Re: Confirmed: Pre-flood giants of Bolivia wrote proto Sumerian.

On Aug 31, 6:57 am, Eric Stevens <eric.stev...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, 30 Aug 2007 20:55:46 -0700, rick_so...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Aug 31, 4:42 am, The Kat <ne...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, 30 Aug 2007 20:13:37 -0700, rick_so...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
The pieces are all coming together now.

ONLY if you're a complete dumbass.

Oh puhleese, you can't make evidence go away just like that.

The facts are there for all to see, and that's just the tip of the
iceberg.

The history books will have to be rewritten, but that is progress.

The recent data which has falsified plate tectonic theory such as the
remains of Tarascosaurus found in France clearly shows that

1. The Pangea theory is completely wrong.
2. There is no Laurasia.
3. There is/was no Godswanaland
4. There was no Tethys Sea.

rather the earth has expanded as is clearly shown by merely removing
the rock in the ocean floor in stages according to age as is shown in
this animation...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJfBSc6e7QQ&mode=related&search=

How do the supporters of this theory explain how the tectonic plates
avoided tearing when they flattened out to accomodate themselves to an
earth of increasingly large diameter?

Never mind. It has absolutely nothing to do with archaeology as far as
I can see.



and recent data by Louis Franks of the university of Iowa confirms
that ice and snow from space is entering the atmosphere and in all
probability was responsible for the Tunguska event, and for the
knocking down of woolly mammoth left to freeze with grass in their
mouths, and for the ice ages themselves, as the earth traversed
through areas of space where the ice and snow rained onto it in great
shall we say catastrophic amounts.
Sufficient amounts to plunge the earth, into a deep freeze.

http://smallcomets.physics.uiowa.edu/pdf/
http://smallcomets.physics.uiowa.edu/

Eric Stevens

It has everything to do with archeology because dating artifacts is a
tricky business and so knowing how the whole process works is
important.

A city discovered at 2,100 feet below the ocean, that is archeology.
Explaining how it got there, well you tell me how it got there, when
it is intact, not crumbled, covers an area of 7 sq. km and the ground
it is sitting on, could only have sunk at a maximum rate of 16 cm per
year. There is no evidence in the entire world of any area sinking
faster than that. That is based on the fastest known decent in the
entire world. And that pegs it at 50,000 years old.
More realistically it is 1.3 million years old.

Oh sure people want to plug their ears and close their eyes and just
make it go away, but this is not an out of place and time artifact.
This is a city.
With columns, which contain clear markings. Man made markings like the
South American cross.

Why do I say possibly 1.3 million years old? Well it seems that it may
not have sunk, since it is in a geologically stable area and the
ground is not disturbed. The side scan radar shows that the streets
are still parallel, the buildings square to each other etc.

And so then the only other option is that the ocean rose 2,100 feet
since it was built.

And so then what other supporting evidence do we have for a
civilization 1.3 million years old in the region?

How about footprints in volcanic rock, dated 1.3 mya in Mexico, along
side footprints of dogs cats and farm animals?
How do you explain that in context with Mesopotamia as center of the
universe?

"But Paul Renne, director of the Berkeley Geochronology Center and an
adjunct professor of earth and planetary science at UC Berkeley, and
his colleagues in Mexico and at Texas A&M University report in the
Dec. 1 issue of Nature a new age for the rock: about 1.3 million
years.

"You're really only left with two possibilities," Renne said. "One is
that they are really old hominids - shockingly old - or they're not
footprints."

Well if they are not foot prints, then why do they look like
footprints? Are we now going to say, that just because they are
hominid footprints, that they can't be what they look like?

Then why don't we say that the dog and cat prints are not dog and cat
prints and the dinosaur prints we find everywhere are not dinosaur
prints either.

Take a look at the prints. They are human footprints.
http://www.mexicanfootprints.co.uk/


http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2005-11/uoc--a4h112805.php

.

Relevant Pages

  • Footprints on the expanding earth
    ... is familiar with the "so-called footprints" and knows Renne ... Its possibly getting sucked into the core region as the earth expands ... And the expansion of the earth and all matter all planetary bodies all ... makes it easier for the planet to expand. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Confirmed: Pre-flood giants of Bolivia wrote proto Sumerian.
    ... mouths, and for the ice ages themselves, as the earth traversed ... How about footprints in volcanic rock, dated 1.3 mya in Mexico, along ... Then why don't we say that the dog and cat prints are not dog and cat ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: it is impossible to explain everything without intellegnet design
    ... There is no way the earth could be this old becuase the sun ... "There are human footprints along side with dinosaur footprints". ... are well schooled in earth history and geology. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: JLA 117 more questions
    ... And there were footprints in the brain! ... Plus flamethrower residues that the GREATEST detectives on Earth ...
    (rec.arts.comics.dc.universe)
  • Re: Confirmed: Pre-flood giants of Bolivia wrote proto Sumerian.
    ... How about footprints in volcanic rock, dated 1.3 mya in Mexico, along ... interpret to say 'dogs cats and farm animals' and not 'bears, wolves, big ... Then why don't we say that the dog and cat prints are not dog and cat ...
    (sci.archaeology)