Know what causes diabetes, or cancer, or pretty much anything? Too much of ANYTHING. I have real diabetes, type 1. It's an immune problem, probably triggered either by a virus or environmental factor, especially because my sister has it and my grandfather got it after he was 60, which is very rare, it's called juvenile diabetes for a reason. THAT is an example of what contaminents really do to you. It's not fat tv addicted boring people who are suffering, and not because of your imaginary contaminents, i've eaten pretty much nothing but organic, non gmo and the like, my entire life. Most people with diabetes have it because they're fat shits who can't control their most basic urges to a point where they don't harm themselves. The same with health problems associated with alcohol and cigarettes. Human bodies wear out, it's just about how fast it happens. Everything kills you, just choose your edibles carefully.
Okay, you're dying to do it, so tell us about the supposed technologies that anciant man had. Provide links, please.
Have you seen these maps that can't be from the 1300 or 1400's? I can't tell from your statement. Can you show where maps of these exposed coastlines have to be over 10,000 years old? Portolan charts are navigational maps based on realistic descriptions of harbors and coasts. They were first made in the 14th century in Italy, Portugal and Spain. With the advent of the Age of Discovery, they were considered State secrets in Portugal and Spain, very valuable in the description of Atlantic and Indian coastlines for newcomer English and Dutch raiding, and later trading, ships. The word portolan comes from the Italian adjective portolano, meaning "related to ports or harbors." These are the nature of the "charts used".
if one begins by assuming that the depicted coast is antarctica then it surely follows that the maps date from an iceless era and one also assumes that the missing water is part of that era, despite the more reasonable assumption that icelessness leads to more ocean, rather than less i find it much easier to assume that cartographers in 1513 really didn't know very much at all about what most of the world looked like, and occasionally got lucky but that's just me . . .
I made a leap it appears. I was referring to your comment that the sphinx must be more than a certain age because it showed evidence of water erosion. The Sahara was a wetter place as little as three thousand years ago. Shoreline ice cover can be variable on a much shorter seasonal time span than thousands of years. Just look at the seasonal arctic ice sheet. I don't think we need to invent new histories to account for the existence of this map, or any erosion patterns observed on the sphinx. There may well be advanced civilizations that we don't know about but even if the evidence were scattered everywhere, there is no guaranty we would recognize it.
Not to get off topic, but has anyone here read '100,000 years of man's unknown history' by Robert Charroux? It discusses the Piri Reis map, advanced ancient civilizations and proposes the idea that man evolved from aliens. Strange, but kind of an interesting read, if only for entertainment purposes.
I haven't, but the idea it seems is as good as any when we are talking about instances that are beyond our capacity to directly examine. Unless we are talking about the small percentage of genes though, that are unique to humans, it seems alien tampering would have to be across the whole spectrum of life rather than just human life. Anyway, in that small percentage is where I would look for indications.
It's a bit far out, but he starts with the Gate of the Sun, Tiahuanaco, being the first place our alien ancestors landed. The actual 'gate' itself is interesting, it's got a lot of weird symbols on it that seem to suggest interaction with extraterrestrials. From there he claims that these aliens after arriving spread out, some formed a society underground at the gate of the sun, others went to live way up in the mountains, himalayans I believe. After long periods of time the ones who lived in the moutains developed blue skin due to lack of oxygen. Eventually as they migrated down and started to inhabit the land their skin began to turn white. Anyways he goes on to talk about how these ancient ancestors eventually developed very technologically advanced societies and that they had vehicles that were able to fly, thus they created the Piri Ries map. The societies eventually got destroyed, and over thousands of years became oil beds, sand, etc. Sounds more like an Arthur C. Clarke novel, not history, but it at least makes one think about possibility if nothing else. Gate of the Sun; http://www.viewzone.com/tiax.html
Then we should abandon our cities and our aggressive pesticide and chemical based agricultural practices in favor of small agrarian based communities in which everyone grows organic vegetables, picks flowers, and prays to the goddess of sun and light Hotwater
too many links… i refered to the sphinx earlier in the thread and the schist disk from saqqara i think?… worth looking at the bagdad battery, the examples of machine tooled quartz in abu sir… just google those things and research for yourself… an interesting video exists called "the pyramid code"… it might give you ideas of where to do your own research and inspire thoughts to ponder… i've seen images of the pier reis map from the 1500's on the net and in books… it clearly depicts the contours of the land under the antarctic ice… we didn't discover ground penetrating radar until 1958, so how can those areas be shown on a map that was made in 1531 when they didn't know the contours of the land there back then? you'll have to look at the images and compare for yourself because i don't know how to actually show you… a little more than occasional luck it would seem, given the accuracy… yes, the sahara was wetter as little as 3000 or so years ago, but i doubt that far north and it would take a LOT wetter and over a loooong period of time to cause the kind of rain erosion seen on the sphinx… and yes, shoreline ice can be variable but not to the degree we are talking here… no, not looked at that book… thanks! sounds interesting
it's not accurate, though - the ocean is missing between south america and antarctica this is not a bering sea that might be a "land bridge" in recent times, it's much wider and much deeper - the bering strait is a continental shelf while the drake strait has depths of over 15,000 feet and looking at other maps of the era will show the various acts of imagination that were an unavoidable part of map-making at the time
From wikipedia: The Johannes Schöner Globe (1515), a manuscript globe, was made in 1515. Referring to globes of the world, Rafael Candel Vila, Professor of Cosmological Science and engineer at the University of Strasbourg says: "Among the most famous is one made by Johann Schönner in 1515, which figured the Magellan Strait before it was discovered". Albert Ronsin also mentions that the Magellan Strait can be found on the globe before its "official discovery". The Strait of Magellan is at 53 degrees south. The Strait, if that is what it is, is shown at about 40 degrees south on the 1515 globe. The Johannes Schöner Globe (1520), a printed globe, was made in 1520. Albert Ronsin also mentions that the globe also shows the Antarctic continent, which had not been explored at that date either. Albert Ronsin, honorary curator of the Bibliotèque et de Musée de Saint-Dié des Vosges, wrote that Schöner "draws an Antarctic continent, named lower Brasilia separated from South America by a strait unknown at that time because the results of Magellan's voyage were still not complete" ("Jean Schöner: Globe Terrestre (1520), disciple de Waldseemüller […] et dessine un continent anatarctique nommé Brasilia inférieur séparé de l'Amérique du sud par un détroit alors inconnu puisque le résultat du voyage de Magellan n’est pas encore achevé"). The Johannes Schöner's Weimer Globe (1533) was made in 1533. It shows North America as part of Asia, and also shows Antarctica. I have to agree with wa bluska wica after examining the map. There is no way that the claim of an accurately reproduced, ice free antarctic coastline is true if there is no waterway between South America and Antarctica. The Piri Reis map is not even breathtakingly accurate over all.
i wasn't referring to the inaccuracies, but the accuracies... there could be all sorts of reasons for the apparent inaccuracy regarding the area you are referring to, especially given that it has been proposed that the source maps are thousands of years older... my point is, how did they depict the actual shoreline of antarctica which was buried beneath at least a mile of ice in some places? some of it is still under the ice... we only know this bcos of the technology currently available to us now... available only since the 20th century... the piri reis map wasn't the only map that charted topographies impossible to actually observe at the time... please look at the following maps... the orontius finaeus map of 1531 the bauche map of 1737 both of these maps as well as the piri reis map show topographies that we weren't supposed to have been "discovered" until much later... actually i will quote from a book called "earth's forbidden secrets (searching for the past) by maxwell igan"... but you will have to get the actual images of the maps elsewhere to do your own comparisons if interested... The Piri Reis Map of 1513 In 1929 there was an amazing map discovered in the Imperial Archives at Constantinople that had been sitting, virtually unexamined, for years. The map, which had been drawn in 1513 by a Turkish Admiral named Piri Reis, showed North America, South America, Greenland and Antarctica. However what is so perplexing about this map is that Antarctica had not been discovered in 1513. Antarctica was not located until 1820 and America had only been discovered in 1492, a mere 21 years prior to the maps creation and yet it is mapped quite accurately. Remarkably, the map also depicts several land masses bearing their correct longitudes even though longitude itself was not discovered until the late 1700’s either. Reis had been a famous Turkish Admiral of the 16th Century. He had a passion for maps, He loved cartography and was a highly experienced and respected mariner. In his day, he was considered to be an expert on all Mediterranean Lands and Coastlines and also held high in the favors of the Turkish court. Such a noble status enabled him to enjoy privileged access to the Imperial Library at Constantinople and he spent much of his spare time there. In his notes Reis said that he had based his map on several much older maps he had seen at the library, including one that Columbus is reported to have viewed prior to his voyage to the Americas. The map in question was said to have been captured from the Spaniards in a naval engagement and later given to the admiral by a Spanish prisoner who had apparently sailed on three of Columbus's New World voyages! Many scholars have indeed suspected that Columbus was in possession of a map and already knew of the existence of America before embarking on his famous ‘voyage of discovery’. Reis also wrote a well known Turkish book on sailing called ‘Kitababi Bahriye’ in which he gives detailed and accurate descriptions of the coastlines, harbors, bays, currents, shallows and straits of the Mediterranean and Aegean Seas. He was beheaded by the Turkish Court in 1554 or 1555 for reasons now unknown. In case you can’t see it, That’s the top piece of Africa on the top right of the map and the tip of south America reaching out to it from the left side of the map, running up through the gulf of Mexico and up to Nth. America. The tip of Antarctica can be seen sticking up on the bottom right. Another interesting point to this map is the strange layout of the South American continent which looks sort of stretched out of shape. However, viewing the sphere of earth from space accurately produces this type of view. The Orontius Finaeus Map of 1531 The Orontius Finaeus map was found in 1960 by Charles Hapgood and it too, apparently shows the continent of Antarctica along with the accurate outlines of Antarctic rivers that are now covered by thick glaciers. The map was found in the Library of Congress in Washington DC where it had been sitting unstudied for a great many years. In the map the continent and coastline is shown to be ice free and, like the Piri Reis map, it too shows an accurate depiction of the Ross Sea which today is totally hidden beneath a floating ice shelf several hundred meters thick. Studies of actual core samples taken from the Antarctic ice shelf have also clearly revealed numerous layers of strata in the ice showing that the area has indeed gone through several periods of dramatic environmental change. Some sedimentary deposits that were found in the samples were from sea water that had flowed into the area and were even actually datable. The tests show that the sediments were deposited sometime around 4000 years ago which indicates that the Ross Sea would have had to have been flowing and free from ice at the time for the deposits to have occurred. The Bauche Map of 1737 Phillip Bauche was a French geographer of the 18th century who also drew a map that clearly shows Antarctica except that Bauche's map shows Antarctica two separate land masses, with detailed shorelines. For many years the map was generally considered to be wrong because when Antarctica was discovered it actually looked nothing what Bauche had drawn. Then in 1958 a seismic survey of Antarctica was carried out which surprisingly showed that Antarctica was indeed two archipelago islands covered by a thick layer of ice that made it appear as only one land mass and not only that, but that the general topography of the lands beneath the ice matches the drawings on the Bauche map in every detail. So how on earth this can be in any way possible? This map means that Bauche was in possession of a correct map showing Antarctica 100 years before it was discovered and not only that, but without any ice on it. Antarctica has not been in an ice free condition for a minimum of at least 10,000 years and many scientists believe that the period of time to be more like several million years.
Again, Antarctica had not been "discovered" yet in 1513(note how the same term can loosely be applied to the Americas in 1492), but numerous maps before and after showed Antarctica. The idea of a giant landmass further south had long been a popular one and shown on maps. Either people just assumed and got lucky, or tales from long ago of some people who had seen this land(perhaps even ancients on rafts during the last ice age) survived across cultures in the human lexicon. The coastline is vaguely accurate, but that means nothing. I mean look at maps of Europe and the mid east from the 16th century, a densely populated, well traveled and highly developed area and maps were still generally pretty rudimentary. Considering how unexplored the coast of the bottom half of South America was at the time, but people knew it was there, he probably just guessed what it looked like. I mean no one is pointing out the fact his "good" map of Antarctica is in reality a terrible map of South America.
