Atlantis On The Internet (in Cuba, Spartel and Antarctica) - ORIGINAL

Andre
Member
Member # 661

Member Rated:
   posted 03-29-2004 10:59 AM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Well I guess it's most embarrasing for science.

The geologists who have not researched the material, don't know how fast they must declare this a natural phenomenon, pointing at some other geometric and symmetric features like devils tower or formations of hexagonal basalt columns.

However these things are formed emerse, on land, and the site looks orders of magnitude more complicated than than the most symmetric features of nature.

Moreover, Manuel Itturalde-Vinent, author of over hundred scientific publications, who examined the material closely, hardly speculates about a natural origine. In fact he suggest that to be the least
likely explanation.

So the thing -natural or not- is most likely formed on land but supposedly the sea level presumably has not risen 700-800 meters anywhere in the last million years.

If we assume that the maximum possible subsidence speed equals the maximum assumed rebounce speed of roughly 15mm a year, yes then the side could not be younger than about 50,000 years. But contrary to other rising and sinking areas there is not a trace of such a subsidence speed left as the area is not sinking now.

But there are many more problems, water erosion and the reported high sediment rate (assuming about an order of magnbitde mm per year) would make a site like this unrecognisable within a short time span and 50,000 years seems a awful long time then.

But were humans capable of building or modifying sites like that, such a long time ago? Moreover, there were no people in South America before the Clovis people entered America via the Beringia land bridge some 15,000 years ago, as we are lead to believe very strongly.

So, was it build more recently and did it sink incredibly quick, to have the preservation state it has now? That would seem plausible but there is no known phenomenon (Vulcano calderas, Meteorite strikes, land slides) that would sink the land so deep and still left the structure intact.

In a word, a formal mystery and science hates that. So I wonder why it is so awfully quiet out there. Or is it that one of the rock solid paragdigms that clash here will be debunked and nobody likes to see his pet theory go down the drain?