured and died, but comming back to life to save their people. Im not suggesting a Hancok theory, i just find it funny how the savior factor keeps cropping up..it was a similiarity i found to funny to ignore...no response needed..

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by kthebom,
Mon Mar 29 01:09:41 1999
I must say i have read your other postings and responses javier, and i have really enjoyed them, i find it refreshing to listen to someone who is based on evidence and not caught up in the "what if's" as i have been guilty of...k.

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by javierd,
Mon Mar 29 17:21:04 1999
hi kthebom,

I don't know much about osiris, but you should read something about Mitra. he born in 24 of december, He died, he came back from the dead.

His followers have a dinner fro celebrations, where the gave bread and wine.

It was very popular bewteen Romans about 2000 years ago....

We have an interesting thread on pyramids about a year ago, so i save it , there are many interesting links there, you can find it at

http://www.paralax.com.mx/javier/8-venado.html
  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by lonnieshiv,
Tue Mar 30 11:02:27 1999
i believe atlantes did exest simpely because of similar cultures on both sides of the alantic and i think it exested right were it was described to be past the pillars of hercules of course that could be anywere in the atlantic for when it was written of the earth was consederd flat so to them if ever exested it had to be right off futherest point of land. i would like to know if there has been any civalization with writen skills descoverd that exested before the sumarens
  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by javierd,
Tue Mar 30 16:37:01 1999
There are three problems.

The similaritis are not conclusive.

The pillars of Hecules were not in Gibraltar. This is a modern reference.

The map of the submarine mountains in the Atlantic does not show any place where the mythic Atlantis could had been.

There is another interpretation of Atlantis. But i think that qualifies for another thread.

Javier Delgado

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by lonnieshiv,
Wed Mar 31 09:58:28 1999
javierd i think pyramids in mexeco and egypt is pretty conclusive what are the odds of two completly different civalizations separated by that much distance could have the same culture. as for there being no proof of alantis along the under water mountains if huge cataclysm happend as was discribed and crack opened underneth atlantis it could have fell into that crack and when said crack closed up it could have caused the mountians.

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by cheesey,
Wed Mar 31 11:51:09 1999
How about Science lonnie? Ever hear of it? Civilizations on different sides of the world also developed speech and some form of clothing; is that CONCLUSIVE proof of the existence of Atlantis?

The "idea" of a pyramid does not have to be passed on. Any culture pileing rocks on top of each other is bound to "discover" a pyramid shape. Maybe Mountains were the inspiration, humans wanted to build there own mountains....does that mean that Atlantis discovered Mountains and placed them all over the world. Come to us with some scientific research and keep your bed time stories between you and your mommy.
  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by lonnieshiv,
Sun Apr 4 11:33:46 1999
heard that mind close from here in case you havent heard the exchange of thougt is science and just because something isn't in your wittle science book doesn't mean doesn't exest and just because you cant nock something dowen don't stike your thump in your mouth and pout

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by liangcheng,
Sun Apr 4 21:06:27 1999
One thing which puzzles me:

Hominids have been on this planet for more than a million years. Why is it that our 'civilizations' seemed to have sprung up all at once (give or take 1000 years) all over the planet?

In this million+ year time frame the sudden development of 'civilizations' throughout the world seems much too unlikely without some form of contact between these remotely scattered civilizations.

Any ideas on this?

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by javierd,
Tue Apr 6 12:19:46 1999
Homo sapiens has been here for almost 100,000 years, and most of his time it was as hunter ghaterer (not sure about the spelling).

Altough we are uses to thing of primitive man as a hunter, Louis Leaky, found that this kind of society recolect about 75% of his food, and only 25% from hunting. But the worst part is that they dedicate about 30 hours a week for this.

So we lost the 30 hours week about 10,000 years ago!

Ussually the agriculture is seen as the seed that started all. Since a sedentary people, can acumulate wealth. But Agriculture requieres much more work per week.

So something had to happen to replace hunting and recolecting, all sing, low work life with agriculture.

The curious part is that it seem to have started a at the same time in several parts of the world.

Sumer, the indo Valley, Tehuacan valley, in Mexioc, are some of the older places, about 10,000 yers ago.

This is an interesting mistery.

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by javierd,
Tue Apr 6 12:25:09 1999
hi lonnieshiv,

As i see, pyramids between Egypt and America are to much disimilar in form, function, and too much separated in time and space to have an comoon origin.

And remember, is good to have an open mind... but not so open that your brain slips trough it :))

or as the other saying says.

Extraoirdinary claims, requiere extraordinary proofs.

So, get tyour data, coment it, and share with us.

And have fun.

Javier Delgado

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by apcdh,
Tue Apr 6 16:40:01 1999
Very Interesting discussion. I LIke the openess of thought. I Have suspected that perhaps the advent of agriculture might be correlated to the extinction of the great, giant mammals. Such animals as the mammoths must have provided weeks of food for a group of humans numbering 20- 50 individuals. The disappearance of such food sources must have created questions both practical and religious in nature. Agriculture was obviously a successful solution to the practical question of food. The transition from a primarily hunting organization to a primarily agricultural society may well have taken centuries. Such a change may well have occurred without input from some "older" and more scientifically knowledgable society. If one looks at the Indians of North America, one can see the integration of hunting, and planned rotation farming, applied in a manner which should have beed self sustaing, if not for the interference of outside forces. The apparent applied intelligence of such an arrangement is worthy only of respect. The Question I think becomes- why do farmers need a written language, when hunter-gatherers do not? In a word, could it be - TAXES? Ah - I become cynical. Well, what do you think?
  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by javierd,
Wed Apr 7 16:11:14 1999
not taxes, but something almost as dreadfull...

acounting.

The oldest records known, are not poetry, literature or anything like that.

They are accounts. At first, it was with beads, or tokens. One for each good, or animal. In Sumeria, they were sealed in clay envoelopes and sent, so show the numbers of trnasactions, but they had to be broken to be counted later, so signs were used. Later the signs replace the tokens, and writing was born.

This of course is very interesting to archeologis, because it shows the organization and economy of ancient civilizations.

But, it boring for the rest of the world.

So this accouns are rarely published.

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by armaetno,
Sun Apr 11 09:17:33 1999
Estimado señor Delgado: It was Carl Sagan who said: "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof". I just wanted to give credit where credit is due. This comment brings me to the point I was making in the "Archaeology conversation", earlier today, about peer review. Anyone can claim anything, but unless you present supporting evidence to survive the criticism of the professional community in your field (peer review) your hypothesis is fried. Armaetno

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by javierd,
Sun Apr 11 14:52:26 1999
thank you armaetno,

This is one of my favorite cites, but i did not now where it come from.

and this reminds me of another of my favorite cites. ( i think it's form Max Planck)

"How many times your beautiful theory is destroyed by one little and ugly fact." :-)

saludos Javier Delgado

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by lonnieshiv,
Tue Apr 13 01:13:44 1999
javierd you are right but though there is no hard evadence of atlantis exestance i cant help but wonder what proof of our exestance should we expereance a major catoclesem our books burnd our buildens of wood and metel burned melted all of our information on computers totely destroed would anybody believe we exested 10000 years from now

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by javierd,
Tue Apr 13 13:02:18 1999
in 10,000 years, the footprints of Neil Amstrong would still beas good as new, and the voyager series will still be 20,000 years to reach another star.

But in the case of atlantis we have much less.

The leyend of Atlantis comes from a ales of Palot, that he said he took from Egyptinas priest, and... thats all, no artifacts, no other confirmation form other spurces etc.

Even the account by Plato, does not try to present an historical fact, but it has a moral intention.

Now, the acount has some resemblance to what we know now about Creta. They speak a dialect of greek, and had the same gods, so the later greeks took much of their culture from them, and they had a great catastophe when the thera volcan exploded.

Their civilization did not end with thera, it last a copule of centuries more, so some scholars don't like to credit the legend to Crete.

But there is eough similarities to start a legend, and this are true fats. And so far are the only we have.

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by amlodhi,
Thu Apr 15 16:48:07 1999
Thera or crete cannot be Atlantis.The story told to Plato has more meaning than people give it credit for.It tells of an island which existed many great years before even the Egyptian culture florished.In fact it could be that Egypt was a descendant of the survivors of Atlantis as is told in many cultures all over the world which according to expert opinion had no contact with until Columbus. Atlantis was beyond the pillars of Hercules which at that time was the straits of Gibralter,this doesn't actually mean that a great big island sat in the Atlantic but could mean a different continent or a land mass so big it was not charted by archaic sailors.Antartica has been mapped on old maps shown in a time when it was free of ice the shape of the island is identical to that shown by surveys done to asertain a map of Antartica as it would be free of ice.The fact that maps already existed showing this many hundreds of years ago has caused experts some embarassment and they pass it of as a fake or just ignore it completely,they don't want to accept that man has existed for tens of thousands of years and possesed an ancient knowledge which has been lost. At the time of say 1200 bc Antartica may not have been where it is today.In fact the whole earth was totally different,Antartica may have been in a more temperate climate and thusly would have been in the Atlantic ocean,the earths magnetic poles shift and reverse causing upheavals to the earths crust.This is known as crust displacement and could have occured during this time,dragging Antartica down to it's currnt location.The sudden onset of the iceage supports this.

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by liangcheng,
Thu Apr 15 20:58:09 1999
For Antartica to have moved that quickly due to plate tectonics, I don't think any civilization would have survived that kind of calamity. I suppose maybe the axis of the Earth's rotation may have shifted more during this time but still not enough to account for this either. If Antartica was ever clear of ice during this 'recent' past, the only thing I could imagine to be responsible for this would be some kind of change in ocean and air currents where warmth from the tropics were brought towards that area during that time, but ice core samples don't suggest this ever occured recently.

There are underwater pyramid-like structures off the coast of Okinawa which have recently been explored but no *confirmation* as to their age has been established yet.

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by amlodhi,
Fri Apr 16 13:15:01 1999
But they did survive by leaving and colonising other lands.Egypt and maybe south America all have the same influences,pyramids,star religions,an ancient science.There is an arachaic account of the earth shifting on it's axis.They call it the time when the stars fell out of place.All markers on earth and the sky moved and appeared to fall from view. This too supports the archaic floods which litter ancient stories,they talk of the earth shifting and the waters rising. Scientists have taken geophysical surveys which allow them to map the land mass beneath the ice.The land map they drew up matches almost identicaly to the ancient maps of hundreds of years ago.These maps show the flow of rivers and lakes which are now frozen under the ice,when the scientists did this themselves they saw the same rivers and lakes in the same places as on the ancient maps concluding that the source maps must have come from a time when Antartice was free of ice.How else could they have seen the land mass and mapped it so acurately?. The pryamid structures off Japan too support the idea of ancient civilizations colonising the world.The great ships found at Giza prove that they were capable of building ships which could travel the great oceans of the world.If people had to flee from a great catyclism they would have taken their knowledge with them and influenced other cultures.All ancient civilizations speak of a builder God who brought great knowledge and wisdom.The structures if man-made simply means that the same civilization reached Japan. These structures would have been on land in 10,500 bc,the same time quated as the orion belt pyramid formation and the time of a water weathered sphinx.

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by cheesey,
Fri Apr 16 13:55:45 1999
Amlodhi,

The presense of pyramid shaped structureas in different parts of the world is NOT evidence of a cultural contact or some ancient civilization teaching them how to build one.

Every ancient civilization made some sort of pot to hold items in also. Does this mean that some Ancient civilization from Atlantis went around the world teaching others cultures how to make pots!?! Come on, use some rationality!

You've also showed some classical misinterpretations of Plato's work also. In his day, the Pillars of Hercules were in the Agean, not the straits of Gibraltar. And, it is believed that the original interpretation of Atlantis' location in Plato's work was "between Africa and Asia". This would leave your Antarctic theory in shambles.

Finally, there is NO, NONE, ABSOLUTELY NO, NADA evidence to support an advanced civilization in the time period that Atlantis is belived by some to exist. We do however have much archaeological evidence from ALL over the world for primitive (I don't mean this in a pejoritive sense) hunter-gatherer societies at this time period. Follow the evidence guys, it'll usually lead you in a better direction than some old stories.

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by amlodhi,
Fri Apr 16 16:45:30 1999
The account told to Plato by Solon goes that 'the Egyptian priests who said that mysterious people from a place called Atlantis had invaded much of the mediterranean as well as Egypt some nine thousand years ago and records still survive in Egypt.' From the time of Plato nine thousand years would fit in the right time line.Also we are not talking about pots,pyramids are totally different. The pillars of Hercules may refer to a palace that once stood one the edge of Crete.Wether this is the straits of Gibralter or not is always up for debate but the passage reads 'BEYOND' the pillars,implying that Atlantis once existed further than the pillars no matter where they are.Also if Atlantis is between Africa and Asia then presumibly it would still be there as those land masses are pretty big you could hardly lose them. If there was no advanced civilcization before 5,000 bc how do you explain the sudden arrival of civilization?.A complete writing system,advanced mathematics,the ability to produce mind boggling structures from your primitive hunter gatherers. Antartica holds many strange particles in it's ice.Frozen specimens of trees and leaves,pollen and flowers have been found in the ice when they should not have been according to expert opinion.they have no explaination of how they got there but if antartica was once temperate then they would have grown naturally. If you take the time to read the 'old stories' you would see a completely new picture emerge,the myths that so many people dismiss hold vital information about ancient man and the way of archaic times. Also don't be so quick to heap praise on archaoeologists,when they find something they can't explain they either dismiss it or ignore it as Flinders-petrie did and he's concidered the father of Egyptology. Why would ancient peoples go to so much trouble to erect their monuments which show a star pattern of 10'500 bc unless it meant something.It's happened in Egypt,Cambodia and South America can they really all be coincidences that all these ancient peoples built pyramids just like that for no reason?.

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by lonnieshiv,
Mon Apr 19 05:43:34 1999
bravo amiodhi and cheesey you speak of old stories and bedtime stories well if we listen more to our ancesters old stories maybe we would be better off

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by cheesey,
Mon Apr 19 10:30:39 1999
OK Smart ^$$! You're right, we should pay more attention to the stories of our ancestors. The only problem is determining what they intended their stories to be. Since Plato's story of Atlantis reads as a morality tale, most scholars assume that this is what it was intended to be. But, hey I'm sure with all of your advanced university ducation in Ancient Greek you and Lonnie know better. OK and hey, what about Jonathan Swift's tales of Gulliver's Travels. I belive that there may really be a land called Lilliput with people about two inches high. Why not, he wrote it down IT MUST BE TRUE!!! Camelot must really be somewhere also, I bet we can fund Excalibur and maybe the Holy GRail is there!

The sudden apprearance of civilization!!! I cannot believe you made such a statement! What is your educational background? There is well documented archaeological evidence of the gradual immersion of civilization from small settelements experimenting with agricultural to the development of walled cities to monument builders.

Come out from left field amiodhi; the inning is over and you team lost!

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by javierd,
Mon Apr 19 12:56:33 1999
hi amlodhi,

it seems as if you have been reading too much Daniken ...

There is to much to say, taht i don't know where to start but.

The simmilitud of the pyrmids is more aparent than you think.

What is the more similar natural structure similar to a pyramid?.

A mountaint, and no civilization has an exclusivity on mountains. In the thread of the shape of pyramids i wrote the egyptian account of the shape of the pyramids. In Mexico, for example you can find civilizations like Cuicuilco, Tehotihuacan, and Mayas, that had almost no contact btween them and developed their own kind of pyramid (round in the case of cuicuilco). But their have very diferent shapes.

And archeologist don't hide what they not understand, they jump of rejoice because it's they way to fame. They are hummans and can be hard head edsometimes but remember the moto of science:

Publish or perish.

Show me a maya record, Theotihuacan, olmec etc. tahat show a star pattern of 10,500 BC. they were spledind astronomers, but the oldest maya dates is about 3000 BC .

The theory of water erosion, is only one of several explications to the erosion of the sphynx.

The material of which is made the sphynx is soo diverse that any attempt to date it based on erosion will failed.

But his knowdlege seem to be conveniently forget in most books on the theme.

And as cheesey said, civilization did not start sudenly. They evolved very slowly at first, in Summer there is evidence of almost 1000 years of civilizations before the first city started.

Agriculture changed the way hummans lived for hundred of years but te change was not sudden,.

And the old map (you are speaking of Piris Rey, isn't it) Does not coincide with the shape of antartida, unless they are subjeted to several "corrections" and several assumptions are made. So Hardly they can be taken as proofs.

The old stories should had to bee studied, but always with a grain of salt.

For example the hittite empire was compleely forgoten, except for a couple of references in the Bible.

This leed to the discoverring of and ancient civiliation, and to discover that the references in the Bible had nothing to do with it ..!

Schliemman discovered Troya, but the archeology discovered a more complex history that the one that leed him to it.

So may it happen with Atlantis. It's interesting, but we can take it very literally.

Javier Delgado

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by amlodhi,
Mon Apr 19 14:20:12 1999
For a start I have never read Von Daniken.He speaks of aliens shaping the world and that is something I do not agree on. Ok so the pyramids were shaped to look like mountains that is neither here nor there the problem is how and why build them in the first place.The Egyptian pryamids resemble orion,the temples of Cambodia resemble draco and the temples in south America are believed to map the solar system.Not only that but the Mayans or Aztecs whatever all held the plaides and venus as their God stars is this a coincidence that these stars were also revererd by the ancient mesopotaminans? who lived thousands of years and miles from each other. when I talk of civilization I mean the arrival of writing and maths not simple farming.The development of farming and the improvment of homes from caves to houses can be seen but the arrival of writing can't.The oldest recorded writing from Egypt was a clay tablet with a wine order written on it dating from the reign of King scorpian or nemes.So you want me to believe that suddenly one day the king picked up a clay tablet and wrote his shopping list out and of course everyone understood perfectly?. The aruguement about the sphinx will never be solved until we can acuratly date stone but to trot out the same story of the sphinx being carved of poor quality stone beggers belief.For a start name a pharaoh who would accept a monument like the sphinx and still think it was ok if it was made so poorly.If the stone is so poor the sphinx would have weathered away to nothing several hundred years ago.It hasn't,it's still there. There are two mysteries still to be solved.If the two worlds,new and old, were so isolated as to evade contact until Columbus so did cocaine get into Egypt?.Several Egyptian mummies have been found to contain cocaine a substance which was only grown in south America so what took it there?,a gust of wind?.Maybe it's got something to do with those massive ocean going ships found near the pyramids. What of the Olmec heads? giant heads which have African features and look nothing like native Americans also stone carvings of white men with beards how could native indians know what beards are,they can not grow facial hair.How do they know what Africans look like unless they had actualy seen them?. THIS DEBATE IS FAR FROM OVER CHEESY AND I'M UP TO BAT AGAIN.

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by mjm,
Mon Apr 19 23:30:58 1999
First off, Solon lived during the early part of the 6th century BCE, so there is no way that he told Plato anything (since he lived in the late 5th and early 4th century BCE). Plato was presenting a moral allegory and he put it in the mouth of one of the Greeks' "7 Sages". Plato also created many other myths or allegorical tales, that and dialectical conversations were his preferred method of presenting his philosophical ideas. Second, writing didn't just pop up all of a sudden. It began as simple marks representing numbers, or pictures representing things. These were later short-handed to a symbol representing the initial sound of the thing that the letter represented, for example: The Greek letter 'mu' was adapted from the Phonoecian alphabet where it represented the initial sound for their word for water. This process was not sudden. The 'arrival' of writing is not 'seen' because it was for a very long time extremely rudimentary. If it was carved in stone and it survived weathering then we would have remnants, which we do in some cases. But, for instance, the Sumerians generally wrote their cuneiform accounts on clay tablets, which are relatively soft and therefore easily reused. This also means they rarely survived. The Egyptian papyri only survived because of Egypts extremely dry climate, but the manuscripts we have today are extremely fragile. Just look at all the trouble they had trying to piece together the crumbling shreds of the Dead Sea Scrolls. As for why all these widespread civilizations 'revered' the Pleiades and Venus, maybe because they looked up in the sky and thought they were pretty amazing. I'm not famliar with Mayan (or Aztec) astrology, but I'd be willing to bet their version of who and what the Pleiades represent is quite different from what the Greeks believed. What is the source of all these "facts" you mention that "experts" can't explain?

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by armaetno,
Tue Apr 20 10:44:53 1999
I would like to address the comment that Lonnieshiv wrote on April 13 asking what would be left of our civilisation perished in a giant catastrophe and all buildings and monuments were destroyed. The first source of information for archaeologists is, believe it or not, trash. Most of the time went we are digging, the midden is nothing else than a refuse heap, and the buildings are ruins. Rarely do we find "treasures"; people normally don't throw away valuable articles. What we are looking for is "data", information, about the way of life of a people, not "treasures" as such. So, if anybody survived and after many years Archaeology was reborn, I'm pretty confident that my future fellow archaeologists would find and learn about us.

Most of the discussion in this conversation runs around the myth or legend of Atlantis. Now, one thing all of you must take into account is (even if it was a true story) that Plato is not a primary source for Atlantis, meaning he never was there, he never met an Atlantean, nor read any of their documents. According to his account, he learned of Atlantis from Solon, who learned the story from an Egyptian priest. Now, given the time involved in the passing of the story from one person to another (as MJM properly points out), we don't know thru how many other mouths the story passed. In other words Plato's story is at best hearsay. Further more, as Amlodhi pointed out there were other "Pillars of Hercules" in the Agean (maybe it was a term applied to a geographical feature, like "morro" in Spanish).

Listen, in the early days of Archaeology, in 19th century, many archaeologists believed that the only way to explain the American civilisations was by Diffusion, the passing of cultural traits from places like Egypt, Babylon and Atlantis to the "primitive Indians". This was based, in part, on what we would call racial bias. How else could inferior peoples, like the Indians, develop high cultures and civilisations? (The same was said of Zimbabwe in Southern Africa.) Yet, as the years passed and more and more information was collected, the evidence mounted against the Diffusionist view point and, despite the "Ra Expeditions", it was pushed aside (A clear example of peer review). Do we know all the answers? No, absolutely not. That is why we keep on digging and doing research.

One more thing, Mr. Daniken, author of "Chariots of the Gods" and other such nonsense, is not and has never been an archaeologists. He has no formal training in this field, and has never presented his work for proper review to the proffesional community. The proper term for him is Quack. Armaetno

  A funny thought... you deserve a break today.
by liangcheng,
Tue Apr 20 18:32:16 1999
I'm curious what future archeologists would think of the remains of all the many McDonalds playlands?

Temples to some unknown gods? *smile*

Sorry, I could'nt resist.

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by walley,
Wed Apr 21 07:06:42 1999
In his book, Heaven's Mirror,Graham Hancock, has located intriguingly similar ruins which are precisly positioned around the planet according to mathematical principles based on precession. These are located in exact relation to each other. If I quote partial facts here I suspect I'll eventually end up reprinting most of the book in response to challenges, so I suggest that those who are truly interested read the book. The scholarship is impressive (trust me on this. I do not suffer fools gladly). For the more robust among you I suggest Hamlet's Mill by Giorgio de Santilana and Hertha vov Dechend. The math is impressive. I think the evidence points strongly to an unknown pre-historic civilization. ps amlodhi-keep at it. Beliefs do not change easily.

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by cheesey,
Wed Apr 21 09:58:28 1999
Get real Walley!

We've already discussed the credentials of Mr. Hancock on several strings here. He has NO formal training as an Archaeologist or Anthropologist, and he has already recounted some of his so-called theories when presented with documented evidence (i.e., he retracted his statement about the Great Pyramid not being built by Egyptians). He bases his conclusion of far fetched theories and backs them up with convoluted "evidence". I could do a mathmatical analysis of the geographical positions of New York, Tokyo, and Peoria if I wanted and then "prove" to you that the conclusions show evidence of Alien Lifeforms! That proves nothing. Where is you hard evidence? You have none. Give me a break!

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by amlodhi,
Wed Apr 21 14:36:26 1999
It'd true that people like Graham Hancock have made some concessions.But that doesn't mean that they are entirely wrong.You cannot deny that there is alot of strange goings on that can not be explained by conventional means.I think that maybe Hancock et al are fed up at being brow beaten as so many have before.It is true that some scholars have chosen not to publish the truth for fear of backlash from their peers.Take the case of John Allegro who worked on the dead sea scrolls.He knew that something wasn't right with the translation and withholding of the texts so he went ahead and published his own papers concerning the whole translation.He was immediatly sent to coventry and was the subject of vicious mockings and media put-downs.He was subsequently sacked by his bosses and never taken seriously again.If that is the fate of scholars who dare to step out of line then it's no wonder that people choose to remain silent. Even though some people have recanted their original statements I still do firmly believe that there is a hidden knowledge that does remain intact in archaic myth.I have almost finished reading Hamlets Mill and although it's heavy at times the overall picture is pretty clear.All the myths have a common origin,all over the world the same themes pop up and although under a different name we can still see parralels in myths from Babylon to New Zealand. The idea that the voyage of odyseus and the Argonauts could be a telling of cosmic events makes for interesting thinking.The concept of the earths axis being thought of as an ancient mill churning out time makes sense when the Gods in this case planets where thought to be immortal was not this a concept of the unending movments of time?. When the sky fell and all the stars fell does not this tell us that something happened to move the axis and break the mill?.It's very clever and when you think about it alot of things make sense.

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by walley,
Wed Apr 21 19:49:33 1999
I have more respect for someone who recants theories in the face of evidence than those who refuse to examine it. Personally, I do have experience and formal training regarding the workings of the educational system and credentials do not always mean very much on the frontier. The guy who invented the car radio and the Learjet had no credentials or former training. If he had gone to university, he probably would have acquired the conventional knowledge that it was not possible to build a radio small enough to fit in a car. Hancock is pioneering in interdisciplinary research, which according to the way that we constitute knowledge, puts him in an excellent place to have a breakthrough. Mavericks like Hancock have determined many of the directions that have resulted in our present lofty state. Lets go way out on a limb and made predictions: (1) within 20 years Hancock will be acknowledged as having made an important contribution. (2) at that time, it will be difficult to find people who remember that they discounted him. Actually, I'm betting on my own track record of sorting out the wheat from the chaff in the face of knowledgable opposition. Time will tell; let's wait and see.

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by cheesey,
Thu Apr 22 14:33:18 1999
Whatever guys!

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Where is your proof? Not conjecture, not some reference to an old story no one can validate-give me proof!

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by armaetno,
Thu Apr 22 16:43:19 1999
My friends:

Knowledge can be seen as an inverted pyramid. What we know today is based and expands on what we knew yesterday. When an archaeologists presents the results of his (or her) research, his interpretation is based on many years of studies and work. We are not magicians, pulling explanations out of hats. Archaeology is a science and as such it has a method and structure, which must be followed by its practitioners. Anyone can talk or write about "Archaeology", but if the proper methodology is not followed, then all claims are suspect.

Walley, I don't know Hancock's work (Cheesy seems to be the expert), but his "theories" sound quite "quacky" to me. Archaeologists don't hide from facts, the question should be why some "researchers" refuse to submitt their findings, and the evidence to support it, for peer (professional) review. What are they hidding?

If any of you is interested in learning about real Anthropology, which includes Archaeology, I'm more than willing to help.

Armaetno

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by javierd,
Thu Apr 22 17:59:48 1999
hi amlodhi,

tell me how he constelation of orion resembles a pyramid?

Constelations are groups of stars, but thyeir grouping is completely subjective. I remeber the firts time y try to find contelations in the sky, i just could not undersand where thouse beatifull drawinds of mithological monster could be seen in the sky.

And the only think in common that we can be shure if taht for all ancient civilizations astronomy or astrology was important for their lives, since they need to knnow when to seed. but that did not prove contact.

And yes, the sphynx was made of low quality rock. Like the pyramids. In the case of the sphynx, to be buried on sand has helped to preserve it. Otherwise it would have been more dammaged. The amount of deterioration that has suffer only in this century alone shows it.

you can find more details on:

http://www.leonardo.net/davidpb/sphinx2.html

whenever it was possible egyptians cover the limeligth with granite.

This casing of granite help to preserve the soft core of the pyramids, and there is a project to put a new case in the pyramids of "Me ken rau" to preserve it.

Remember that you can damage the limelight with just a bit of acid. Romans use vinnegar to excavate limeligh.

And how can see a white men on a stone carving? does it show white?

Olmec head had been describe as negroid and mongolic, There is a beatifull figure that is called the wrestler, that resembles looks like mongol , but also there are heads with factions that resembler jaguar so there were really olmec with Jaguar Faces?

And where did you get he idea that native american can't grow facial hair?. Altough a razor can last me a month, if i forget to use it my wife will protest in a couple of days.

Beards are thin but they can be grown.

Remember that the myth of Quetzalcoatl says that he let to grow his beard because he found that his face was ugly.

Javier Delgado

There is enough variation in the american stock to allow for african like features or mongolic to have to resort to more elaborated hypotesis.

Javier Delgado

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by walley,
Fri Apr 23 07:05:29 1999
Armaetno,can you tell me at what point of history we can look back and say"at this time the orthodox view of reality was substantially accurate and complete"? I'm afraid that I take acception to your assumption that the quacky sounding work with which you are not familiar must come from ignorance. I am familiar with the way in which knowledge is generated and I have some familiarity with Anthropology. Although I was only able to take one Anthro. course in university(for what its worth I got an A) due to the heavy requirements of my double major in Psych. and Soc. it was a favourite of mine and I have since kept up with recent findings for my own interest. Please do not compare Hancock to Von Daniken simply on the basis of orthodoxy. Hancock is looking for patterns based on extensive work of other people. He documents his work. While I am not sure I agree with everything he has suggested, he has satisfied me that there are principles of human development or events which bear closer scrutiny. As for the frequently asserted statements about the integrity of scientists ...PLEASE...what are they Vulcans? Remember the easy access everyone had to the Dead Sea Scrolls? Even scholars react defensively when it looks like their point of view is being challenged and inter-disciplinary challenges are the scariest because it often goes outside of fields of expertise. I'm basically a generalist and I know the number of times I have proved accurate when argueing with experts(if I know I don't have a clue,I don't argue) so I now keep my own council. I shall summarize with an anecdote and a request. I once engaged three oceanographers in a brief agruement in which I maintained that water expands when it freezes. As their basic physics dictated otherwise and I clearly was not qualified to dispute with them they refused to continue the debate. I had the exact same arguement with a Physics major in university. This is a true if silly example; my point being that, in their eyes, the arguement was over as soon as they had compared our respective credentials. Listening would have helped. Please, everyone, if you do in fact have expertise in some related area ... read Hamlet's Mill, read Mirror of the Sky and then come back here and give me a thoughtful and reasoned response. One more thing, please look at it openmindedly: knowledge progresses much faster when we don't start from antagonism.

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by walley,
Fri Apr 23 08:52:25 1999
nuetrino, this is late but thanks for the definition. I have seen several discussion/arguements here where people literally did not know what they were talking about because they were using words differently. What's the point in flaunting symbols at each other if we do not agree on the referents?
  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by amlodhi,
Fri Apr 23 13:44:47 1999
Hi javier, The stars do not resemble pyramids,the pyramids resemble the layout of the belt of orion.The minds of ancient man worked differently to ours so they had ample time to look at the sky and see their monsters or Gods. The movements of the heavens must have seemed like mans destiny was preordained by the heavens.They saw the stars and believed them to be their Gods or the workers of the mill.They watched the skies obsessivly to see the signs and watch the changes and interperate them on earth.It is believed in the book Hamlets Mill that the myths of man were not on earth but played out in the stars,that the universe was the happening place and man could only sit and watch the mill turn. Keep looking at the stars,it might take some time but you will see them eventually.Also read the books on myths and then watch the sky turn see how they saw their lives in relation.

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by lonnieshiv,
Wed Apr 28 15:00:48 1999
let me try explane why i think atlantis may of exested there has to be an explanation why civalizations like the incas and mayans suddenly sprung up in the ameracas with out any proof humans evolveing there

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by cheesey,
Thu Apr 29 08:30:03 1999
For one LAST time you IDIOT! Civilizations did NOT suddenly spring up anywhere. Why don't you do a little research from some RELIABLE sources? You will see the EVIDENCE you claim is not there. How can you be so stupid? What level of education do you have?

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by javierd,
Thu Apr 29 12:58:26 1999
hi amlodhi,

By the way, I owe you an apology, it seems that i mixed Von Daniken with Velikovsky. :-))

Javier Delgado

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by amlodhi,
Thu Apr 29 15:09:27 1999
Javier, No problem mate,though Danikens theories are a little absured I find that Velikovsky does have something on his birth of venus theory. I'm not really familiar enough with Velikovsky to make a firm judgement.What do you think?.

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by walley,
Thu Apr 29 15:12:47 1999
You know, cheesey, I might not be the only one who has noticed that there is often an inverse relationship between the volume or tone of an arguement and the weight of its facts.
  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by cheesey,
Fri Apr 30 09:21:19 1999
You know Walley; you just might be right! I mean the "weight" of the facts of my arguments are so meaningless when compared to your's and Lonnie's. I mean I have physical evidence of human habitation in the forms of human remains, remains of living quarters, pottery pieces. I have the writings and research of people who devote their entire lives to studying the past and who have uncovered the evidence of the development of civilization (INCLUDING WRITING!) from agricultural settlements to monument building societies. ALL OF THIS compared to your theories of high tech Atlatean lost civilizations concocted by people with no training in Scientific methods (often Psychics, how funny). They talk of flying machines and ancient computers built by this peaceful society of Atlantis who supposedly conducted world wide trade in their nuclear powered ships but funnily and CONVIENTLY enough left no evidence of thier exploits except the idea of ....PYRAMIDS! Oh yeah, no one could of thought of building a pyramid without them! No other evidence exists though...how nice for the Psychics. Meanwhile, they fleece the ignorant for money by hawking their books and television shows on the FOX network. And your willing to belive them! You won't belive the scientists working in the fields, digging up the remains of past civilizations! What do they know? You BELIVE THE PSYCHICS! They obviously know better!Hey, Ignorance is bliss!

Take Lonnie for example...he refuses to acknowledge that societies in Latin AMerica and the Middle East could have achieved such great and advanced societies without the help of some one else. Is their a hint of racism in his views? He asks how these "brown people" could have done this by themselves. Instead they had to have been helped by people from Atlantis...Tell me Lonnie were the people from Atlantis white?

Lonnie claims these civilizations just "appeared"... he says there is a "lack of evidence" showing otherwise. When did archaeological remains become a "lack of evidence" Lonnie? Instaed you are wiling to belive in a myth despite it's LACK OF EVIDENCE. I'll never understand you people!

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by walley,
Fri Apr 30 15:13:28 1999
Thank-you, that was better. I'll get back to you about the rest.

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by armaetno,
Sat May 1 20:45:45 1999
Walley: "The orthodox view of reality"? Let me clear this point. As far as our capacity to learn about the universe is concerned; right now there is no way anyone can claim to have a "substantially accurate and complete" view. That is the reason we keep doing research. Nobody has all the answers; not Newton, Einstein, Leaky, not even Yogi Berra!!! But, the "experts" (I hate the term) have expended years, sometimes their whole adult life, dedicated to learning about a subject. You cannot brush them aside, just because someone says they are wrong.

The idea of the outsider teaching a lesson to the fossilized "high priests" of a particular field is very romantic, but it isn't real.

It isn't that sometimes the "experts" are not blinded or biased by their "knowledge", nor that they cannot learn a thing or two from representatives from other fields, but in general, you must agree, that Johansen knows more about Austrolopithecines, Coe knows more about the Maya, and Rouse knows more about the Arawak than the Chemistry Phd. who lives next door.

I freely admitted that I haven't read mister Hancock's work. I wasn't trying to hide anything. I based my comments on the information provided in this conversation by the different writters. Now if Hancock has such an overwhelming amount of evidence for his ideas, why haven't I seen these presented in any professional publications or in scientific congresses? Why doesn't he submitt to the proper review process? Some would blame some sort of Conspiracy. Yet, that would require a concerted effort by all archaeologists, and, as you hinted in your comments, there is absolutely no way you can achieve such an expectacular feat.

Are all scientists good, honest men, without an ego? Absolutely not. What a better example that the Piltdown oax, blamed by many on Chardin, an anthropologist and, worst, a priest!!! We are human and "ergo" quite imperfect. That is one reason why there must be a peer review. That is exactly the reason why I must ask: "What made Hancock such an 'expert'?"

My favorite work is "The Ascent of Man" by Jacob Brownoski; based on a series he "hosted" on PBS around 1973. In this work he wrote about the "Priciple of Uncertainty" or as he called it "the Principle of Tolerance", because "all knowledge is limited". He also called on all students to keep a sense of irreverence towards what is known, because students' responsability is not to worship what is known, but to question it. I have followed his admonition, as best I can, and it has gotten me in hot water more than once.

I hope you got to read the April 26 issue of Newsweek. I believe that the article "First Americans?" presents quite a good example of how the "peer process" works. The commonly held idea was challenged. The "Pro's" rejected the new theory. Evidence mounted, and mounted, until now the new theory has taken hold. It took time and a lot of effort, but American Archaeology changed.

Armaetno

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by walley,
Sun May 2 12:05:51 1999
Armaetno, I have a great respect for those whose long hours of toil produce expertize in any area. Without their work we would have nothing. What is frustrating me is that many of the people here are grouping a large number of works together under a category such as "stuff that is too dumb or weird to look at". Maybe if we look at one item at a time we can get closer to a consensus. In Hamlet's Mill, it is shown that a group of traditions of diverse cultures contain extensive imagery and specific numbers which relate specifically to precession of the equinox. Hancock has demonstrated physical ruins are located at geographically exact positions to correspond to those same precessional numbers. Although the ruins are of different cultures, they have many intiguing similarities including positioning of buildings to represent past star locations. Some building locations suggest a common time is refered to at different locations. I cannot account for this with anything I find in the books. I would be very interested in anyone with expertize, who has read the works in question and can respond to them, critically. The work is obviously interdisciplinary and requires expertise in a number of fields.

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by javierd,
Mon May 3 02:49:55 1999
hi amlodhi,

Velikovsky wrote a beatifull written book, in certain ways his works reminds my too much the claims of Hanckok.

He studied several civiliations, and several myths. Based on those myths, he conluded:

that venus was the result of an eruption in Jupiter, that it went for the solar sistem, Went near the earht and caused the 7 plagues of Egytp, , then in the times of Josue, stooped the earth, and then the earth went backwars and finaly it stope and became venus. etc etc.

I read that book when i was 13, and i believe it all.

The arguments seemed perfect, i looked as it was fully documentes, with cites from every civilization that i never have heard before.

I was until some years ago, that i understand that it was physically imposible. And it only required some high school math to prove it.

But This book created in me a lot of curiosity for the past, so even now i treated it gently.

It's a shame that he did ot used his talents for writing something more serious.

Fortunatelly i discoverd "Gods, tombs, and wise men" (or whatever name it has i english), and i started to learn something real about archeology.

About Hanckok, i raise some interesting coincidences, but his method leaves a lot to think.

Like in the case of the erosion of the spynx, he get the hypotesis that suits , and ignores all the others, ore in the case of the pyramid of Cuicuilco, he choses the oldest date, ignoring the facts that it was the result of an estimated, and it has been wkown wrong for at least 50 years.

Since all ancient cultures depend of agriculture, and the calendar was very important for them, it is not a surprise that most of them know the dates of solstices and other astronomical events.

That not proves contact.

And even it there was contact, how did it survived unchanged?

Let me put an example.

On of the oldes civilizations in Mesoamerica, was the olmecs. They developed a very exact calendary, and a high developed civilizations.

When the olmec civilization ended (probably by war and hunger) it tooks about 200 years that another civilizations started in the same area: the Mayas

They have an olmec influence, probably a the remanents of the olmecs helped to started the Mayas. But a lot was lost. In just 200 yeast a lot of knowdledge was lost.

Then how could something survive for thousands of years?

And if someting as elaborated as astronomy survived why not other technology?

If you compare the technology from the prehispanic America with other parts of the world, it was completely diferent.

The wheel was known, but it was used only for toys. There was no metal tools, but they had a complex metalurgy, only used for decorations.

The ball game was one of the most important ritual, and as far as i know it is unknown in the rest of the world.

I think i need somehing more solid, to acept Mr. Hankcok, he may have something interesting, but still umproven.

Javier Delgado

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by lonnieshiv,
Mon May 3 08:21:50 1999
cheesey do you have a racel chip on your shoulder what i am saying is that the incas and mayens and other such civalizations are decendants of atlantions that would make them of the same race now all i have read and heard the so called experts can't explane how people first came to the amaricaes of course thay like you ignore the obviouse this only my opion try not let it upset you but i am interested in ancient civilizations i would be very interested in your knowledge of such

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by amlodhi,
Mon May 3 15:37:00 1999
Hi Javier, I guess theres' never going to be a difinitive answer.I still can't get hold of Velikovsky's books as there out of print but when I do I'll be sure to try to read as best I can. Why did you change your mind?,you say you were thirteen when you read his books but soon came to question them.Thats always good,questions should always be raised but the Greeks say that Venus was born from the head of Jupiter they wouldn,t say that for no reason.How did simple maths make you reevaluate your mind?.As I say I haven't read the books so I can't make a proper judgement. As for Hancock he has made some concessions on his beliefs,and thats more than some 'experts'.I don't think it's fair to just pick out Hancock all the time sure he chooses the hypothosis that fits the facts that cannot be denied,but isn't that what all researchers do?.Find things out and then attach a hypothosis. Unfortunatley this is a field that cries out for evidence but alas none can be found. On a different note how are you on the buildings on Mars,the Face and the city?.Also just out of interest were do you come from?,I'm from England and don't know how much of a diverse pool of knowledge we have here.

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by javierd,
Mon May 3 17:20:25 1999
hi amlodhi,

Well, it took my a couple of years after reading Velikosvsky. As soon as i could manage to use the laws of motion of newton and the laws of gravity I understand how unlikely the process was.

The forces involved would have torn the earth and Venus, before any of the efects seeked by Velikosky would apear.

Also the chains of events was very unlikely. the solar sysem is too big, if it measured by the size of the plannets.

That a comets pases near the earth is unlikey. But that it passes near, several times in historical time!!! the posibilities are, well,infinitesimal.

By the way, i am from Mexico City, an engineer, that loves ancient History.

About Mars, the last mission photograph the "Face" with much more resolution, and did not find anything.

Somewhere i saw the photographies, let me look for them.

I you are asking me about extraterestial life, i think there is someone out the. But the earth is soo small in the middel of the universe, and we have existed for so little time, that the probabilitys or and encounter in historical tiems are small. I think Carsl Sanga made once the estimate, altough i don't remember it.

But until we found something, like a fosilized radio, or something equivalente we dont kow nothing.

My main problem with Hanckok is that most of what he says is not really new. Some of it are points of view that had been abandoned some time ago, or that had been propose by esoteric groups, withouth much proof.

Its funny, but i first read a lot of books from esoteric circles, like the Chatedral of Chartres, and things like that.

then i Realized that a lot of those authors were just citing ont to another, but they never went actually to investigate.

Maybe you would think that i am overreacting, but probably i have read too much garbage and it makes me a little impacient.

Javier Delgado

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by amlodhi,
Tue May 4 15:08:59 1999
Hi Javier, Your from Mexico city? COOL!.Your ancient historys much better than mine.We have strange burial mounds and stone circles over here you have those wonderful temples and statues that have strange meanings no-one understands. There is alot of rubbish out there take Von Daniken for instance. As for the Face on Mars it raises all sorts of possibilities.It depends where you stand on ETs,I personally believe in them and that the governments are covering up first contact.It's long been believed that earth had a twin and people think it's venus but evidence supports Mars as a more likely suspect. The pictures that the Mars probes sent back recently have been heavily doctored to appear that the face is not there but more 'raw' pictures suggest that it is more face like thar ever.Don't forget that the Mars orbiter was lost under 'mysterious circumstances' and it may have been a coverup for something. Anyway thats got nothing to do with ancient history or has it?.Ancient Egypt has many references to Mars and what may have occured during their time. As for comets hitting the earth it is a real possibility.Scientists went round claiming comets don't hit planets and then shoemaker-levy hit jupiter suddenly we don't seem so indestructable.Asteroids that could destroy the whole world pass us by as close as the moon.A small asteroid hit the moon in the 18th century,it was widely reported and if the moon had not been in the way it would have devestated the world. An asteroid ten kilometres long passed close by at a place that the earth had occupied just six hours earlier.It's frightening and is that what happened to Mars?,is that why structures that are man-made appear in a dead world,maybe Mars once supported life and was struck by an asteroid which turned it into the world it is now?.Ancient texts seem to think so.

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by cheesey,
Wed May 5 09:20:44 1999
amlodhi, give me a freaking break! How old are you? Again, what level of education do you have? DO you also believe that the moon is made of cheese? There is an ancient text that speaks of a cow jumping over the moon; do you believe this?

I have seen natural rock formations in Tennessee that are the most remarkable representations of human faces; you mean to tell me that rock formations on Mars (which really do NOT resemble human features when examined closely) could not be natural formations.

The so called "concessions" that you talk about Hancock making are HUGE! You act as if they are minor chages in some of his theories. NO NO NO WRONG WRONG! Among his many concessions when faced with irrefutable scientific evidence are that indeed the Great Pyramid was built by the Egyptians. This is no minor claim. It throws his entire 10,000 BC construction theory to the wind.

Lonnie your reply was at once childish and incoherent! You have ignored basic facts established in the field of new world anthropology for decades now!!! Perhaps this is why you resort to outlandish theories of Ancient Civilizations. I'm sure there are some Fairy Tale Forums on the Net somewhere where you can peddle your garbage. Go find them!

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by javierd,
Wed May 5 18:30:26 1999
hi amlodhi,How can you say that the Mars photos have been tampered?Simply i cannot buy the idea that a first contact has been cover up.As Arthur C.Clarke wrote:"it,s as imposible as hiding a Dinosaur in Hide Park"How did you get to those conclusions?cheesey, try to calm down. I am afraid lonnieshiv will never hear us, so it,s no use to insist.
JavierD

  Ultra-Ancient Civilizations
by armaetno,
Thu May 6 07:50:03 1999
Javier: The book you were talking about, was it C.W. Ceram's "Gods, Graves & Scholars"? For all others, so you know, it is a history of Archaeology originally published in Germany in 1949. Although dated, it is a good introduction to the field.

Javier: Don't you remember the old saying: "Ni la mujer, ni el carro, ni los libros se prestan." Once I read a quote from someone famous (don;t remember who), that said something like: "The best books in my library are those that I borrowed". Keep lending your books, specially the good ones, and you will pay ... for new copies to replace those.

I'm not shure Jericho is the oldest city. I know it is one of the oldest, but I feel this tingling in the back of my head... I studied that in college, but that was "so long ago" (hate saying that) and I don't remember. I probably have a book, at my parents house, with that information. In any case, if I'm not wrong, it was also in that region, and Jericho is one of the oldest, if not the oldest city. Of course, by our standards it would little more than a hamlet or small town, but back then, it was a "revolution". Check V. Gordon Childe for information on that period.

If you think we should create a Part Two to this conversation, that will be fine with me, but please let us know.

One more thing, before we create a new "conversation", could we all calm down and TALK, not insult and attack each other. This is an exchange of ideas, even if we don't agree. Debate is good, personal attacks, not so good. Everyone cool down!

Have fun Armaetno