Ancient Civilizations

Rajaah said:

For example, people in Norway or Switzerland would have needed to evolve quicker to adapt to their harsh environment, while people in equatorial regions might have just been able to lounge around picking fruit from trees in perpetuity in comparison.

Click to expand...

I totally belive this, you literally can't survive in Northern Europe without technology but you can lay around in an African jungle or savannah half naked.

I'm not sure how much genetics has to do with it than culture though. I don't think the timescale of European habitation is long enough to have any real divergence.

I teach in a pretty diverse school and while Afro-Carribeans totally suck (slave stock, same as African Americans), there are plenty of smart kids of all races (including non slave origin sub-Saharan Africans).

Also northern Asia has the same pressure to survive the cold and did pretty well, but not as good as Europe. I think that small states and religious warfare really helps to educate a population. There is also the irony of Europe's simpler writing working better on printing presses that China invented to spread knowledge fasger, that was really just luck.

Araysar said:

The likelihood of human race developing is already astronomical. The likelihood that it happens twice around same time, on the same planet, independent of each other, is beyond astronomical

Click to expand...

Go be fair to him, perhaps we can imagine multiple offshoots from Homo Erectus becoming isolated, then distinct, then later on interbreeding again to become less distinct.

Which I guess is the Neanderthal/Denisovan part of Europeans/East Asians.

Well if we’re going to get into tinfoil spaghetti theory, I’ll jump in and say you guys are definitely looking in the wrong place For Atlantis. West of Gibraltar and sitting neatly on the triple juncture of three continental plates: the Azores. For your review the bathymetric map of the forward island group. I’ll get into this shit more later but regarding the human element...




I posted here about the dearth of information on the pre-colonial settlers of the island and how, by European views, the islands only existed once ’’’discovered’’’ by the Portuguese in 1427. This is despite the fact that ocean atlases were accurately depicting the number and general location of the islands as early as the 1340s. Recent but limited archaeological exploration has kicked in as the outside world starts to realize what the locals have known forever- there are massive indications both above and below the sea level to indicate that human occupation has been a part of the islands beyond the reach of written record.

Isotope analysis shows that there were non-native ruminants– cows/sheep/goats— present on the island in numbers as early at 750.

the Vikings knew about and used the islands. Mitochondrial dna research of mice populations sources them as originating from Scandinavia, having either supplanted native mouse populations or being wholesale introduced in the traditional sea fare era of viking exploration. It has been argued that early reporting of the islands (ie., before Portuguese discovery and mapping of the historically erroneous orientation of the archipelago on a N-S axis) was sourced from interaction between Viking/scandinavian seafarers and the native populations in Spain, on the mainland Portuguese coast, and the areas surrounding Gibraltar. This is in direct keeping with the descriptions of Atlantis using the straight as a basis of orientation. And no, the ancient writers were not referring to the Canary Islands, as these were already ‘known’ and identified as land masses distinct from those Plato was describing. The north south orientation that persisted on maps until discovery? Makes sense when you see the underwater north-south orientation of the middle mass of islands below.

There is a shitload of archeological evidence for pre-Viking population on a massive scale, one that indicates a stable and static human occupation dated waaaay before the soil isotope evidence. There are over ten different manifestations of monolithic construchino scattered across the islands- again, both above and below the current ocean surface. These structures are usually being dated to the Neolithic area. There are tumulus tombs that started to present in 2500bce concurrent to the construction of the same kind of tombs found in Ireland at the same time. The pyramidal structures are in some senses identical to those found on sicily and in North Africa.



To understand how crazy this shit is, the highest concentration of these structures is on Pico, one of the volcano cone islands with a low plane that drops off into the sea. It’s less than 200 sq miles. There’s hundred of these structures , literally hundreds, some of them 140 feet tall. There are subterranean chambers in some but none have been excavated. None. There was a civilization here long enough and with enough people to sling a hundred thousand man hours and untold bodies at each of these apparent funerary structures, and modern academia wants to pretend it was just a smatter of seafaring refugees that called the place home up until the 15th century. Get the fuck out of here with that.



Again. All signs point towards occupation during the glacial maximum, as these structures exist underwater on the now-submerged plateaus around the main island group.




Local reporting on a perfectly square 200+ft pyramid under 400m of water, on a now-submerged plateau that likely linked the main islands of Terceira and St. Michael during the glacial maximum. This thing was first reported on in 2013, crickets since then, with the usual host of ‘scientific community’ arguing it is a natural formation because it doesn’t fit in our current understanding/timescale of human diaspora across the Atlantic. doesn’t make sense by your model that people lived here 20k years ago (and would thus be subject to the relative cataclysm of having half the islands’ surface swallowed by rising sea levels?) Call it a natural pile of rocks and move on.

Rock cut tombs in Phoenician style. Rock cut water channels are are remnants of irrigation systems. Post hole structures in vertically faced rock indicating wooden structures being erected as part of huge megalithic complexes. Cart ruts identical to those found on Malta cannot be dated to European occupation, as the tracks (again) sometimes run right off into the ocean and are also covered in areas with relatively recent volcanic activity predating historical record. The islands are so rich with evidence of pre-modern settlement on a mass, organized scale, and yet the modern research and money necessary to explore this shit is apparently nonexistent.

The fact of the matter is that the azores are so geographically isolated and the populace so small half of this shit hasn’t been reported on until recently, in the last ten years or so. No large-scale research is being done by any international institution and the locals don’t have the resources or trained researchers required to take a real deep dive on this

back to the maps.




While this macro view doesn’t really help to illustrate just how much of the volcanoes have been lost to rising sea levels, I think that we are essentially looking at another Doggerland situation re: the receding from glacial maximum. Flores was likely double its size. There is an area between faial and pico that was above water in the lifetime of anatomically and culturally ‘modern’ humans. And as you can see, everything is sitting on top of the confluence of three continent plates. The area is still volcanically active. There can be no question that geographically speaking 20k years ago this area looks much different, given the modern precedent of volcanic activity on faial and pico changing the geography in real time.

I mean you guys can argue that somehow the oceans rose up and over a mountain range and flooded the fuck out of richat if you want, but the archeological record or lack thereof just doesn’t jive. There is no evidence of any of this shit occurring in Richat at the time required to fit into the Atlantis narrative. Far as I can tell the collective boner over the place subsists solely for the fact that the structure is a circle. Big whoop.

Zaara said:

The fact of the matter is that the azores are so geographically isolated and the populace so small half of this shit hasn’t been reported on until recently, in the last ten years or so. No large-scale research is being done by any international institution and the locals don’t have the resources or trained researchers required to take a real deep dive on this

back to the maps.

While this macro view doesn’t really help to illustrate just how much of the volcanoes have been lost to rising sea levels, I think that we are essentially looking at another Doggerland situation re: the receding from glacial maximum. Flores was likely double its size. There is an area between faial and pico that was above water in the lifetime of anatomically and culturally ‘modern’ humans. And as you can see, everything is sitting on top of the confluence of three continent plates. The area is still volcanically active. There can be no question that geographically speaking 20k years ago this area looks much different, given the modern precedent of volcanic activity on facial and pico changing the geography in real time.

I mean you guys can argue that somehow the oceans rose up and over a mountain range and flooded the fuck out of richat if you want, but the archeological record or lack thereof just doesn’t jive. There is no evidence of any of this shit occurring in Richat at the time required to fit into the Atlantis narrative. Far as I can tell the collective boner over the place subsists solely for the fact that the structure is a circle. Big whoop.

Click to expand...

Atlantis is basically just a placeholder name that people latch onto because it was written about in a book. who gives a fuck what it was called. there could be a settlement right where you're saying. i also believe that there was something that caused the northern part of Africa to be flooded. i am more interested in the event than the actual settlement if there was one. its just a sexy idea that the Richat has rings just like Plato wrote about in his Atlantis story. there is also a line that can be spotted from space cutting from the Med to the Atlantic or vice versa.

as for the water and elevation. there already was water there.
Beneath the sands of the Sahara Desert scientists have discovered evidence of a prehistoric megalake. Formed some 250,000 years ago when the Nile River pushed through a low channel near Wadi Tushka, it flooded the eastern Sahara, creating a lake that at its highest level covered more than 42,000 square miles.


These two images show the relative size of a megalake in the Sahara Desert reaching 810 feet above sea level and covering 42,000 square miles (left), and a smaller lake at 623 feet above sea level covering 18,600 square miles. The Nile is at lower right in both images. (Image derived from NASA’s Shuttle Radar Topography Mission)


National Air and Space Museum Geologist Ted Maxwell and colleagues recently spotted evidence of the lake while studying radar data of Egypt taken by the Space Shuttle Radar Topography Mission. Using images of wind-blown sediments, sediments produced by running water, and bedrock seen by radar beneath the desert sands, the geologists pieced together the profile of an ancient megalake. Egypt’s extreme aridity enhances the ability of radar to see distinct subsurface features. Buried channels can be detected as much as 50 feet below the surface of the desert.
Kiseiba Oasis, southern Egypt. This oasis is along one of the ancient watercourses discovered by geologists using Space Shuttle Topographic data. Water at present is 6.5 to 9.5 feet below the surface. This oasis was recently plowed for melon farming. (Photo by Ted Maxwell)


Using fossil fish found in deposits some 250 miles west of the Nile and at 810 feet above sea level as a marker of the lake’s highest shoreline, the scientists estimate the Nile once flooded the entire Kiseiba-Tushka depression of Egypt creating the giant lake. The location of Paleolithic human settlements near the areas of Selima and Tarfawi in Egypt correspond to a lake covering some 42,000 square miles, the scientists determined, placing these settlements in what would have been desirable, near-water regions.
The location and elevation of a different set of archaeological sites near Bir Kiseiba, 93 miles west of the Nile, suggest a second, lower level of the lake at 623 feet above sea level, this one covering an area of some 18,600 square miles. The geologists also used the elevation of the Tushka channel through which the water of the Nile once flowed into the desert as a base level to calculate the size of the second lake.


These newly discovered lakes add to growing evidence of numerous early and middle Pleistocene lakes across North Africa that could have supported human migration patterns, the researchers say. Their research was published in the article “Evidence for Pleistocene lakes in the Tushka region, south Egypt,” in the December 2010 issue of the journal “Geology.”

Zaara said:

The fact of the matter is that the azores are so geographically isolated and the populace so small half of this shit hasn’t been reported on until recently, in the last ten years or so. No large-scale research is being done by any international institution and the locals don’t have the resources or trained researchers required to take a real deep dive on this

back to the maps.

While this macro view doesn’t really help to illustrate just how much of the volcanoes have been lost to rising sea levels, I think that we are essentially looking at another Doggerland situation re: the receding from glacial maximum. Flores was likely double its size. There is an area between faial and pico that was above water in the lifetime of anatomically and culturally ‘modern’ humans. And as you can see, everything is sitting on top of the confluence of three continent plates. The area is still volcanically active. There can be no question that geographically speaking 20k years ago this area looks much different, given the modern precedent of volcanic activity on facial and pico changing the geography in real time.

I mean you guys can argue that somehow the oceans rose up and over a mountain range and flooded the fuck out of richat if you want, but the archeological record or lack thereof just doesn’t jive. There is no evidence of any of this shit occurring in Richat at the time required to fit into the Atlantis narrative. Far as I can tell the collective boner over the place subsists solely for the fact that the structure is a circle. Big whoop.

Click to expand...

Azores are the most promising location if we take the myth at face value.

I saw some interesting speculation about the huge flood in North America changing the weight distribution on the North American plate which may have cause the islands elevation to change

Ukerric said:

We ("caucasoids") are also interfertile with africans. Meaning we're closely related enough to be considered the same species, no matter what.

As I said, DNA hints that there was once about four slightly distinct human lineages: Homo Africanus, Homo Neanderthalensis, Homo Denisova, and a fourth, not yet found in archeological record, probable species that interbred with some Denisovans, but not directly with us. Various models of evolution/drift puts the divergence of those four lineages between 500kY and 250kY ago. If you want a point of divergence between "human species", like Chukzombi wants, that's when - but it doesn't change the fact that non-Africans have diverged from Africans 2500 generations ago, or so.

(and yes, I'm a partisan of the fact of "hybrid vigor", that is, getting some divergent lineages might have helped us once we settled out of Africa, and outcompeted those prior lineages)

Click to expand...

see, this is what i'm talking about. these divergent lineages didnt just pop up out of nowhere. they had to come from somewhere and it just so happens they came out of places NOT AFRICA. you think i'm talking about some master race or i dunno, Spacemen from Planet MFF. well, i'm not. i am sayinbg we dont have all the answers about our origins and we should keep an open mind about what may be found as more digs uncover our hidden past.

I've seen some dodgy youtube theories that people outside migrated into africa and mixed.

Rajaah - I didnt know that when you brought me back to this thread it would be like this. Ha!

Heres some stuff to toss into the theory boat that people will clearly have an opinion on, ask for evidence to support your theory and dismiss it without, but yet have no evidence to support their own theory.

Africa has a Super Swell under it - extreme volcanic activity that is tearing the continent apart. As we can see, Africa is three Craton's and the bottom ones are being pushed apart at about half an inch per year. Lets just say Atlantis was 10,000 BC - using Gobekli Tepe as a dating sample. Since that time, the Cratons have been pushed upward and outward by ~500 feet. How much of a rise in elevation has that caused the rest of the continent, and in particular, the West African Craton that the Congo Craton is pushing up and out against? Africa's South Eastern portion will completely separate at some point, creating a new ocean.

Ok, ok, lets add something else to it. If we're going this far, then we might as well account for the Asteroid that hit and caused global temperatures to sharply rise. Enough to where the Ice Caps would melt. If all the glacial water in the world were to go into the ocean on TODAY, the ocean would rise 70 meters. 10,000 years ago, we only have a rough idea of what the sea level was in relation to the land that was under water. From what Ive read, the earth had much less surface land (land above water) than it does today, and in relation to that - the sea level was higher from that as well.

Lastly - and this is less relevant to a degree, but its related to an earlier point. Africa, like North America, had Glaciers (believe it or not). Still does to a very diminished degree to this day. North America is still rising, and is expected to continue to rise in elevation for quite some time. How was Africa affected by the glaciers of that time? Did those Glaciers keep the southern Cratons from pushing on each other? Who knows! But a lot of the time frames sure do seem to add up around the Younger Dryas Events time period.

Granted, none of this means that Atlantis was real or anything of the such. What proof is there other than completely separate civilizations in Northern Europe, Southern Africa Eastern India (and everywhere in between) having a loose set of artifacts and writings that could "possibly" be related to Atlantis. By all accounts, I think it was a pretty good chance it existed. Just not some ultra advanced civilization that Hollywood has made it out to be. I would wager the city was likely seen by Hunter Gatherer Travelers for the first time, something similar to Gobekli Tepe(?), and the continued story telling of the city at the campfire morphed the city into something more fantastical than it really was.

Daidraco said:

Rajaah - I didnt know that when you brought me back to this thread it would be like this. Ha!

Heres some stuff to toss into the theory boat that people will clearly have an opinion on, ask for evidence to support your theory and dismiss it without, but yet have no evidence to support their own theory.

Africa has a Super Swell under it - extreme volcanic activity that is tearing the continent apart. As we can see, Africa is three Craton's and the bottom ones are being pushed apart at about half an inch per year. Lets just say Atlantis was 10,000 BC - using Gobekli Tepe as a dating sample. Since that time, the Cratons have been pushed upward and outward by ~500 feet. How much of a rise in elevation has that caused the rest of the continent, and in particular, the West African Craton that the Congo Craton is pushing up and out against? Africa's South Eastern portion will completely separate at some point, creating a new ocean.

Ok, ok, lets add something else to it. If we're going this far, then we might as well account for the Asteroid that hit and caused global temperatures to sharply rise. Enough to where the Ice Caps would melt. If all the glacial water in the world were to go into the ocean on TODAY, the ocean would rise 70 meters. 10,000 years ago, we only have a rough idea of what the sea level was in relation to the land that was under water. From what Ive read, the earth had much less surface land (land above water) than it does today, and in relation to that - the sea level was higher from that as well.

Lastly - and this is less relevant to a degree, but its related to an earlier point. Africa, like North America, had Glaciers (believe it or not). Still does to a very diminished degree to this day. North America is still rising, and is expected to continue to rise in elevation for quite some time. How was Africa affected by the glaciers of that time? Did those Glaciers keep the southern Cratons from pushing on each other? Who knows! But a lot of the time frames sure do seem to add up around the Younger Dryas Events time period.

Granted, none of this means that Atlantis was real or anything of the such. What proof is there other than completely separate civilizations in Northern Europe, Southern Africa Eastern India (and everywhere in between) having a loose set of artifacts and writings that could "possibly" be related to Atlantis. By all accounts, I think it was a pretty good chance it existed. Just not some ultra advanced civilization that Hollywood has made it out to be. I would wager the city was likely seen by Hunter Gatherer Travelers for the first time, something similar to Gobekli Tepe(?), and the continued story telling of the city at the campfire morphed the city into something more fantastical than it really was.

View attachment 485977

Click to expand...

this is very fair, Plato wrote about Atlantis as a major greek type of place because he was living in a major greek type of place at the time 3000 years ago, so the story had to relate to another place such as his being swept under the sea. perhaps as a cautionary tale for his current day generation. whatever was being called Atlantis could have been a 12k year old grecian city. or it could just be a big ass meet up spot where boatmen, mineral farmers and slave traders got together every day and plied their wares. the barter system would be king. then the Big Flood happened and washed that shit all away into the Atlantic. its like people talking about their favorite department store or restautant thats gone now. as generations go on the store could go from just a shitty K Mart to a massive trading hub in a palace city.

Daidraco said:

Lets just say Atlantis was 10,000 BC - using Gobekli Tepe as a dating sample. Since that time, the Cratons have been pushed upward and outward by ~500 feet.

Click to expand...

Where do you get the 500 feet figure from?

Is that's true and if the water level also rose, we are still not accounting for 400 metres.