Posted on 12/19/2020 8:21:38 AM PST by Rakhi Sarkar
It’s Socrates
“On the video, a professor explains that the area was NOT under water 9,000 years ago...Lake Michigan was there, but this area was the coastal plain...The lake rose to it’s present level 3,500 years later...’
So sea levels rose and yet somehow life carried on just the same.
Neither did civilizations from 10,000 years ago, especially if they had to carry 1000 lb. boulders along with them. 10,000 years ago, the ice age was just receding. The melting glaciers would have raised the level of Lake Michigan, not lowered it. Most of lake Michigan had a couple of miles of thickness of ice covering it. The Ice might have lowered the level of the oceans, but it raised the water/ice levels where the glaciers were located. So how did these boulders get placed there? Methinks this story has not been well thought out.
Definitely fake news...
Archaeologists uncovered sunken boats and cars and even a Civil War-era pier at a depth of around 40 feet into Lake Michigan’s Grand Traverse Bay......
.......said Mark Holley, a professor of underwater archaeology at Northwestern Michigan University College who made the discovery, during a news conference with photos of the boulder on display in 2007.
_________________________
Hmmm.... Grand Traverse Bay borders right up against Antrim County where there has been a lot of recent election news. Odd that this story comes out at this time given the fact that the underwater photography is stated to be from 2007....
That is the first thing that came to mind for me as well.
No it doesn't - there are clear references to it in Sumerian tablets and elsewhere. Pretty much a consensus that as the glaciers shrunk there was a lot of water let loose in lots of places wreaking havoc.
Bad start to a post.
I believe it was Velikovsky who first proposed that theory.
caveman Keith ;D
I have had a long and deep fascination with shipwreaks from the Age of Steam and Sail. Jim Gibbs has some interesting books on the subject.
Did they find Jimmy Hoffa?
The common consensus is that history begins when people begin writing it down and try present both sides.
So Herodotus is considered the first "historian".
Ah. Thank you.
Who was it who put the “blogpimp” stuff in the keywords? humlegunner?
According to archaeology theories put forward by speculators, a cataclysmic event happened over 11,000 years ago where the Earth tilted on it's axis. Supposedly by something colliding with the Earth. It caused massive melting of a polar cap and flooded the Earth. Old human civilization was almost wiped out, along with most evidence of their culture except for the largest monolithic stone structures (pyramids, etc.). Land and seas changed dramatically. Ancient monolithic structures all over the world and their destruction date back to that time, and newer human groups built on top of those structures, although with inferior building practices. The old monoliths show signs of modern tooling for their creation, that we have yet to duplicate. Sounds very plausible.
On the other side of the stone it reads, “Kilroy was here.”
Are you kidding me??
The Great Flood, not ice cubes melting.
Science has denied the teachings of the Bible since science itself.
Also, please prove the earth was covered in glaciers.
That’s JUST a theory, just like ummmmm evolution, just like the Big Bang.
In order to believe science, one must exclude or disbelieve the Judaic, Christian beliefs.
Science teaches the earth is millions and millions years old.
My King James Bible says otherwise.
“Bad start to a post.” I don’t think so.
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.