Posted on 12/19/2020 8:21:38 AM PST by Rakhi Sarkar
Archaeologists found something much more fascinating than they got credit for when searching under the waters of Lake Michigan for shipwrecks: they uncovered a rock with a prehistoric carving of a mastodon, as well as a collection of stones arranged in a Stonehenge-like manner.
(Excerpt) Read more at archaeology-world.com ...
It’s got those modern zebra mussels all over it.
That dating sounds a little suspect.
That looks to me like two elephants making love to a men’s glee club. -HT Woody Allen
Those aren’t rocks.
Glaciers were still covering much of northern North America 11,700 years ago, so there was not much of a Lake Michigan then. So human settlement could have existed then on the land now covered by Lake Michigan.
But by 9,000 years ago Lake Michigan was nearly as big as it is now.
Then, 7,000 years ago Lake Michigan was not as filled in as it is today.
Instead of the find having a date of origin of 9,000 years ago, I suspect it is either older than 9,000 years ago, or somewhere in the 7,000 years old range, or younger than 7,000 but before the current extent of the waters of Lake Michigan.
On one hand, science ignores the Great Flood.
On the other hand, science says the Great Lakes were dry or much smaller so the land mass was larger, about 12,000 or so years ago.
With a larger land mass, or shore line, the people would live near water.
Home (huts) or whatever would be where the Lakes now extend. So a mini Stonehenge that was built on land is now under 40 feet of water.
Of course, as a Christian I believe the Great Flood indeed happen and did cover the Earth. As waters recessed we’re left with the Lakes in their present sizes and shapes.
Of course EVERYTHING discovered here in Michigan the Native Americans claim it’s from their ancestors.
But there have been interesting discoveries made that never have been found to be done by Native Americans.
A Stonehenge structure is purely Anglo-Saxon, Pict, Celt.
The Natives can shove it, they can’t claim this as it would be a first for them. Ever! Anywhere!
Wait a sec...
Climate change?
Whoa. That's some fast rising water. Did the professor on video explain where all that water came from?
Watch the video..............
The article is confusing - first it says 9,000 years old (or 7,000 BC) then it says at least 10,000 (or 8,000 BC) without saying how they determined the age of either the boulder or the formation. This is an old discovery - not new.
Both dates are after the 10,800 BC (12,800 years ago) comet strikes and the end of the Younger Dryas Age when the ice had reformed and was melting - so its possible (stretching here) that (without knowing were in the lake these things are) that that part was dry for long enough for some one to erect the formation and make the crude carving.
Either that or they are both much older than 10,800 BC having been made at some point during the Ice Age when the Wisconsin Sheet had not retreated too far, but just far enough to expose dry land before more ice melted and the area went under water.
There are other odd things on the bottom of the lakes as I recall.
a bit speculative but interesting! Did not know the Great Lakes were not so great just 5000 years ago.
But hey, the climate changes all by itself.
9,000 years from now, scientists will be astonished to discover prehistoric voting machines.
The article is poorly written and poorly edited. So much so, that I wonder if its original language wasn’t English.
When does prehistory end and history begin?
As opposed to golden oldies?
These are archaeology scientists not sentence writing scientists.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.