PDA

View Full Version : Underwater city = AGW?


brantc
16th December 2009, 10:02 AM
Is the reason this city is underwater AGW? Did they have carbon technology?

"WASHINGTON, DC (Herald de Paris) - EXCLUSIVE - Researchers have revealed the first images from the Caribbean sea floor of what they believe are the archaeological remains of an ancient civilization. Guarding the location’s coordinates carefully, the project’s leader, who wishes to remain anonymous at this time, says the city could be thousands of years old; possibly even pre-dating the ancient Egyptian pyramids, at Giza.

The site was found using advanced satellite imagery, and is not in any way associated with the alleged site found by Russian explorers near Cuba in 2001, at a depth of 2300 feet. “To be seen on satellite, our site is much shallower.” The team is currently seeking funding to mount an expedition to confirm and explore what appears to be a vast underwater city. “You have to be careful working with satellite images in such a location,” the project’s principle researcher said, “The digital matrix sometimes misinterprets its data, and shows ruins as solid masses. The thing is, we’ve found structure - what appears to be a tall, narrow pyramid; large platform structures with small buildings on them; we’ve even found standing parallel post and beam construction in the rubble of what appears to be a fallen building. You can’t have post and beam without human involvement.”"
http://www.heralddeparis.com/previously-undiscovered-ancient-city-found-on-caribbean-sea-floor/65855

ServiceSoon
16th December 2009, 10:08 AM
I'm usually creative, but I can't see what the article is explaining. It looks similar to a satellite shot of my neck of the woods. Either way, very interested to see some better pictures after further exploration. There is still lots out there to explore on earth.

Careyp74
16th December 2009, 10:08 AM
It appears that they don't have a definitive answer as to if it is even ruins of a city? They are awaiting funding to explore the area? Couldn't they get at least one submersible down there? Why does this paper have an exclusive?

Cynic
16th December 2009, 10:11 AM
The plate it sits on likely moved.

I Ratant
16th December 2009, 10:21 AM
There's quite a few historical sites in the Mediterranean that have been taken by the sea.
This one probably isn't any different.
In a few years, all those fancy newly made islands in Dubai are going to suffer the same fate.
New Orleans came close, with Katrina.

lomiller
16th December 2009, 10:22 AM
This has nothing to do with AGW

phunk
16th December 2009, 10:25 AM
If the images in the article are any indication, these guys are either scammers or idiots. To me it looks like they found compression artifacts in images from google earth.

BenBurch
16th December 2009, 10:26 AM
Sea levels rose a lot when the ice age ended.

We know why that happened.

What is happening now is happening for different reasons.

Reality Check
16th December 2009, 11:06 AM
Given that this is

A news article.
From an anonymous source.
With photos that look suspiciously like aerial or satellite images of land surfaces
The photos look amateurish with no scales and see the hand cursor in one of them!
There is no evidence (that I know of) of the Caribbean ever having ancient civilisations with populations big enough for enormous cities.
I suspect that this is a hoax.

Correa Neto
16th December 2009, 11:39 AM
OK, I expect soon to see mentions to Atlantis and Cayce...

brantc
16th December 2009, 11:49 AM
Sea levels rose a lot when the ice age ended.

We know why that happened.

What is happening now is happening for different reasons.

There are several underwater cities that have been discovered.
Did civilization have enough time to develop and build cities during the ice age so the level of CO2 caused to ice to melt??

When was the last time the sea level was low enough to uncover any of the underwater cities that have been found?
In Cuba that is a sea level rise of 2300 ft!!!!

So why did the water level rise? What caused to ice age to be over?

From wiki(not to be trusted)

Changes in Earth's atmosphere

There is evidence that greenhouse gas levels fell at the start of ice ages and rose during the retreat of the ice sheets, but it is difficult to establish cause and effect (see the notes above on the role of weathering). Greenhouse gas levels may also have been affected by other factors which have been proposed as causes of ice ages, such as the movement of continents and volcanism.

The Snowball Earth hypothesis maintains that the severe freezing in the late Proterozoic was ended by an increase in CO2 levels in the atmosphere, and some supporters of Snowball Earth argue that it was caused by a reduction in atmospheric CO2. The hypothesis also warns of future Snowball Earths.

The August, 2009 edition of Science (journal) provides further evidence that changes solar insolation provide the intitial trigger for the Earth to warm after an Ice Age, with secondary factors like increases in greenhouse gases accounting for the magnitude of the change. [35]

William Ruddiman has proposed the early anthropocene hypothesis, according to which the anthropocene era, as some people call the most recent period in the Earth's history when the activities of the human race first began to have a significant global impact on the Earth's climate and ecosystems, did not begin in the 18th century with the advent of the Industrial Era, but dates back to 8,000 years ago, due to intense farming activities of our early agrarian ancestors. It was at that time that atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations stopped following the periodic pattern of the Milankovitch cycles."


Which is it??

Lucian
16th December 2009, 11:51 AM
OK, I expect soon to see mentions to Atlantis and Cayce...

Archaeologists Claim They've Found Lost City of Atlantis (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/16/archaeologists-claim-they_n_394240.html)

shadron
16th December 2009, 12:08 PM
The Caribbean basin is a subsidence basin based on the failed Mississippi valley rift system (the one responsible for the earthquakes in the valley, particularly the New Madrid quakes of 1800). That subsidence is currently drowning New Orleans and the surrounding area; Forts on the lower Mississippi dating back to near Spanish colonial times are now 16 feet deep in water. The only thing that kept the lower valley from sinking under the sea is the yearly wash of sediment down the Mississippi/Missouri drainage system, which, of course, no longer happens thanks to the Corps of Engineers.

If the presumed ruins are in that area, then their demise and drowning are not AGw at work, but rather plate tectonics.

lomiller
16th December 2009, 12:32 PM
The Caribbean basin is a subsidence basin based on the failed Mississippi valley rift system (the one responsible for the earthquakes in the valley, particularly the New Madrid quakes of 1800). That subsidence is currently drowning New Orleans and the surrounding area; Forts on the lower Mississippi dating back to near Spanish colonial times are now 16 feet deep in water. The only thing that kept the lower valley from sinking under the sea is the yearly wash of sediment down the Mississippi/Missouri drainage system, which, of course, no longer happens thanks to the Corps of Engineers.

If the presumed ruins are in that area, then their demise and drowning are not AGw at work, but rather plate tectonics.


Given the depths the OP is throwing around (2300 feet) that wouldn’t be an explanation, indeed the only plausible explanation is that they are natural features not ruins. Sea level rise at the end of a glaciations can be ~250 feet, but clearly that would be long before the existence of any cities. In the last 6000 years before sea levels varied within a range of about 1 foot.

MrQhuest
16th December 2009, 12:32 PM
I agree with Phunk, this looks more like image artifacts rather than an actual city. Is there any place on earth where you can see through a half mile of water?

MrQ

Buckaroo
16th December 2009, 12:49 PM
The photos look like magnified compression artifacts. Like above, I'm calling hoax or stupidity.

blutoski
16th December 2009, 01:11 PM
The photos look like magnified compression artifacts. Like above, I'm calling hoax or stupidity.

I think we'd need somebody to find the original article involved. There isn't even a scale - those 'roads' could represent lines ten miles wide.

There were a few Google Earth photos that had compression artefacts. This rings a bell as one of those, rather than naturally forming fractures.

If I had to put my nickel down, I'd say it's a many-times-forwarded copy of one of those compression artefacts that keep showing up in tabloids as Atlantis, stripped of its original article and context.

brantc
16th December 2009, 01:20 PM
From the OP article.
"To be seen on satellite, our site is much shallower.” The team is currently seeking funding to mount an expedition to confirm and explore what appears to be a vast underwater city. “You have to be careful working with satellite images in such a location,” the project’s principle researcher said, “The digital matrix sometimes misinterprets its data, and shows ruins as solid masses. The thing is, we’ve found structure - what appears to be a tall, narrow pyramid; large platform structures with small buildings on them; we’ve even found standing parallel post and beam construction in the rubble of what appears to be a fallen building. You can’t have post and beam without human involvement."

Read it.

All I'm saying is that there are more than one underwater cities. The one off Cuba is 2300ft down. I think as we explore more of the ocean we will find more under signs of habitation.
http://www.andrewcollins.com/page/articles/lostcity.htm

Global warming in a lake???
Ancient temple found under Lake Titicaca
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/892616.stm

Japan
http://www.cyberspaceorbit.com/phikent/japan/japan2.html

Near Hawaii
http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&VideoID=30207415

This city existed right after the ice age.......
Aryan Invasion Theory Busted - New Ancient Cities Discovered within India.
Gulf of Cambay has a city older than 9,500 years old.

Archaeological remains of this lost city have been discovered 36 metres (120 feet) underwater in the Gulf of Cambay off the western coast of India. And carbon dating says that they are 9,500 years old.

The vast city — which is five miles long and two miles wide — is believed to predate the oldest known remains in the subcontinent by more than 5,000 years.
http://in.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090120225723AADeHlf


Again, are these cities victims of AGW? Or something else that we dont know about how the earth evolves. Can you imagine the massive ice pack required to lower the sea level by 2300 ft?? If not that then where did the water come from?

Marduk
16th December 2009, 01:27 PM
From the OP article.
"To be seen on satellite, our site is much shallower.” The team is currently seeking funding to mount an expedition to confirm and explore what appears to be a vast underwater city. “You have to be careful working with satellite images in such a location,” the project’s principle researcher said, “The digital matrix sometimes misinterprets its data, and shows ruins as solid masses. The thing is, we’ve found structure - what appears to be a tall, narrow pyramid; large platform structures with small buildings on them; we’ve even found standing parallel post and beam construction in the rubble of what appears to be a fallen building. You can’t have post and beam without human involvement."

Read it.

All I'm saying is that there are more than one underwater cities. The one off Cuba is 2300ft down. I think as we explore more of the ocean we will find more under signs of habitation.
http://www.andrewcollins.com/page/articles/lostcity.htm

Global warming in a lake???
Ancient temple found under Lake Titicaca
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/892616.stm

Japan
http://www.cyberspaceorbit.com/phikent/japan/japan2.html

Near Hawaii
http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&VideoID=30207415

This city existed right after the ice age.......
Aryan Invasion Theory Busted - New Ancient Cities Discovered within India.
Gulf of Cambay has a city older than 9,500 years old.

Archaeological remains of this lost city have been discovered 36 metres (120 feet) underwater in the Gulf of Cambay off the western coast of India. And carbon dating says that they are 9,500 years old.

The vast city — which is five miles long and two miles wide — is believed to predate the oldest known remains in the subcontinent by more than 5,000 years.
http://in.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090120225723AADeHlf


Again, are these cities victims of AGW? Or something else that we dont know about how the earth evolves. Can you imagine the massive ice pack required to lower the sea level by 2300 ft?? If not that then where did the water come from?
all the claims you made in this post are erroneous, bet youre a Graham Hancock fan too
:p

Reality Check
16th December 2009, 01:33 PM
There are several underwater cities that have been discovered.
Did civilization have enough time to develop and build cities during the ice age so the level of CO2 caused to ice to melt??
What are your sources for the existence of "several underwater cities"?
Why do you think that these cities existed in the ice age?


The answer to your question is no:

The last major ice age (Last Glacial Maximum (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_Glacial_Maximum)) was approximately 20,000 years ago.
The birth of cities of any size is generally though to be after the Neolithic Revolution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neolithic_Revolution) which was about 10,000 years ago.
This is 10,000 years after the Last Glacial Maximum (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_Glacial_Maximum).
Cities do not create appreciable increases in the level of CO2.
Basically all they do is concentrate the release of CO2 from fuel burning into a smaller area. They do allow population growth and so there is a small increase in the amount CO2 released.
Industrial activities do create appreciable increases in the level of CO2. But that is 10,000 years too late for your "several underwater cities".
ETA:
Just seen your links. It does seem that you are easily fooled by crackpots like Graham Hancock.

Marduk
16th December 2009, 01:38 PM
crackpots like Graham Hancock.

Zing
:D

blutoski
16th December 2009, 01:54 PM
From the OP article.
"To be seen on satellite, our site is much shallower.” The team is currently seeking funding to mount an expedition to confirm and explore what appears to be a vast underwater city. “You have to be careful working with satellite images in such a location,” the project’s principle researcher said, “The digital matrix sometimes misinterprets its data, and shows ruins as solid masses. The thing is, we’ve found structure - what appears to be a tall, narrow pyramid; large platform structures with small buildings on them; we’ve even found standing parallel post and beam construction in the rubble of what appears to be a fallen building. You can’t have post and beam without human involvement."

Read it.

Of course we read it. My analysis stands.

Specifically: Guarding the location’s coordinates carefully, the project’s leader, who wishes to remain anonymous at this time,

And: The project team asks that for more information, or to find out how to help fund their research, please contact the Herald de Paris’ publisher, Jes Alexander, at a specially set-up telephone number: 415-738-7811

So: nothing verifiable at all, and a photo with no scale or context that looks familiar.

Pretty boilerplate tabloid fraud. It's like they're not even trying.

Ooo! New photos with much more detail: [Got ruins? Undersea archaeologists release new photos (http://www.heralddeparis.com/got-ruins-undersea-archaeologists-release-new-photos/66899)]

Gotta love those fanboi posts:
Because Main Stream Media only spews propaganda and government approved “news”, you’ll have to wait for the major networks to get the official “story” … usually takes a day or so.

PS: Wake up

BenBurch
16th December 2009, 01:56 PM
http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/moonhoax.html

Marduk
16th December 2009, 02:00 PM
Ooo! New photos with much more detail: [Got ruins? Undersea archaeologists release new photos (http://www.heralddeparis.com/got-ruins-undersea-archaeologists-release-new-photos/66899)]

By showing the un-filtered images, the team hopes to exhibit why filtering and lightening of the images has been necessary.

translation, we edited the original pictures to make them more convincing and decided not to mention it to you at the time, but somebody noticed so we're making a retraction in a pointless attempt to save face

:rolleyes:

and another woo claim dies an early death

icerat
16th December 2009, 02:12 PM
Might be a viral or just a plain hoax. The website domain is only a year old, updated in November, and out of california. (http://who.godaddy.com/WhoIs.aspx?domain=heralddeparis.com&prog_id=godaddy)

icerat
16th December 2009, 02:20 PM
and you gotta love the google earth hand on one of the "advanced satellite imagery" photos .... hahahha

http://www.heralddeparis.com/wp-content/gallery/caribbean/jes30-08-dec-2125.jpg

Marduk
16th December 2009, 02:26 PM
I love the way that the "city" jumps from the ocean floor to the cloud tops in this image
http://www.heralddeparis.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/jes34-08-dec-2214.jpg
they've discovered Bespin, perhaps if we look hard enough we could see the Millenium Falcon on an outlying landing pad
:D

icerat
16th December 2009, 02:28 PM
I love the way that the "city" jumps from the ocean floor to the cloud tops in this image

It's a flying city! Just like Stargate Atlantis! What more proof do you need? :jaw-dropp

Marduk
16th December 2009, 02:34 PM
It's a flying city! Just like Stargate Atlantis! What more proof do you need? :jaw-dropp

I'd need a signed affadavit from Zechariah Sitchin or I just won't believe it
;)


you know Brandtc will be back soon spouting more unsupported psuedo history later on, so I'm going to post these here now to save time later
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/temperature/sealevel.150kyr.jpg
http://schools-wikipedia.org/images/439/43917.png
http://www.globalwarmingart.com/images/1/1e/Holocene_Sea_Level.png
and this one which may be especially relevant
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/p1T01RK7dmI&hl=en_GB&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/p1T01RK7dmI&hl=en_GB&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

This youtube vid was made using the most accurate inundation data known to man. By me in association with Proudman oceanographic labs
:p

Andrew Wiggin
16th December 2009, 10:11 PM
I can think of one underwater city in the carribean. Port Royal if I recall correctly, was the victim of a land slide, and is now underwater. It was rebuilt higher up. This isn't a mystery though, just a popular scuba diving site.

A

Correa Neto
17th December 2009, 02:31 AM
Pseudoarcheology as an argument against AGW...

OK, that's a new one...

Marduk
17th December 2009, 08:21 AM
Pseudoarcheology as an argument against AGW...

OK, that's a new one...

pseudoarchaeology against pseudoscience
it might just work
:p

shadron
17th December 2009, 11:41 AM
Given the depths the OP is throwing around (2300 feet) that wouldn’t be an explanation, indeed the only plausible explanation is that they are natural features not ruins. Sea level rise at the end of a glaciations can be ~250 feet, but clearly that would be long before the existence of any cities. In the last 6000 years before sea levels varied within a range of about 1 foot.

Agreed, though the OP cite in the OP said that this one was NOT the Russian-discovered ruins(?) located at 2300'.

ponderingturtle
17th December 2009, 11:50 AM
OK, I expect soon to see mentions to Atlantis and Cayce...

So did Atlantis cause enough global warming to end the last ice age?

Correa Neto
17th December 2009, 12:12 PM
Of course not.

Their power crystals caused no greenhouse gas level increase in the atmosphere.

Thus, sunken Atlantis means AGW is false.

Simple and logic, eh?

Marduk
17th December 2009, 01:07 PM
Atlantis had bull.s too
all that methane
:D

varwoche
17th December 2009, 01:32 PM
Whaddya know. I didn't think it was possible for a thread started by someone not named mhaze or poptech to discredit AGW skepticism so thoroughly. :boggled:

lomiller
17th December 2009, 01:34 PM
For all his issues, mhaze wouldn’t come up with something this goofy. Poptech on the other hand…

daenku32
17th December 2009, 03:10 PM
That's where Cthulhu is sleeping. Don't wake him up.

shadron
18th December 2009, 12:54 AM
That's where Cthulhu is sleeping. Don't wake him up.

Spoken with non-forked tongue.

Correa Neto
18th December 2009, 02:41 AM
Atlantis had bull.s too
all that methane
:D
Meh.

A handfull of sacred bulls plus a minotaur or two.

Aussies' sheep produce more methane.

Again, sunken Atlantis = no AGW.

Brilliant.

Mangoose
5th January 2010, 11:41 AM
A reader on Huffington Post (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/16/archaeologists-claim-they_n_394240.html?show_comment_id=36573131#commen t_36573131) wrote:


Mystery solved.

I work with satellite imagery and these patterns appear where the image is very low contrast (I could show you an example from the waters around Manhattan).The patterns are produced by noise in the sensor, exacerbated by compression/expansion and contrast stretching during post-processing. I actually spend quite a lot of time trying to get rid of them...

They are not to be confused with jpeg compression artifacts, which are not as linear/orthogonal. I've only seen these patterns from satellites using pushbroom-type scanning sensors.

And he provided this photo of a lost underwater city in the waters off Manhattan:

http://www.eurimage.com/tmp/Atlantis_NY.jpg

Trakar
5th January 2010, 12:03 PM
...Which is it??

"It" is not an "either"/"or" situation.

Trakar
5th January 2010, 12:17 PM
Given the depths the OP is throwing around (2300 feet) that wouldn’t be an explanation, indeed the only plausible explanation is that they are natural features not ruins. Sea level rise at the end of a glaciations can be ~250 feet, but clearly that would be long before the existence of any cities. In the last 6000 years before sea levels varied within a range of about 1 foot.

Could still be tectonic/fault related, possibly of more ancient origin, and possibly compounded by various glacial/interglacial events, and coincidentally, many natural tectonic event features can resemble archeological ruins/remains (evidence the Japanese underwater "temples").

Trakar
5th January 2010, 12:30 PM
In finishing the thread, and looking at several sets of the photos themselves, I'm trending more toward the imagery process artifact, with a strong potential for fabrication or "creative enhancement," though, as noted, however, there are volcanic/tectonic processes that can generate similar features.

Mister Earl
5th January 2010, 12:31 PM
These are all merely artifacts arising from bitmap compression. It's sickeningly obvious. There's no city there. It's just some nut who is out to make a fast buck, then disappear.

ben m
5th January 2010, 01:44 PM
There used to be a guy who claimed to be able to see a teeny-tiny civilization on the Moon, by zooming in on Apollo surface photos and seeing lots of squarish and pyramidal structures among the rocks underfoot.

Kahalachan
5th January 2010, 01:47 PM
I was hoping to see this. :(

WDqli9F0-m4