Mysteries :  The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
For serious discussion of the controversies, approaches and enigmas surrounding the origins and development of the human species and of human civilization. (NB: for more ‘out there’ posts we point you in the direction of the ‘Paranormal & Supernatural’ Message Board). 
Welcome! Log InRegister
I saw the program last night, on the History Channel, about the underwater ruins near Japan. Overall, it seemed favorable toward the idea of the site actually being man-made, or at least partially man-made, and pointed out the need for more research to be done to confirm the site one way or the other. There are those who insist that the area is entirely natural, the result of blocks flaking off along straight fault lines. If so, then wouldn't there be debris at the bottom of the monuments? Even if the strong currents sweep some of it away, if the erosional patterns are an ongoing occurance, then there would surely be at least a few broken blocks at the base of the monument. And what about the pits that resemble eye sockets? I find it strange that erosion would be so selective as to produce two perfectly symmetrical holes on each side of a nose-like ridge. If I recall correctly, there were TWO such sites. What are the chances of that happening purely by chance? Still another place had what appear to be carvings in a great, sweeping pattern like wings or flames. Selective erosion must come with a hammer and chisel.

If orthodox researchers have so much confidence that their pet theories are true, if they're so positive that intelligent human civilizations could not have existed 10,000 years ago, then why are they so afraid of studying this and other underwater sites? Are they afraid, after all, of being proven wrong? Why would that be such a bad thing, anyway? Is saving face really so much more important than knowing the truth?

They continue to insist that the Japanese gentleman who found the site is mistaken, or that he's only trying to make money from tourism. Well, as for making money, it seems like a bad business venture, since storms and powerful currents often make diving impossible even for professionals, let alone amateurs who only want to take home souvenir photos. And as for his being mistaken: He's had many years of experience diving in those waters, far more than any of the researchers themselves. I'm sure he's come across oddly shaped rock formations before, yet for some reason, THIS PARTICULAR rock formation caught his attention, so that he immediately thought "man-made."

We can only hope that public demand will force archeologists to take notice of this site and study it, even if it does ultimately prove to be natural.

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
History Channel program 247 Mia Z. 12-Dec-00 15:39
RE: History Channel program 185 Steve Y 12-Dec-00 17:16
RE: History Channel program 169 oziris 12-Dec-00 20:02


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.