Atlantis Online
November 21, 2017, 07:44:22 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Site provides evidence for ancient comet explosion
http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/nationworld/story/173177.html
 
  Home Help Arcade Gallery Links Staff List Calendar Login Register  

ROCKS OF ATLANTIS MAY HAVE BEEN FOUND BENEATH BIMINI, BAHAMAS

Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: ROCKS OF ATLANTIS MAY HAVE BEEN FOUND BENEATH BIMINI, BAHAMAS  (Read 211 times)
Trasean Trafalgar
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1152


« Reply #15 on: January 17, 2015, 07:19:42 pm »



All cores taken were put into core boxes for later shipment to the U.S. for paleontological and chemical analyses, and for C-14 dating of core samples
Report Spam   Logged
Trasean Trafalgar
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1152


« Reply #16 on: January 17, 2015, 07:19:58 pm »

After our field work, we noted a large piece of coral at a depth of 45 ft in core-hole 2. (See Fig. 9). This was identified by two university geobiologists as Colpophillia breviserialis, a type of brain coral found in the Bahamas during the late-Pliocene to early-Pleistocene. Another sample in core 2, at the 48-to-49.5 ft depth below MSL, contained rudstone, an indurated carbonate mud with shell fragments of Turritella type gastropods 15%, worm shells 10%, ribbed bivalves 15%, and non-ribbed bivalves 60%. (See Fig. 10). Associated with this assemblage was Montastrea I-franski, a type of boulder coral found in the Bahamas during the early to mid-Pleistocene. (See Fig. 11).
Report Spam   Logged
Trasean Trafalgar
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1152


« Reply #17 on: January 17, 2015, 07:20:28 pm »



Figure 9. Colpophillia breviserialis, found at -45 ft in core 2. Secondary porosity in the form of solution channels and/or Lithophaga borings is shown.
Report Spam   Logged
Trasean Trafalgar
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1152


« Reply #18 on: January 17, 2015, 07:20:52 pm »



Figure 10. Rudstone containing shell fragments of Turritella type gastropods, worm shells, ribbed bivalves, and non-ribbed bivalves, found at -48 to -49 ft in core 2.
Report Spam   Logged
Trasean Trafalgar
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1152


« Reply #19 on: January 17, 2015, 07:21:20 pm »



Figure 11. Montastrea I-franski found at -48 ft in core 2.
Report Spam   Logged
Trasean Trafalgar
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1152


« Reply #20 on: January 17, 2015, 07:21:36 pm »

Report Spam   Logged
Trasean Trafalgar
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1152


« Reply #21 on: January 17, 2015, 07:21:48 pm »

Fig. 12 - The blue curve is for relative sea-level rise for the entire Bahamas. It is based on numerous C14 dates for intertidal peats and shallow reef-crest corals. It reflects a reasonable demarcation between intertidal peat data (maximum sea-level) and shallow reef crest A. palmata data (minimum sea level required to submerge coral). The sea-level rise curve was constructed by Toscano and Macintyre (2003) who wrote as follows. "All {rates of sea-level rise} are well below the maximum accretion rate of A. palmata and are not indicative of extreme pulses capable of effecting reef drowning and subsequent backstepping." X and Y denote C14-corrected dates for Bimini intertidal peats.

From this blue curve alone, the expected age of the limestone sample in borehole 2, at -48.5 ft., should have been about 8,900 BP. (Refer to the black horizontal axis of the graph.)

But because it has a minimum C14 age of about 36,000 BP, it is a minimum of 27,200 years older than would be expected from its position on the blue curve in the graph.
Report Spam   Logged
Trasean Trafalgar
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1152


« Reply #22 on: January 17, 2015, 07:22:11 pm »

 Taken together, the ages of these fossil corals indicate that we had cored rocks of early-Pleistocene age at the minus 45.0-to-49.5 ft level below current sea-level, there in the middle of the Bimini Inlet. A piece of cemented carbonate silt from the 48.5-ft depth was C-14 dated to 36,100 ±1050 years BP. However, there are clear indications that the reported result represents only a minimum age and that the true age may in fact be older. The measured C13/12 ratio of -5.6 o/oo was more depleted (more negative) than is typical for a sample containing carbonates from a strictly marine environment (typically marine values range from -2 o/oo to +2 o/oo). As such, the C13/12 ratio may be indicating the presence of carbon from post-depositional sources, due to the dissolution, recrystillization, replacement or alteration of carbonates transported by fresh water or rainwater. If that carbon was from younger or even modern (post-1950 AD) sources, the reported radiocarbon age could have easily been biased in the more recent direction by varying amounts.

As an example, consider that if the true age of a hypothetical carbonate rock is, say, 100,000 years, and it contains as little as 1% contamination by post-1950 AD carbon, the C-14 age determination would yield a result of approximately 37,000 years BP. Contamination by younger, but not necessarily modern carbon could also have very large effects depending on the amount and actual age of more recent contaminants contained in the rock.

Therefore, the 36,100-year-old radiocarbon age of the limestone rock at -48.5 ft in borehole 2 is only a minimum age. It provides a "youngest possible" age for the rocks containing the fossil corals identified above. Thus, if the corals at -45 ft and -49 ft represent early to mid-Pleistocene age, then they could be between about 1,800,000 to 400,000 years old. (The "early-Pleistocene" epoch, or the Lower Pleistocene Calabrian epoch to geologists, is represented by rocks between 1.81 to 0.78 million years of age. Mid-Pleistocene age rocks are younger.)

We have examined the stratigraphic implications of all three cores with respect to the probable boundary between the Lower Pleistocene rocks and the overlying, Holocene rocks and sediments. (The Holocene covers the last 10,000 years of Earth history.) If we turn now to the sea-level curve for the late-Pleistocene (Fig. 13) we see that the old land surface of Atlantis could have been above sea level since roughly 120,000 BP.
Report Spam   Logged
Trasean Trafalgar
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1152


« Reply #23 on: January 17, 2015, 07:22:35 pm »



Figure 13. Global changes in sea levels from 2000 to 140,000 B.P. Source: Edouard Bard, Bruno Hamelin, and Richard G. Fairbanks, "U-Th Ages Obtained by Mass Spectrometry in Corals from Barbados: Sea Level During the Past 130,000 Years," Nature 346 (1990): 456–458. Note that the curve of relative sea-level rise for the Bahamas (Fig. 12) should take precedence, for the period 0-5,000 BP, over the curve in figure 13, for corals from Barbados which is in a slightly more tectonically active location.

 

The limestone that contains solution channels from minus 10 to minus 26.8 ft in borehole 1 (see the Appendix), is highly suggestive of a former land surface that has been subjected to surface-flowing freshwater, or rainfall, in the past. This uppermost, solution-channeled limestone stratum may be of the same mid- or lower-Pleistocene age as the rocks stratagraphically below it, at about minus 35 ft in boreholes 2 and 3. (See descriptive logs in the appendix.) If so, that suggests that the ancient land surface of Atlantis would presently be only 10 ft below mean tide level at the location of exploratory borehole 1. Additional work is needed to confirm this supposition.
Report Spam   Logged
Trasean Trafalgar
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1152


« Reply #24 on: January 17, 2015, 07:22:54 pm »

Conclusion

Evidence of fossil coral ages, as backed up by a C-14 date, indicates that a considerable thickness of Pleistocene and Holocene strata is missing from the near-surface geologic section beneath the Bimini Inlet. A reasonable implication of these missing rocks is that, during a period of time covering perhaps 800,000 years -- or a minimum of 120,000 years at the least -- an ancient land surface in the Bimini area could have been above sea-level during times of continental glaciations when ocean water levels were depressed due to the oceanic water mass locked up in ice sheets. That ancient land surface could have been the continent of Atlantis.

But, one asks, "What happened to that continent; where is the remainder of it today?"

To answer this question requires one to enter into the great geologic controversy of the last 40 years; that is, the controversy between those who believe in plate tectonics and sea-floor spreading vs. those who credit largely vertical crustal motions as the true explanation for global tectonics. Because we have a serious problem with the plate-tectonics group-thinkers (see chapter 25 of our book), we would simply say that legendary Atlantis just sank, during a series of geological catastrophes between 19,400 and 12,400 BP. This explanation, advanced in a series of Cayce readings, makes as much sense to us as do the stories advanced by the followers of plate tectonics for oceanic crustal movements.

The uppermost Bimini disconformity is significant because it implies an environment that could have been inhabited by an ancient civilization for thousands of years. In Cayce reading 364-3, that former human environment and ancient land surface is implied in this way.

    "... a portion of same {Atlantis} that may be seen in the present, if the geological survey would be made ...especially, or notably, in Bimini... "

We have now completed a small first step in a geological survey of Bimini. Indeed, we may have even "seen" a portion of Atlantis in the rock cores recovered. Further field and laboratory work is being planned, with emphasis on the analysis of the core samples for their abundances of rare-earth elements.
Acknowledgments

    We want to thank the many unnamed people who have helped our Bimini research along over the last months and years. Their names have not been listed here to avoid their suffering the consequences of ridicule, or even career impediment, for having helped with research based upon psychically-derived information.

    You will not be forgotten, and if some day you wish to be cited in updates of this article we will be most pleased to do so.

Appendix

GPS locations of the core-hole stations in the Bimini Inlet

GPS locations of the core-hole stations in the Bimini Inlet

   Latitude    Longitude
Core Hole 1:
   N 25° 43' 9.4"    W 79° 17' 55.6"
Core Hole 2:
   N 25° 43' 11.1"    W 79° 17' 58.7"
Core Hole 3:
   N 25° 43' 10.6"    W 79° 18' 2.6"

 
Core Descriptions

Here follows descriptions of the cored strata taken from exploratory borings 1, 2, and 3 (see Fig. 4).

    Hole 1. The uppermost 2.0 ft of hole one consists of loose sand. Between 10 ft below mean sea level and minus 26.8 ft there was 85 per cent recovery of gray limestone with small to moderate-sized solution channels. (See Fig. 14).
Report Spam   Logged
Trasean Trafalgar
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1152


« Reply #25 on: January 17, 2015, 07:23:26 pm »



Fig. 14. Solution channels and borings at minus 10 ft (left), and minus 16 ft, in core 1.

    From 26.8 ft to the bottom of the hole there was 25 to 50 percent recovery of gray to white limestone containing considerable solution cavities and channels up to one-half inch in diameter. At minus 35 to minus 36.6 ft a layer of cemented shell hash was recovered. Note that this is quite possibly the same layer as the one encountered at this same depth in hole 3.

    Between minus 41 and 47 ft the drill core-barrel returned 50% of a layer of cemented shells with numerous solution cavities. And from minus 47 ft to 51.5 ft the core barrel returned 90% of a layer of limestone with medium-sized shells and coral fragments. Ninety per cent recovery of this stratum exhibited numerous solution cavities and channels, and medium-sized shells and coral fragments.

    Hole 2. The top of this core, from minus 18 to 20 ft was composed of moderately well cemented, light-tan-colored sand with some borings and/or solution channels. (60% recovery). From minus 20 to minus 30 ft the core barrel recovered 95% of light tan, cemented, bedded sand with some solution channels around minus 23-25 ft. This sand became white down hole. Between minus 30 to minus 35 ft there was 95% recovery of cemented white sand. From minus 35 to minus 40 ft there was only a 2% recovery of hard, thumbed-sized coral fragments, and between 40 and 44.5 ft, only 3% recovery of the same material. A roughly one-ft-long piece of Colpophillia breviserialis coral was encountered at minus 44.5 to 45.5 ft. Another shorter piece of Montastrea I-franski was encountered at minus 49.2 to 49.6 ft.

    Hole 3. We recovered only uncemented sand in this core from minus 4 ft to minus 10.8 ft. From minus 10.8 ft to minus 25.8 ft we had 60% recovery of weakly-cemented tan sand that became more whitish downhole.

    From minus 25.8 ft to minus 40 ft light-tan, cemented sand with considerable solution channels was recovered (90% recovery). Cemented shell hash occurred between minus 35 to minus 36.4 ft. Note that this is quite probably the same layer encountered in hole 1.

    From minus 40 ft to minus 45.8 ft we had 70% recovery of a fine white limestone matrix containing small to medium-sized white shells. And below minus 45.8 to 50.8 ft there was only 20% recovery of fragments of fine white limestone.
Report Spam   Logged
Trasean Trafalgar
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1152


« Reply #26 on: January 17, 2015, 07:23:37 pm »

http://www.huttoncommentaries.com/article.php?a_id=86
Report Spam   Logged
Trasean Trafalgar
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1152


« Reply #27 on: January 17, 2015, 07:24:07 pm »


MORE "ROCKS OF ATLANTIS" ARE CONFIRMED WIDELY OVER THE NORTH ATLANTIC OCEAN FLOOR
KEY FEATURES OF THIS ARTICLE


        The ancient ages of rocks, fossils, and sediments found at numerous places on the North Atlantic Ocean floor indicate that the hypothesis of sea-floor spreading is inaccurate and should in large measure be scrapped. Previous explanations as to the origin of ancient continental-rock fragments on the sea floor are almost laughably incorrect. Vertical, primarily downward, movements of the oceanic crust have been far more important to the geologic history of the Atlantic basin than have horizontal movements of the crust, as championed by believers in plate-tectonics. The Edgar Cayce psychic readings on the geologic history of the destruction of Atlantis fit far more easily into tectonic conjectures by present-day geologists and researchers unencumbered by the hypothesis of sea-floor spreading. A proposed classification of ancient and continental rocks on and beneath the Atlantic ocean floor allows for the insertion of the specific rocks of Atlantis discovered by Hutton and Eagle in their drilling and core-sampling of rocks at Bimini in 2007. That work followed clues found in the Cayce readings. (Read the details of the proposed crustal uplifting activity at the end of this article.)

INTRODUCTION

John Ziman is a physicist and science analyst. In 1978, he wrote, “Institutionalized collegiate science is always vulnerable to the charge that it is no more than an 'Establishment' that defends only its own orthodoxy. The consensus towards which science strives applies, in practice, only to the members of a scientific community already heavily indoctrinated in the current paradigm. Despite all its high ideals and good intentions, such a community must inevitably resist radically new ideas that upset its hard-won position and throw into doubt all the earnest labours of its members”. Present-day Earth science, to the extent that it is dominated by the hypothesis of plate tectonics, readily conforms to Ziman's description. In peer reviewed journals, as well as on grant-giving boards, criticism of established paradigmatic 'rules' and views are commonly suppressed – thus blockading free exchange of opinion, the cornerstone of true science. Such a fate has befallen serious investigation of alternatives to the hypotheses of 1) sea-floor spreading and 2) the presence of a former land mass in the north Atlantic Ocean called Atlantis.

In the Hutton Commentaries continuing research and validity-testing of Edgar Cayce's readings on Atlantis, we have had modest success in finding evidence of the rocks of the former continent, as located in the following readings.
Report Spam   Logged
Trasean Trafalgar
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1152


« Reply #28 on: January 17, 2015, 07:24:31 pm »



    ...while the destruction of this {Atlantean} continent and the peoples are far beyond any of that as has been kept as an absolute record, that record in the rocks still remains... (emphasis added by Hutton).

    The position as the continent Atlantis occupied, is that as between the Gulf of Mexico on the one hand - and the Mediterranean upon the other. Evidences of this lost civilization are to be found in the Pyrenees and Morocco on the one hand, British Honduras, Yucatan and America upon the other. There are some protruding portions within this that must have at one time or another been a portion of this great continent. The British West Indies or the Bahamas, and a portion of same that may be seen in the present - if the geological survey would be made in some of these - especially, or notably, in Bimini and in the Gulf Stream through this vicinity, these may be even yet determined.

    (364-3)

    (Q) How large was Atlantis during the time of Amilius?
    (A) Comparison, that of Europe including Asia in Europe - not Asia, but Asia in Europe - see? This composed, as seen, in or after the first of the destructions, that which would be termed now - with the present position - the southernmost portion of same - islands as created by those of the first (as man would call) volcanic or eruptive forces brought into play in the destruction of same.

    (364-6)

The following map is our interpretation of these readings, from chapter 26 of our book, Earth's Catastrophic Past and Future.
../images/Other/AtlantisEvidence/NAtlOceanBasin/Ch26Fig1clr_800.jpg Fig. 1. Approximate outer limits of Atlantis at its greatest extent. Vertical-stripe pattern indicates our best estimate of "protruding portions within this [Atlantis] that must have at one time or another been a portion" of the legendary lost continent.
MAR = Mid_Atlantic Ridge;
FZ = Fracture zone.

Now comes a new compilation of that record in the rocks that still remains of lost Atlantis, although the authors of that compilation are loath to use that explanation ("Atlantis").
Report Spam   Logged
Trasean Trafalgar
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1152


« Reply #29 on: January 17, 2015, 07:24:58 pm »

NEW DATA ON ANCIENT CONTINENTAL-TYPE ROCKS
IN THE NORTH ATLANTIC OCEAN BASIN


A stunning and scholarly study was web-published last month in the New Concepts In Global Tectonics (NCGT) Newsletter [no. 53, December 2009]. It is titled "Ancient and Continental Rocks In The Atlantic Ocean," and authored by T. Yano, D. Choi, A. Givrilov, S. Miyagi, and B. Vasiliev. Here's their abstract.

    According to the hypothesis of ocean-floor spreading, oceanic crust contains no rocks older than 0.2 Ga* or so of continental origin. The Atlantic oceanic crust, however, includes rocks as old as 1.85 Ga and of continental constituents, such as granitoids, gneisses, schists, granulites, coarse-grained terrigenous clastics, and continental peridotites. This paper describes these rocks from 42 localities and groups them into 4 types. The occurrence of these rocks has prompted ad hoc modifications to the sea-floor spreading hypothesis, e.g. ceased spreading or older sediment patches getting left behind, non-spreading areas, multiple ridge jumping, oscillatory spreading, small roll-like convection cells located beneath both sides of a spreading axis, delamination, etc. All these modifications are contrived and unsupported by firm data.

    The widespread occurrence of ancient continental rocks is compatible with the hypothesis of the oceanization of a former continental outer layer in the present oceans. The currently available data suggest that the Atlantic Ocean formed as a result of complex interaction of tectono-thermal, magmatic and rifting processes in the Middle Mesozoic which destroyed and oceanized the ancient continental lithosphere. Since marine geological surveys are still extremely sparse and the ancient continental rocks discovered to date have only been found by accident, future drilling and dredging may prove the systematic presence of ancient continental rocks in the Atlantic. All hypotheses on the origin of the Atlantic should be reexamined in the light of the increasing volume of rock specimens from the ocean floor.
Report Spam   Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum | Buy traffic for your forum/website
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines