Welcome to the Wild Heretic forum where ideas are explored and information is linked so that hopefully all of us will have a clearer and better understanding of the world we live in. (When uploading avatars, make sure to resize them first by using a website such as this one - http://resizepic.com/. Max dimensions are 120 x 120 pixels.)

New members must first INTRODUCE THEMSELVES in the introduce yourself thread below if they want to post replies and start threads. If more than a couple of days have past after posting on the introduce yourself thread, and you still can't start threads, pm me. Either I've been away, or I have overlooked your introduction and forgotten to add you to the approved list.

Mud flood in the 19th century?

Anything and everything to do with concave earth theory and the glass sky, and what is wrong with the other models.
User avatar

Wild Heretic
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1071
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 10:17 am
Location: Ireland
Contact:

Re: Mud flood in the 19th century?

Postby Wild Heretic » Thu Nov 09, 2017 6:09 pm

Okay, the Med. Where do we start as there is too much under the sea and under the earth as it is.

Let's start with Israel. As this one is atop a mountain! Not kidding.

Decapolis
There are a series of 10 biblical "cities" in the Mediterean Middle East that have been grouped together but are really independent. One of these "cities" overlooks the Sea of Galilee and is atop Susita Mountain in Israel and was called Antiochia Hippos. Looks more like a small town than a city.

Image
Image

Among the excavated remains are toppled columns and damaged structures, evidence of a violent earthquake that destroyed the city in 749 CE. It was the end of Antiochia Hippos. Its citizens abandoned it, never to return.

http://popular-archaeology.com/issue/fa ... roman-city

I bet it was. Look where it is:
Image
Image
Image

That's the Sea of Galilee a few km away in the background.


The homepage has a lot of photos.
http://hippos.haifa.ac.il/

Check out the size of the mortared masonry. It was huge in some parts.
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set ... 466&type=3

Image

That wall looks like it has become part of the mountain. Now, that is a very bad landslide.

A lot of the masonry has been utterly destroyed. This was a real earth moving event it seems.
Image

There looks to have been a wall around the town too.
Image

The question is why did they build a town on the top of a mountain far away from the lake? It makes no sense. Where did they get their water from? The aerial photo shows quite a difficult road in and out. This means transport, waste, food, water, trade was difficult to access. This makes no sense. If you look at Switzerland for example all their towns are in valleys because that is where the fertile fields are and the water and the easy access in and out etc. Plus it is much easier to build in a valley. How did they get all those blocks up the mountain for construction? Seems very arduous.

I would have expected the town to have been located at the shore of lake Gallilee for easy transport and fishing and water etc.

Established initially by the Seleucids as a Greco-Roman enclave, Antiochia Hippos once controlled two port facilities on the lake and its surrounding countryside.


Yeah, but it's nowhere near the lake now, is it? What's the bets that the town was actually located at the lake, but the earthquake was so huge as to move the lake away from the town so that it looks like it is on a mountain top? There are other examples of this in Italy.

The last interesting thing is that they think the town may have suffered two earthquakes centuries apart.

But excavators have recently uncovered evidence of another, earlier earthquake at Hippos. This one, occurring in 363 CE, left the city seriously damaged, but recoverable. During the last season of excavations the team uncovered a number of crushed human skeletal remains beneath a collapsed roof of the city Basilica, considered the largest structure of the city and the main public building and market center. Among the skeletal remains were those of a woman with a golden, dove-shaped pendant. The skeletons were dated to the earlier, 363 earthquake because of coins found between the Basilica floor and other architectural elements. At another location, they discovered evidence of the same earthquake destruction within a Roman bath complex.

The excavations have shown that Hippos underwent a period of rebuiding after the first, 363 CE earthquake, but there was a gap of about 20 years before reconstruction occurred in at least some sections of the city. This was indicated by dozens of coins found in Byzantine construction about three feet above the Roman Basilica remains dated to about 383 CE., with no intervening reconstruction. The bathhouse was never rebuilt at its original location but another bathhouse was built later about 500 ft north-east.


I'm not too sure about this. You can forget the actual dates, but they have put the two quakes about 1000 years apart. If they rebuilt some of the city then why did they leave the bodies under the market place and Basilica? They didn't reconstruct the Basilica and just left the bodies there to rot? Odd.

To date, they have unearthed a wealth of artifacts and an array of Hellenistic, Roman, Byzantine, and Ummayad structures spanning a period of a thousand years—from the 2nd century BCE to the 8th century CE.


But did it really span 1000 years? I'm not so sure. They are using a mainstream yardstick of "this structure belongs in this box" because other archeologists say so. The article tells us they only found one lot of coins to date so I'm not too sure about the two quake hypothesis here.

The bathhouse was never rebuilt at its original location but another bathhouse was built later about 500 ft north-east.


Maybe there were two bathhouses before the quake struck. Either way, all this is pretty unnerving.

Now let's have a quick look at Italy, then Turkey, France and North Africa.


"When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."

User avatar

EyeLevelHorizon
Hoax destroyer
Hoax destroyer
Posts: 173
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2015 1:32 pm
Location: Scotland
Contact:

Re: Mud flood in the 19th century?

Postby EyeLevelHorizon » Thu Nov 09, 2017 7:16 pm

EyeLevelHorizon wrote:sorry eyelevel. I have accidentally deleted this post. I thought I was replying to it and instead I clicked on the edit button. it didn't save your post in the cache.

oops.

Wild Heretic


Lol, a fat finger moment, no worries, got most of it saved on a word doc anyway 8-) . Will post it up later as I am on a different computer at moment.
John 21:25
And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written.

User avatar

Wild Heretic
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1071
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 10:17 am
Location: Ireland
Contact:

Re: Mud flood in the 19th century?

Postby Wild Heretic » Fri Nov 10, 2017 10:09 am

Wild Heretic wrote:You know the 1688 date comes back to me in another way. I used to have a German girlfriend who live in Benrath, Dusseldorf, Germany. I distinctly remember in the year 2000 they were digging out out/renovating/knocking down etc. two beautiful old houses which were situated around Benrather Marktplaz. The great thing was, both these houses had the dates of their construction above the front doorway and I remember one of them being 1680 something. The other I think was the same year but I am not sure. I am 90% sure the date was 1688.

Actually, the date would make sense as that Marktplatz was created between 1688 and 1691 (those two dates again! lol). Actually 1689 according this website.
1688 to 1691...dabei wird im zuge des festungsbaues 1689 auch die Stadttopographie durch Brandlegung verandert. Beim Neubau entstehen gerade Strassen, Rechtwinklige Bauquadrate und der Marktplatz.
Translation: At the same time, in the course of the fortress construction in 1689, the city's topography was changed by fire. In the new building, straight roads, rectangular building squares and the market place arise.

https://issuu.com/watsonkalender/docs/s ... chte_issuu

Mmm, the topography of Benrath was changed by fire eh? Hot stones from above? Are they sure it was a fire that caused the changes. I remember both houses were about 2 to 3 feet (1m) below the present street surface level (in the year 2000) and that the door heights were pretty low anyway, but the gorund still came up to about half the doorway height. Again, evidence of a flood, but no damage was done to the building much. I walked around inside haha. There was damage to the roof if I remember correctly. Perhaps Germany was far enough away from the major fault lines but still suffered some flooding. This also perhaps puts the megaquake in the year 1689. I still say it was 1688 though.

BTW, I can't find the two houses now. I looked on google maps and the houses are gone. There may be a chance that google earth can find them if I go back to the year 2000.

Ok, finally on to the Med sea area.


Something also just rang a bell. There is a well known tourist attraction in Solingen I think. I'll have to look it up. It is a fully intact medieval castle. Not kidding. Not in ruin at all. You take a cable car up the steep mountain slope to it. The other side of the castle is flat though and there is a small village the other other side where tourists get their coffee and cake etc.

I think it was Burg Solingen.
Image

Oh I tell a lie. It looks like the castle did get quaked after all.
In 1632 Swedish soldiers laid siege to the castle. After the Thirty years war, in 1648, Imperial troops destroyed the fortifications of the castle including the keep, walls, and gates. In 1700, the main building was partially reconstructed and subsequently used for administrative purposes. 1849, the castle was sold to be scrapped, decayed, and became a ruin... Today’s appearance does not exactly match the condition documented by Erich Philipp Ploennies at about 1715.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burg_Castle_(Solingen)#Restoration

1700 is the right date. I'm in doubt it was any Swedish troops that destroyed the castle, rather the quake of 88; and they then decided to reconstruct a part of it 12 years later. It's hard to say without seeing any sketches pre-1700. Although I could be wrong and German fortifications withstood the quake better. I have a feeling Germany didn't suffer as much as Holland, Ireland and the UK. Coastal France and Spain were very badly hit too I think. I know the German build quality is better than these countries which may have helped.

The two 17th century houses (large cottages) in Benrather Marktplatz, Duesselfdorf could have been renovated by an experienced builder and lived in today . Only the roof was quite of bit damaged in parts if I remember right. It had a real "Hansel and Gretel" feel to the building. I'm amazed the local authorities didn't rennovate them and set them up as a tourist attraction. Ireland would have done for sure. In fact there is one of these "villages" at the foot of a ruined castle in Ireland. The village is a complete reconstruction. The Irish know how to milk the tourist dollar.

If those 2 houses only experienced a bit of major flooding and withstood the earthquake then it stands to reason that a lot of the German people survived the great quake of 1688. It might have been just the flood that killed.

Something else popped into my head. 18th century canals, said to have been built for industry during the industrial revolution to transport goods up and down the country. Notice that Ireland, the UK, France and Holland all have extensive canal systems (same for parts of the United States as well I think and St Petersburg Russia). Could they have served a dual purpose of draining the surrounding land which may have still been a bit marshy? Other countries had industrial revolutions (albeit a touch later) yet never built canals, such as Poland? Germany does have a few canals I believe but they are much less extensive than the UK and Ireland and very localised. E.g. Elbe–Havel Cana. These canals are connected to rivers and so would most certainly help drainage.

Also, as Eyelevel pointed out, was the industrial revolution itself necessary to get goods produced? Was mechanisation a solution to a dire labour shortage due to the quake/flood wiping most of the population out?

Another thing - the "every sperm is sacred" theme of Catholicism (no birth control and sex only when married) may have been a necessary administrative policy in the 18th century to repopulate the area after the quake wipeout. I also remember reading somewhere that medieval people were real randy buggers according to a lot of very olde English texts and had it away so to speak quite often outside marriage. This would also tie in with the "Roman Orgy" theme and sex pictures on the wall and as statutes in Pompeii etc. Pre-1688 life may have been more hedonistic. Both Islam and Churchianity may have had to have been heavily sold in the 18th century to get the population back to normal levels in a few generations. Every village then had a priest and a church etc.

Of course, since the 1950s they want most people dead. I wouldn't bother NWO, the next quake/flood will do it for you, especially if it hits at night like the last one.
"When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."

User avatar

EyeLevelHorizon
Hoax destroyer
Hoax destroyer
Posts: 173
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2015 1:32 pm
Location: Scotland
Contact:

Re: Mud flood in the 19th century?

Postby EyeLevelHorizon » Fri Nov 10, 2017 12:43 pm

EyeLevelHorizon wrote:
EyeLevelHorizon wrote:sorry eyelevel. I have accidentally deleted this post. I thought I was replying to it and instead I clicked on the edit button. it didn't save your post in the cache.

oops.

Wild Heretic


Lol, a fat finger moment, no worries, got most of it saved on a word doc anyway 8-) . Will post it up later as I am on a different computer at moment.


Repost:

Seriously great finds WH. Thank you.

The 1687/91 date range is very interesting. Was thinking about the Battle Of the Boyne and how it fits in last night, but you answered it already lol. Yeah, a faction of the European mainland powers coming over to a post-apocalyptic Britain, as a survival motivation and others to rule over the survivors and do a land grab makes a lot of sense. Also fits in nicely with the chain of command we see today like you were saying.

I went to a few of the old castle/church ruins in Scotland recently. One church was in Gullane (East coast of Scotland).

Image

“There has been a church in the village since the ninth century. The ruins of the Old Church of St. Andrew built in the twelfth century can still be seen at the western entrance to the village; the church was abandoned after a series of sandstorms made it unusable, and Dirleton Parish Church took its place.”


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gullane

Yep, sandstorms. Supposedly in 1612. There were graves in the chapel, but they were flat in the ground and any writing on them had faded. Outside, the oldest one I could see was 1761:

Image

Another was in Lesmahagow (Central Belt of Scotland).

Image

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lesmahagow_Priory

“Lesmahagow Priory, founded by Benedictine monks in 1144, no longer stands but its foundations were excavated in 1978 and can be seen next to the Old Parish Church off Church Square.”

“Lesmahagow Priory was a medieval Tironensian monastic community located in modern South Lanarkshire, Scotland. It was founded after John, Bishop of Glasgow and King David I of Scotland granted lands at Lesmahagow to Kelso Abbey with which to establish a new priory. It remained a dependency of Kelso Abbey. Control of the abbey was gradually secularized in the 16th century. Along with Kelso Abbey, it was turned into a secular lordship in 1607 for Robert Ker of Cesford, later earl of Roxburghe. Lesmahagow however passed into the hand of James Hamilton, 2nd Marquess of Hamilton in 1623.”


Perhaps it was an old chapel, but maybe something else. Nevertheless, there is a graveyard there too. Oldest grave I could see was 1622 ot 1629:

Image

As for buildings being destroyed by fire, what about the Great fire of London, 1666?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Fire_of_London

The Great Fire of London was a major conflagration that swept through the central parts of the English city of London from Sunday, 2 September to Wednesday, 5 September 1666.[1] The fire gutted the medieval City of London inside the old Roman city wall. It threatened but did not reach the aristocratic district of Westminster, Charles II's Palace of Whitehall, and most of the suburban slums.[2] It consumed 13,200 houses, 87 parish churches, St Paul's Cathedral, and most of the buildings of the City authorities. It is estimated to have destroyed the homes of 70,000 of the City's 80,000 inhabitants.[3]

The death toll is unknown but traditionally thought to have been small, as only six verified deaths were recorded. This reasoning has recently been challenged on the grounds that the deaths of poor and middle-class people were not recorded, while the heat of the fire may have cremated many victims, leaving no recognisable remains.


The writers are jokers, aren’t they? Nearly 90% of homes are destroyed in a city with supposed 500,000 population and only 6 dead. Lol.

The fire that caused this devastation supposedly “started at the bakers” and “spread rapidly”! Lol.
John 21:25
And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written.

User avatar

Wild Heretic
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1071
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 10:17 am
Location: Ireland
Contact:

Re: Mud flood in the 19th century?

Postby Wild Heretic » Fri Nov 10, 2017 2:51 pm

SPACE wrote:I was in several Russian cities, if walk in central part, old city, there's feeling, that street is higher, than houses around. Sometimes windows half in the ground, or, if you go close to the house, there's breach between house and street about 3 meters deep. Ans especially visible, when they do street repair, uncover 3 layers, floors underground. I think in Russia it happened in last 200 years, in Europe I heard about plaques.
Thanks @Freezetime26, because more about history we can know only from noble families.
I think human or humans are like car. They can remember factory (birth, parents), but no way they can remember constructor, who with pencil draw on paper project of the car.
Bible is like helping hand, when human gets lost, it can help sometimes. Science cannot answer all questions, it's like Creation vs Evolution.


Video evidence supports your observations space.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X58paJkwk4M

He is wrong about the 19th century though. A video from Newearth showed an illustration from 1715 showing a building in St Petersburg with the exact same windows-below-ground-level phenomenon. I can't find the video now but it is there. She also said that Venice never used to have canals, as the floor of the canals is cobbled stone, i.e. streets. I can't find that video either as it was a passing comment. I would love to see the evidence for that. That too would fit would the great quake/flood of 1688.
"When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."

User avatar

Wild Heretic
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1071
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 10:17 am
Location: Ireland
Contact:

Re: Mud flood in the 19th century?

Postby Wild Heretic » Fri Nov 10, 2017 3:57 pm

Found this guy on youtube with some explosive stuff. He's right for the most part. He shows a lot of good evidence for a bad flood, especially the second video. Bascially he shows buried buildings in rubble, like that wall in Israel, that were made of wood and buried by silt. The wood just petrified in the silt (clay) and baked in the sun in the aftermath.

This explains another mystery I could never get my head around. There are never any trees in these areas desolate areas. It always a really dry area, deserty or scrub. I was thinking no civilisation could or would have a city here. You need water, fields, farms etc. The reason there are no trees is because the massive flooding took away all the trees and all the vegetation and just left silt (clay) behind which then baked in the Sun

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_fRliKpZgw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMv_uCQ-zDQ

The second video is the best and makes perfect sense. Modern building methods are the same as the "ancient" ones. He also makes a great point that these structures can't be that old as you can see a lot of the surface of these rocks are plaster which doesn't last that long. I love that obvious observation that the so-called tombs buried in sand in Egypt are nothing but buried houses. He points out attics and bathrooms with even fitted pipes.

This is obviously a pre-1688 Egyptian bathhouse, or a wealthy man's indoor pool area. That is an indoor pool. You can see the steps going down into it. The entire building is built out of concrete as well as the pool. It isn't an electric insulated wire going down the side of the wall, it is a water pipe! There is another to the left nearly just out of the picture. These will be hot water pipes feeding the indoor bathing pool. As the narator says, they took the tub out of the wall from the other room, smashed up the pool floor, and newly concreted the tub to the pool floor. It is so obviously newly concreted at the bottom. The fact that they have destroyed and "amended" historically important artefacts shows their true true regard and respect for "history". These guys would sell their grandmothers to feed their family. They have no shame and are super dangerous lowly creatures. Beware the Egyptian archeologist! The destroyers of real histories.

Image

I always wondered where the actual "ancient" Egyptian cities and towns were that made the pyramids. You can't have a few pyramids, a sphinx, and a few tombs and call it a civilisation lol. Totally ridiculous. You have to have lots and lots of houses and then the momuments like the pyramids. Now we know where the houses are. There must be 1000s and 1000s of them buried under the Saharan sand, and the few that have been discovered have been mislabelled "tombs" lol.

Again "ancient" my arse. 1688 is looking better and better. And it sure looks like pre-1688 Egypt was inundated with an absolutely huge and overwhelming Mediterranean Tsunami that buried all their towns and cities in sand. In fact, here is a thought for the day, what if the entire Sahara desert and perhaps other deserts too are the result of mega Ocean Tsunamis? Definitely worth looking into.

Interesting comment from "Zal Moxis" under the above Youtube (part 2) video.
Hey Wise up I forgot to tell you something interesting about the Egyptians... The Australian aboriginal elders state emphatically that the Egyptians would come to Australia to learn from the clever fellas only until 400 years ago. The last of them were speared on Balmoral Beach in Sydney for stealing a power rock from central Australia....


400 years ago is early 17th century lol.

A real eye-opener. Clarity at last. We are getting there. We can finally step away from the organised bullshit.
"When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."


Topic author
Freezetime26
Initiate
Initiate
Posts: 32
Joined: Sat May 27, 2017 1:05 pm

Re: Mud flood in the 19th century?

Postby Freezetime26 » Fri Nov 10, 2017 9:26 pm

Wild Heretic wrote:
Wild Heretic wrote:You know the 1688 date comes back to me in another way. I used to have a German girlfriend who live in Benrath, Dusseldorf, Germany. I distinctly remember in the year 2000 they were digging out out/renovating/knocking down etc. two beautiful old houses which were situated around Benrather Marktplaz. The great thing was, both these houses had the dates of their construction above the front doorway and I remember one of them being 1680 something. The other I think was the same year but I am not sure. I am 90% sure the date was 1688.

Actually, the date would make sense as that Marktplatz was created between 1688 and 1691 (those two dates again! lol). Actually 1689 according this website.
1688 to 1691...dabei wird im zuge des festungsbaues 1689 auch die Stadttopographie durch Brandlegung verandert. Beim Neubau entstehen gerade Strassen, Rechtwinklige Bauquadrate und der Marktplatz.
Translation: At the same time, in the course of the fortress construction in 1689, the city's topography was changed by fire. In the new building, straight roads, rectangular building squares and the market place arise.

https://issuu.com/watsonkalender/docs/s ... chte_issuu

Mmm, the topography of Benrath was changed by fire eh? Hot stones from above? Are they sure it was a fire that caused the changes. I remember both houses were about 2 to 3 feet (1m) below the present street surface level (in the year 2000) and that the door heights were pretty low anyway, but the gorund still came up to about half the doorway height. Again, evidence of a flood, but no damage was done to the building much. I walked around inside haha. There was damage to the roof if I remember correctly. Perhaps Germany was far enough away from the major fault lines but still suffered some flooding. This also perhaps puts the megaquake in the year 1689. I still say it was 1688 though.

BTW, I can't find the two houses now. I looked on google maps and the houses are gone. There may be a chance that google earth can find them if I go back to the year 2000.

Ok, finally on to the Med sea area.


Something also just rang a bell. There is a well known tourist attraction in Solingen I think. I'll have to look it up. It is a fully intact medieval castle. Not kidding. Not in ruin at all. You take a cable car up the steep mountain slope to it. The other side of the castle is flat though and there is a small village the other other side where tourists get their coffee and cake etc.

I think it was Burg Solingen.
Image

Oh I tell a lie. It looks like the castle did get quaked after all.
In 1632 Swedish soldiers laid siege to the castle. After the Thirty years war, in 1648, Imperial troops destroyed the fortifications of the castle including the keep, walls, and gates. In 1700, the main building was partially reconstructed and subsequently used for administrative purposes. 1849, the castle was sold to be scrapped, decayed, and became a ruin... Today’s appearance does not exactly match the condition documented by Erich Philipp Ploennies at about 1715.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burg_Castle_(Solingen)#Restoration

1700 is the right date. I'm in doubt it was any Swedish troops that destroyed the castle, rather the quake of 88; and they then decided to reconstruct a part of it 12 years later. It's hard to say without seeing any sketches pre-1700. Although I could be wrong and German fortifications withstood the quake better. I have a feeling Germany didn't suffer as much as Holland, Ireland and the UK. Coastal France and Spain were very badly hit too I think. I know the German build quality is better than these countries which may have helped.

The two 17th century houses (large cottages) in Benrather Marktplatz, Duesselfdorf could have been renovated by an experienced builder and lived in today . Only the roof was quite of bit damaged in parts if I remember right. It had a real "Hansel and Gretel" feel to the building. I'm amazed the local authorities didn't rennovate them and set them up as a tourist attraction. Ireland would have done for sure. In fact there is one of these "villages" at the foot of a ruined castle in Ireland. The village is a complete reconstruction. The Irish know how to milk the tourist dollar.

If those 2 houses only experienced a bit of major flooding and withstood the earthquake then it stands to reason that a lot of the German people survived the great quake of 1688. It might have been just the flood that killed.

Something else popped into my head. 18th century canals, said to have been built for industry during the industrial revolution to transport goods up and down the country. Notice that Ireland, the UK, France and Holland all have extensive canal systems (same for parts of the United States as well I think and St Petersburg Russia). Could they have served a dual purpose of draining the surrounding land which may have still been a bit marshy? Other countries had industrial revolutions (albeit a touch later) yet never built canals, such as Poland? Germany does have a few canals I believe but they are much less extensive than the UK and Ireland and very localised. E.g. Elbe–Havel Cana. These canals are connected to rivers and so would most certainly help drainage.

Also, as Eyelevel pointed out, was the industrial revolution itself necessary to get goods produced? Was mechanisation a solution to a dire labour shortage due to the quake/flood wiping most of the population out?

Another thing - the "every sperm is sacred" theme of Catholicism (no birth control and sex only when married) may have been a necessary administrative policy in the 18th century to repopulate the area after the quake wipeout. I also remember reading somewhere that medieval people were real randy buggers according to a lot of very olde English texts and had it away so to speak quite often outside marriage. This would also tie in with the "Roman Orgy" theme and sex pictures on the wall and as statutes in Pompeii etc. Pre-1688 life may have been more hedonistic. Both Islam and Churchianity may have had to have been heavily sold in the 18th century to get the population back to normal levels in a few generations. Every village then had a priest and a church etc.

Of course, since the 1950s they want most people dead. I wouldn't bother NWO, the next quake/flood will do it for you, especially if it hits at night like the last one.


"Of course, since the 1950s they want most people dead. I wouldn't bother NWO, the next quake/flood will do it for you, especially if it hits at night like the last one." Yeah, this reminds me of another post where you said that every certain time, a great cataclysm happens in the earth, to end a cycle (The flood for example), maybe every 1000 years?. However, i think we are close to another cataclysm, everything ties up with the end of times prophecy.


Topic author
Freezetime26
Initiate
Initiate
Posts: 32
Joined: Sat May 27, 2017 1:05 pm

Re: Mud flood in the 19th century?

Postby Freezetime26 » Fri Nov 10, 2017 9:32 pm

Another mistery is where are the old forests? the giant trees? if the earth is supposedly to be millions of years old there has to be at least a bunch of this old trees.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0TdGlIeGPY This guy talks about it, his videos are very informative.


Topic author
Freezetime26
Initiate
Initiate
Posts: 32
Joined: Sat May 27, 2017 1:05 pm

Re: Mud flood in the 19th century?

Postby Freezetime26 » Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:33 am

Wild Heretic wrote:Found this guy on youtube with some explosive stuff. He's right for the most part. He shows a lot of good evidence for a bad flood, especially the second video. Bascially he shows buried buildings in rubble, like that wall in Israel, that were made of wood and buried by silt. The wood just petrified in the silt (clay) and baked in the sun in the aftermath.

This explains another mystery I could never get my head around. There are never any trees in these areas desolate areas. It always a really dry area, deserty or scrub. I was thinking no civilisation could or would have a city here. You need water, fields, farms etc. The reason there are no trees is because the massive flooding took away all the trees and all the vegetation and just left silt (clay) behind which then baked in the Sun

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_fRliKpZgw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMv_uCQ-zDQ

The second video is the best and makes perfect sense. Modern building methods are the same as the "ancient" ones. He also makes a great point that these structures can't be that old as you can see a lot of the surface of these rocks are plaster which doesn't last that long.

Again "ancient" my arse. 1688 is looking better and better.

A real eye-opener. Clarity at last. We are getting there. We can finally step away from the organised bullshit.


"A real eye-opener. Clarity at last. We are getting there. We can finally step away from the organised bullshit." Yeah, thats what im thinking aswell, we just need to at least wake up some people, this is what every person on earth needs to know.

User avatar

Wild Heretic
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1071
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 10:17 am
Location: Ireland
Contact:

Re: Mud flood in the 19th century?

Postby Wild Heretic » Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:35 am

Ok, let's keep going. So much to write about. I had thought of a few other trains of connecting thought over the weekend but lost them now. I'm sure they'll come back to me.

I just want to come back to this aerial photo of the ruins near the Sea of Gallilee.
Image

You can see what looks like a lot of overflow on the right side of the mountain. It looks like silt has "poured" over the mountain top and then solidified in the heat of the sun. This points to massive flood waters form the sea of gallilee and then a huge retraction of the lake due to the earth buckling due to the earthquake(s) which has moved the shoreline and even created small mountains and large flood water drainage channels. Totally wild, but also totally devastating.
Image

I also want to go back to the Sahara desert. Remember when I said this in a previous post - "what if the entire Sahara desert and perhaps other deserts too are the result of mega Ocean Tsunamis?" Well, it looks like I am right. Look at this photo.
Image

Doesn't that look like a massive water innudation that swept over the desert leaving behind the sand from the ocean bottom?

Here is an interesting video of the Sahara.
https://youtu.be/qXM6_gb-WUI

I see a lot of water erosion on the rocks here. Look at these still shots from the above video of the Sahara:
Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

There is water still flowing through this one. It looks a lot like the Grand Canyon.

Image
Image
Notice how the above images show rock erosion as if from water waves.

Wave-cut bench, Sunset Bay, Oregon
Image
http://marlimillerphoto.com/coastalE.html

There are more images showing what looks like water erosion.
Image
Image
Image
Image

A lot of the above photos look like sea stacks.

Italian Coast
Image
https://10mosttoday.com/10-most-amazing ... the-world/

Iceland
Image

Unknown
Image

Pacific Coast
Image
http://olympicnationalparkvisitor.info/ ... ea-stacks/

Oregon, USA
Image
http://marlimillerphoto.com/coastalE.html

Now look at this picture of the Sahara from the above video.
Image

That looks a bit like pebbles on a beach.
Image

And then there are the water drainage channels in the Sahara which you can see in the background. Is that an old ruined wall on top of a mountain behind that man's back?
Image

Water drainage on a beach, aka sand runnels (mmm... similiar to the Grand canal drainage channels)
Image

Notice a lot of Saharan rock has the same rock stratification as sea stacks. A massive amount of Ocean swept over north Africa in 1688 buring anythng that wasn't on a mountain.
"When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."

User avatar

Wild Heretic
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1071
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 10:17 am
Location: Ireland
Contact:

Re: Mud flood in the 19th century?

Postby Wild Heretic » Mon Nov 13, 2017 5:14 pm

There's more evidence for the Sahara Tsunami.... oh boy, a lot more. Too late to fully go into this today, but I've got a LOT to write and show tomorrow. You won't believe what I've found.

Here is a video to keep you going about the strange things found in the Sahara:
https://youtu.be/wud7BP3Stho

Edit: I'll work on this topic tomorrow 15 Nov 2017 as I've too much going on today. All i can say is that I've found near absolute proof, or very good evidence, that the Sahara Desert was formed between 1662 and 1780... aka 1688.

Edit: Sadly other work has overflowed into today so I will resume this thread on Thur 16 Nov.
"When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."

User avatar

Wild Heretic
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1071
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 10:17 am
Location: Ireland
Contact:

Re: Mud flood in the 19th century?

Postby Wild Heretic » Thu Nov 16, 2017 1:29 pm

Alright, I'm back in business for a couple of days. This subject is MEGA, and all thanks to the poster Space and his observation of no gravestones pre-1700.

Let's look at some of the points mentioned in the above video on strange things in the Sahara. This will then lead on to the cause of the great quake of 88 and further verification of its timing.

I didn't know there were Nubian pyramids much further south in the Sahara. They look to be of lower build quality than the Egytian ones and smaller. Their location is right on the edge of the Sahara desert in Sudan.
Image

This would have been nearish to the end of the massive tsunami as it swept over north Africa and so we expect the sands here to be quite shallow compared to the depths of desert sand further north which have been estimated at around 150m. These pyramids do bear this out. Despite some excavation and silly reconstruction (why bother really?) you can see what the depths of the sand had been in the photos below. Only a few metres deep.

Image
Image
Image

Here are a couple of sketches from 1821 showing little sand.
Image
Image
http://archive.is/WLl9O

Some pyramids are quite extensively damaged. All damage is top-down showing evidence of a bad earthquake.
Image

Although the flooding was still very bad here with the water probably covering the tops of the pyrmaids, the force was a lot less than what hit north Africa which seems to have been "Apocolypse now" stuff.

Next up, an oasis around the extinct volcano Waw an Namus in the middle of Lybia.
Image

When the charge bolts (lightning) hit the earth in 1688 the pressure of the earth was released in certain spots; this being one of them. The lava flow or ash or whatever came out of the earth here would have rapidly cooled as the apocolypse tsunami washed over it. There are some more pictures here:
http://www.theinfolist.com/php/SummaryGet.php?FindGo=Waw_an_Namus

Now we would expect the water around this volcano to be saltwater as it comes from the aftermath of the 1688 Mediterrean tsunami... and it is.

The inside of the caldera houses an oasis of rich foliage and three small salt lakes of variable color which are the reason for the volcano's name. A volcanic field of dark basaltic tephra flow extends 10–20 kilometres (6.2–12.4 mi) around the caldera. The dark field's vast size allows it to be easily seen from space.

http://www.theinfolist.com/php/SummaryG ... w_an_Namus

Another pressure release was the Tibesti mountains.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tibesti_Mountains

The central third of the Tibesti is of volcanic origin and consists of five shield volcanoes topped by large craters: Emi Koussi, Tarso Toon, Tarso Voon, Tarso Yega and Toussidé. Major lava flows have formed vast plateaus that overlie Paleozoic sandstone. The volcanic activity was the result of a continental hotspot that arose during the Oligocene and continued in some places until the Holocene [greatquake of 1688], creating fumaroles, hot springs, mud pools and deposits of natron and sulfur. Erosion [from the Tsunami] has shaped volcanic spires and carved an extensive network of canyons through which run rivers subject to highly irregular flows that are rapidly lost to the desert sands.


In fact, Africa has the biggest continental rift system in the world. A continental rift is:
A long, narrow fissure in the earth marking a zone of the lithosphere that has become thinner because tectonic plates underlying the region have moved away from one other.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/continental+rift

This author has made that discovery. But not only that, this giant rift is part of several rift systems in Africa "tearing the continent apart". Now what could do that? This is looking like Africa was ground zero in 1688 and hit by several unbelieveably huge charge strikes the modern world has never seen before.

In my last article I wrote about the Turkana, volcanism that is part of the Great African Rift. But unbeknownst to most this is just one of several rift systems in Africa that are tearing the continent apart.

In this article we will be making an initial contact with an even larger, younger and far less understood rift system that over time will spell the end of what we know and understand today to be the African continent.

This rift system is so large that we will have to walk through it country by country, but in the end we will see how it is connecting well known large volcanic features at the very outer ends of this huge continent creating the largest continuous volcanic system on earth if you do not count the Mid Atlantic Rift.

Now, how big is big? Well, without going into detail the volcanic rift system starts at Etna and Pantelleria in the north and goes all the way down to the Cameroon Volcanic Line and from the Red Sea in the East all across Northern Africa well past Chad to the West edges of the continent.

As at pretty much every other large rift system it is where two different rifts intersect you get the largest scale volcanism, or were the rift volcanism is affected by a mantleplume. In Libya there is one major triple-junction were the main north to south rift transects a local East to West rift.

What I find so interesting with the volcanism here is that it is so badly studied and poorly understood, even though it may in all fairness be the world’s largest volcanic system.

http://www.volcanocafe.org/the-forgotte ... -of-libya/

Image

The earthquake(s) that caused the north Afircan Tsunami, which created the Sahara desert, tore Africa apart along these rifts. There are 150 volcanoes in the Al Harujarea of Lybia alone!

And there is even further proof of massive flooding. Remember I said above that "The lava flow or ash or whatever came out of the earth here would have rapidly cooled as the apocolypse tsunami washed over it."

The type of lava to erupt from these volcanoes is called "flood basalt".
Libya has two Holocene volcanoes, one of which is on the local rift. It is the 45 000 square kilometer Al Haruj Al Abiyad flood basalt center. During the last 6 million years it has erupted in an extended series of rifting fissure eruptions with an average length of 60 kilometers per rift event.

The average size of eruptions is roughly twice that of the far more famous Lakí eruption giving an average of 30 cubic kilometers per eruption. Since Al Haruj has been active in the Holocene this makes it likely that the last eruption rivaled the Thjorhsahraun commonly thought of as the largest Holocene flood basalt... The lavas are mainly alkaline basalts or alkali hawaiinites with a high degree of fluidity.

http://www.volcanocafe.org/the-forgotte ... -of-libya/

Flood basalts have theorized to be caused by:
One proposed explanation for flood basalts is that they are caused by the combination of continental rifting and its associated decompression melting, in conjunction with a mantle plume also undergoing decompression melting, producing vast quantities of a tholeiitic basaltic magma. These have a very low viscosity, which is why they 'flood' rather than form taller volcanoes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flood_basalt

These rocks were cooled very quickly in places.
Basalt and related rocks occur as Tertiary-Quaternary lava flows that cover extensive areas along what appears to be structurally controlled belt that transects Libya from the northwest at the Ghiryan (Gharyan) area to the southeast at the northernmost tip of the Tibesti Basement province. Cursory examination of satellite images of Al-Haruj al-Aswad and Jabal Assoda (as-Sawda), the largest volcanic provinces in northeast Africa and centrally located in Libya, suggests three major phases of volcanic activity.

Field work in Jabal Assoda and Al-Haruj al-Aswad shows evidence of intermittent, but prolonged lava spewing as attested to by multiple flows on both the macro and mesoscopic scales. A single basaltic boulder or block, for instance, may show varying degrees of vesiculation and flattening... However, it can be said that in places, flow and cooling were both rapid as attested to by thin layering of only a few centimeters... In conjunction with this assumption of a common origin, the structural control of volcanic activity referred to earlier is interpreted as an aborted rifting.

http://www.b14643.de/Sahara/Al-Haruj/index.htm (Norbert Brügge, Germany Dipl. - Geol.)

In the same paper the caption under this photo reads "This lava ropes in the northern Al-Haruj are thousand years old in maximum ." I.e. this volcano erupted no more than 1000 years ago.
Image

Interesting that these volcanoes don't look like the normal volcanoes associated with this type. The have flattened tops.
Al Haruj a Miocene to Holocene intracontinental basaltic volcanic field in Libya preserves pyroclastic rocks indicating hot emplacement from eruptions of scoria cones and lava fountains. However, craters are commonly wide and surrounded by rims of strongly welded tephra, they closely resemble maar-structures. It is inferred that magmatic fragmentation of the uprising melt often has changed to phreatomagmatic interaction leading to enigmatic explosive events that have removed the top of the volcanic cones and produced maar-like depressions.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 730600062X

And I suggest it was the flood waters of the ensuing Tsunami after the erupion that flattened the top of the volcanic cones. Notice how most of the "lava" is fine black basalt sand.
Al-Haruj
Image

Wau al Namus
Image
Image

Typical to Al-Haruj topography are the numerous small depressions within the lava fields (locally called balta) which are flat-bottomed, ranging in size from a few hundreds meters to a few kilometers in diameter. These baltas are bordered by lava flows and filled by argillaceous, Aeolian and fluvial sediments of mostly silt and fine sand.

http://saudigazette.com.sa/article/8962 ... anic-field

What was that? Fluvial sediments eh. That is earth deposited by water.

In geography and geology, fluvial processes are associated with rivers and streams and the deposits and landforms created by them. When the stream or rivers are associated with glaciers, ice sheets, or ice caps, the term glaciofluvial or fluvioglacial is used.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluvial

And there is more from that article:
The Jabl Al-Haruj is part of an alkaline basaltic intra-continental flood basalt field in central Libya,withvery well-preserved basaltic fields containing scoria cones, lava flows and explosion craters.


Explosion craters, fine sand, silt? These are the hallmark of a Surtseyan eruption.


Surtseyan eruptions occur where magma or lava interacts with water
, most often when an undersea volcano reaches the ocean surface. Another term for this sort of interaction is a phreatomagmatic eruption. When heated rapidly by lava, water flashes to steam and expands violently, creating the most explosive of all eruption types. This aggressive interaction between water and heat is able to fragment lava into very fine grains of ash that can reach heights of 20 kilometers (12.4 miles).

https://www.nationalgeographic.org/ency ... a/volcano/

So, is there any evidence of these mega "charge strikes" that hit Africa in 1688? Funnily enough, there are.
"When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."

User avatar

Wild Heretic
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1071
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 10:17 am
Location: Ireland
Contact:

Re: Mud flood in the 19th century?

Postby Wild Heretic » Fri Nov 17, 2017 5:23 pm

Edit: I'm not sure about the date of the Sahara formation now. Certainly there was a big change post 1688, but whether that was the formation of the desert im not sure. Will continue on Monday.
"When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."

User avatar

Wild Heretic
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1071
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 10:17 am
Location: Ireland
Contact:

Re: Mud flood in the 19th century?

Postby Wild Heretic » Mon Nov 20, 2017 12:53 pm

An obvious candidate for a charge strike in north Africa is the Saharan Eye (Richat crater). It is probably not the cause of the 1688 quake, but it may be. I'll show you my reasoning at the end of the post.


The Saharan Eye is 40km in diameter in North West Africa.
Image
This is a satellite image so the colours aren't exactly correct.

Image

Image

Its location is more West Africa.
Image
http://www.unbelievableinfo.com/2013/12 ... cture.html

It looks like a charge strike. I'm not the only one to think that. Thunderbolts even has the Saharan Eye at the top of one of its articles.
What was the cause of this uplifted region on the Saharan desert floor cut by a circular crater with concentric terraces? Geologists speculate that erosion by wind and water must have worked its magic on the upraised dome. Electric theorists see something else—the scar left by electric discharge.

The possibility that the Richat Structure was formed by a volcanic eruption also seems improbable because of the lack of a dome of igneous or volcanic rock. Rather, the layered sedimentary rock of the Richat structure is now thought by many to have been caused by uplifted rock sculpted by erosion....Why the Richat Structure is nearly circular remains a mystery."

Advocates of the EU model claim that craters like the Richat were not formed by impacts but were "machined" by electric discharges, Birkeland currents that rotate around a "sticking" point and excavate material by electrically accelerating it upwards without disturbing the surrounding or underlying strata, unless the whole area is raised in a fulgamite blister--hence Rampart Craters. Specific effects will depend on a wide variety of soil conditions including chemical composition, material type, density, moisture, and conductivity. Discharge factors, including diameter, voltage, current, and duration will also affect the crater configuration.

http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2005/ ... richat.htm

The Saharan Eye also known as Richat's Crater has similarities to Saturn's hexagon:
Image

And the Punumbra of a dense plasma focus charge (aka lightning stirke).
Image
http://www.holoscience.com/wp/more-on-m ... mysteries/

There are plenty of articles on the web about craters being more like Plasma discharge events than meteorite impacts. E.g.
http://setterfield.org/crater_origins/c ... igins.html
https://www.thunderbolts.info/webnews/1 ... raters.htm
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=craters+are+e ... fsb&ia=web

With certain craters, meteoritic material is there. This is because in concave Earth theory the charge ultimately comes from the sun which consists solely of meteoritic metal, hence some meteoritic fragments of the sun is carried with the charge as it strikes Earth. Because the craters themselves don't match impact strikes, the mainstream has to now say that most of the meteorite broke up before it hit the Earth.

It is also worth noting that researchers investigating the "impact" appear to be moving increasingly toward the idea of substantial fragmentation of the body before striking the ground. Jay Melosh of the University of Arizona, the lead researcher in a recent study (reported in the March 10, 2005 issue of Nature), suggests that about half of the 300,000-ton object was lost prior to impact. But again, electrical considerations played no part in the analysis.

http://rense.com/general79/meteor.htm

There are lots of other problems too such as crators always being circular or hexagonal with regular spacing etc. It's in the articles if you want to research it. I don't want to go into too much detail here as we have a lot of general ground to cover.

Of course, the debate isn't necessarily either/or, but the absolutely massive craters on the Earth will be electric discharge as I doubt there is enough material from the sun to create such an impact.

Richat Crater in the Saharan desert, whose uplifted terrain, circularity, concentric terraces, and layered sedimentary rock defy both the impact and volcanic theories of cratering; Aorounga Crater also in the Sahara, whose parallel grooves and intersecting ridges (which run through the surrounding landscape as well as the crater itself) have been described as "implausible" by geologists; Meteor Crater in Arizona, a 4,000 foot wide depression now regarded by science as an "impact" crater despite the UNDISTURBED rock beds below the crater; and Chicxulub Crater, the famous alleged site of the "asteroid" impact thought to have killed off the dinosaurs. Chicxulub is up to 300 km across, with multiple concentric rings, and the added mystery of Upper Cretaceous fossils found in UNDISTURBED layers -- fossils of the creatures that the impact was supposed to have wiped out.

https://www.thunderbolts.info/webnews/1 ... raters.htm

Lol. So much for meteorite impact causing species wipeout or defining epochs. More like electric discharge from the sun which shakes the earth, changes climate and coastlines, creates mountains, and can even expand the earth (with devastating consequences). Again, all explained with concave Earth theory, sun cycles, and the piezoelectric effect.

The Saharan Eye itself was likely not the charge strike that caused the 1688 megaquake. I say this because it consists mostly of sedimentary rock, to be more exact - limestone.
The center of the structure consists of a limestone-dolomite shelf that encloses a kilometer-scale siliceous breccia and is intruded by basaltic ring dikes, kimberlitic intrusions, and alkaline volcanic rocks.

http://www.unbelievableinfo.com/2013/12 ... cture.html

The Richat structure (Sahara, Mauritania) appears as a large dome at least 40 km in diameter within a Late Proterozoic to Ordovician sequence. Erosion has created circular cuestas represented by three nested rings dipping outward from the structure. The center of the structure consists of a limestone-dolomite shelf that encloses a kilometer-scale siliceous breccia and is intruded by basaltic ring dikes, kimberlitic intrusions, and alkaline volcanic rocks... The breccia was created during karst dissolution and collapse. Internal sediments fill the centimeter- to meter-scale cavities.

https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/gsa/ge ... m=fulltext

The small part that is volcanic rocks will be the result of the charge strike. Interesting that the limestone is broken up into fragments (breccia) due to karst (limestone) disolution. Karst is created by water disolution. How often does it rain in the Sahara?

There is no fused quartz meaning the charge strike didn't hit the sand or what appears to be sandstone to the back of it. Instead it hit the underlying bedrock which also appears to be limestone. You can also see that a small part of the rim of the crater is covered by the sandstone. The other two crators in Africa that have been recognised as such and look similiar are the Jebel Uwaynat that borders Sudan, Egypt and Libya and The Brandberg Intrusion in Namibia. These two are completely covered by sandstone which means that this giant tsunami creating the sandstone came after the charge strike. Again, probably not the 1688 one.

Jebel uweinat
Image

The Brandberg Intrusion
Image

Then there is the Aorounga Crater in Chad.
Image
http://www.amazfacts.com/2016/03/the-mo ... mpact.html

Image

Going back to the Richat crater that is made of limestone; there is limestone bedrock in certain parts of the Sahara; Egypt for example. The great pyramids' outer covering is made of limestone. The other pyrmaids have marine fossils imbedded in the limestone.
https://youtu.be/2JcVMkyJoZY?t=2m37s

There are coal seams and layers of limestone and even underground lakes and rivers beneath the Sahara.

I suspect I'm the only person on SF who can answer this question authoritatively, because I've been there, done that. I work in oil drilling and spent several years working in the Sahara in Libya, Algeria and Tunisia.

Directly under the sand is rock, usually no more than 30m down.

https://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showth ... p?t=404007

A layer of limestone covers most of the surface of modern Egypt. Beneath this lies a bed of sandstone, and this earlier sandstone is the surface rock in Nubia and southern Upper Egypt, as far north as the area between Edfu and Luxor.

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/museums-static/dig ... ology.html

That is a major clue. Limestone is calcium carbonate and is said to come from the dead fossils of living creatures (whether true or not I don't know). Notice how limestone covers most of the surface of roughly the first two-thirds of Egypt on top of the sandstone which continues as surface rock for the rest of north Africa. Could this be because this part of Egypt was at one time deep underwater due to a massive Mediterrean Tsunami? And did this occur in 1688 or earlier?

Also, lightning needs moisture to strike the Earth. That is why there are no thunder and lightning storms in the Arctic or Antartica.

Antarctica never has thunderstorms because it is a desert and no precipitation.

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/inde ... 957AAKlphQ

Interesting map of LIVE lighting stirkes worldwide. They are mostly over water or otherwise over "green" parts of land.
Image
http://wwlln.net/new/map/

This means that the charge strike at the Richat crater occured before the Sahara Desert was formed... or at least when there was a sufficent amount of water at ground zero. This applies to all the craters in the Sahara. Does this mean the crater was formed pre-1688? Probably, but not necessarily. In my next post I'll show you evidence for a lot of water in North Africa in the 17th century compared to the 18th - yes, the water disappeared that quickly.

In the meantime, here is a charge strike crater which looks like to have hit the sandstone bedrock, hence a more likely candidate for the cause or part of the cause of the 1688 greatquake:

The Amguid Crater in South West Algeria.
Image
http://www.amazfacts.com/2016/03/the-mo ... mpact.html
Lots and lots of obvious water erosion on this ground. No need to point it all out. A blind man can see it. In fact, if you didn't know what you were looking at, you'd swear this was the bottom of an ocean. I'd say this is the bottom of a lake originally, or at least lush with vegetation with a big river and lots of streams; right bang in heart of the Sahara.

Image

So, this crater was probably formed post Sahara desert creation, but while there was still a lot of water around and the vegetation that goes with it.

Amguid crater is located in a remote and inaccessible region of southwestern Algeria. The crater is about 500 meters across and 65 meters deep, but the actual depth has not been measured as the crater is partly filled with a wind blown sand. The central part of Amguid crater is flat and covered with aeolian silts.

http://www.amazfacts.com/2016/03/the-mo ... mpact.html

This charge strike was not so big as the crater is "only" 500m wide. This makes it better suited to the 1688 event that disappeared the Mediterreanen coastal regions, rather then the strikes which created the Sahara itself. But, again water is needed. Let's look into that in the next post.
"When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."

User avatar

Wild Heretic
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1071
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 10:17 am
Location: Ireland
Contact:

Re: Mud flood in the 19th century?

Postby Wild Heretic » Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:52 pm

You've probably seen in the two videos on the Sahara that in one valley in Egypt there are hundereds of "whale" fossils littering the area. Apart from the obvious evidence of there having been water in that valley at one time, two important clues are presented.

Image

https://youtu.be/2JcVMkyJoZY?t=4m10s

The narrator in the second video states about this Dorudon and other large whale fossils, "... some were found in the desert floor, others in the cliff walls. The count so far is 400". They were found with 28 other fossils of the Basilosaurus (different video).
Image

This can only mean one thing logically. The floor and cliffs are the sediment of a very violent water that swept over the whales habitat encasing them in the mud/sand.

The fossils of whales vary from single bones to entire skeletons, and a number of partial skeletons are currently on display in the public part of the park. The two common whales are the large Basilosaurus, and the smaller (3 to 5 metre) Dorudon. At least two other species are known from rarer remains.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wadi_El_Hitan#Fossils

Some are only single bones which means the ensuing water that hit was extremely violent and broke up a lot of the whales bodies, just like the broken bodies of the Roman soldiers in their barracks (see earlier post). Their carcases then settled in the sediment and when the waters subsided we find them as they are today.

Also, these two types of whale and others must have lived together in a lake which was situated in this whale valley - Wadi El Hitan. If it was an ocean then why are they concentrated in this valley only? This lake was probably their breeding ground connected to the Med Sea via a river (aka the Nile River), which a Tsunami swept over violently killing the whales.

There are many species of bony fish, sharks and rays represented, but most of the fossils are isolated small teeth and these are not often conspicuous. Larger fish fossils include the rostra and pegs of sawfish; a sawfish rostrum of 1.8 metres long is laid out in the park... A large log is present in the park, and this is full of tubular shipworm fossils. Some fossil seagrasses are also known.


So, it isn't just "extinct" whales. (I bet they aren't really extinct, just extremely rare these days, like that "extinct" prehistoric fish that was found in the 90s).

The Gehannam Formation comprises open marine mudstones, which are largely present on the flatter ground to the East of the public park. The rock unit that contains most of the whale fossils is the Birket Qarun Formation. This comprises yellowish open marine sandstones that form most of the cliffs and buttes. The monotony of these sandstones is broken by a white layer full of well-preserved animal burrows (previously thought to be mangrove roots) and a layer of black mudstone above that.


Mud and sand.

When the cliffs of the Birket Qarun Formation are followed to the East, they are replaced by Gehannam Formation mudstones, indicating a change in water depth from shallower to deeper in that direction. The tops of the higher cliffs are within the Qasr el Sagha Formation, which comprises dark mudstones alternating with limestones full of shells and represents a lagoonal environment.


A lagoon rather than a "lake". I'd bet the lagoon was muddy and the Med Sea tsunami was sandy. You can clearly see where the water level was after the Tsunami hit and left its "deposit".

Image

Where is this valley?
It is 214.5km south of Alexander, which is directly at the Med Sea. Note that this 214.5km from the present location of the shore, not the exact same as the shoreline of 1688 as we will see soon.

Image
Image

You can see 2 modern lakes to the right of it and then the river Nile. Remember the Hippos city at the Sea of Galillee? Well, that is only 56.5km from the Med Sea.

Image

What kind of tsunami can sweep 214km plus inland? I'll show you soonish, as I have first hand oral accounts of at least 114km inland distances of the 1688 Tsunami. Now that is some wave.

Also, its not just Egypt. It occured to northern Libya too. here is a quote from harry harrison under the above youtube video.

I was in Libya in 2003 in the Northern Sahara Desert. Sometimes on a friday we would go walking in the desert but not too far. I remember it was always in the vicinity of a mesa where we would find things. Fossilised feces (good paper weights) flint arrowheads, hand axes and flint spearheads. On walking one day I suddenly became aware of a crunching noise and it was the sound of us walking on thousands of small sea shells. It kind of blows your mind walking in the desert and then realising it was once ocean and you are walking in it!


Let's have a closer look at the Basilosaurus and see if it can shed any light on when and what we are talking about here. Tip: the Basilosaurus is not prehistoric. Pre-modern history maybe, but not millions of years ago lol.
"When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."

User avatar

Wild Heretic
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1071
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 10:17 am
Location: Ireland
Contact:

Re: Mud flood in the 19th century?

Postby Wild Heretic » Wed Nov 22, 2017 2:01 pm

Look at this Basilosaurus. When you look at it what is the is the first thing that springs to mind?

Image

Image

As soon as I saw the skeletons I thought "SEA SERPENT"!

Those are what the cartographers drew on 17th century (and before) maps attacking ships.

Image
"One of the classic images of a sea monster on a map: a giant sea-serpent attacks a ship off the coast of Norway on Olaus Magnus’s Carta marina of 1539, this image from the 1572 edition."

Chet Van Duzer's "Sea Monsters on Medieval and Renaissance Maps" (British Library, 2013) charts the evolution of the mythical creatures that adorned atlases from the 10th century through the 17th century. Cartographers used the beastly art to illustrate mysterious, unexplored regions of the globe and the possible dangers of seafaring.

Despite their wild appearance, many of these creatures were based on real animals. "The creatures look purely fantastic. They all look like they were just made up," Van Duzer, a map historian at the Library of Congress, said here Thursday (Sept. 5) in a talk about his book. "But, in fact, a lot of them come from what were considered, at the time, scientific sources."

https://www.livescience.com/39465-sea-m ... -maps.html

“To our eyes, almost all of the sea monsters on all of these maps seem quite whimsical, but in fact, a lot of them were taken from what the cartographers viewed as scientific, authoritative books,” said author Chet Van Duzer in a podcast with Lapham’s Quarterly. “So most of the sea monsters reflect an effort on the part of the cartographer to be accurate in the depiction of what lived in the sea.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science- ... s-1805646/

Yeah we know. We found a whole load of them in the Egyptian Sahara.

Though people in modern times typically think of monsters as mythical beasts, whales and walruses were considered monsters in medieval and Renaissance times.


The sea serpent, aka Basilosaurus, is a whale:
Basilosaurus ("king lizard") is a genus of prehistoric cetacean that existed during the Late Eocene, 30 to 40 million years ago (mya) [17th century, 3 to 400 years ago]. The first fossil of B. cetoides was discovered in the United States and was initially believed to be some sort of reptile, hence the suffix -saurus, but it was later found to be a marine mammal. Richard Owen wished to rename the creature Zeuglodon ("yoked tooth"), but, per taxonomic rules, the creature's first name remained permanent. Fossils of B. isis have been found in Egypt and Jordan.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basilosaurus

Found in Jordan too eh? This puts it in the same area as the Hippos excavation.

Mappa mundi aren't the most geographically accurate maps...

Yes, and it wasn't necessarily because they were terrible at their map-making craft either, as we will now see.

...but they contain a treasure trove of bizarre animals. One illustration depicts a man in the belly of a monster, most likely a reference to the biblical story of Jonah and the whale. Another shows a creature with the head of a chicken and the body of a fish. "Every land creature had an equivalent in the sea,"

https://www.livescience.com/39465-sea-m ... -maps.html

Image
"This sea pig, which was compared to heretics that distorted truth and lived like swine, lived in the North Sea on Olaus Magnus’s 1539 Carta Marina, a lushly illustrated map that inspired many after it. "

Speaking of bizarre hybrid animals. How about this skeleton supposedly found in Egypt and on display at the Cairo museum?

Image
“We know that the ancient Egyptians were accomplished taxidermist, this is most likely one of their creations they made to scare away thieves.” Dr. Jason Hendley of Oxford university told us. Some of the scientists agree with Dr, Hendley while others are less sceptical.
“I find it quite perplexing that the spinal column of the creature is actually attached to the skull.” Dr.Winston Gorjone explained. “If this was the creation of some ancient taxidermist, the attachment of the skull to the spinal column would have been obvious. There would be wire holding the skull to the spinal column. In this case, there is not. The bone is fused together naturally which would indicate that this skeleton may indeed be the remains of some long forgotten species of animal.

https://aceflashman.wordpress.com/2009/ ... ro-museum/

I couldn't verify this find. However if true, wouldn't this skeleton just be a small sphinx creature? Which reminds me of this interesting video speculating that the sphinx was an actual creature that was killed and then petrified in a great disaster:

https://youtu.be/k9Id--iV1Fo

If true, this would be pre-medieval times when the earth was a lot smaller and creatures a lot bigger, not 900 to 1688AD.

Back to the "whales".

Portrayals of whales and other map creatures became more realistic during the early 17th century. Maps from this era show ships exerting dominion over the beasts of the ocean. Eventually, the beasts disappeared from maps altogether. Modern maps, which lack these fantastic beasts, have absolutely lost something, Van Duzer said.


Yep, you wont find these beasts on maps post-1688. It has dawned on me that the most obvious way to see if there are any changes to North Africa is to compare a modern map of north Africa with a post-1688 map of the same and also with a pre-1688 one. Let's do that.

A picture is starting to emerge that there wasn't just one disaster but cyclical ones, with the older ones being more devastating than the newer ones. Perhaps the next one won't wipeout most of the world's population, but just half of them. The NWO will be most displeased! lol.
"When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."

User avatar

Wild Heretic
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1071
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 10:17 am
Location: Ireland
Contact:

Re: Mud flood in the 19th century?

Postby Wild Heretic » Fri Nov 24, 2017 8:52 pm

computer crashed today. will require reboot. crappy samsung tablet also playing up. will be a few days before i can post again.
"When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."


Topic author
Freezetime26
Initiate
Initiate
Posts: 32
Joined: Sat May 27, 2017 1:05 pm

Re: Mud flood in the 19th century?

Postby Freezetime26 » Fri Nov 24, 2017 10:20 pm

Wild Heretic wrote:computer crashed today. will require reboot. crappy samsung tablet also playing up. will be a few days before i can post again.

Its ok, interesting stuff about the ancient creatures. Could it be that the earth was small when it was young? (If so, what the Earth did to grow?), probably with a huge density of oxygen which made the first humans and creatures bigger than they are nowadays.

User avatar

Wild Heretic
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1071
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 10:17 am
Location: Ireland
Contact:

Re: Mud flood in the 19th century?

Postby Wild Heretic » Tue Nov 28, 2017 2:29 pm

Alright. Computer is up and running and backed up. Time to get back to business.
"When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."

User avatar

Wild Heretic
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1071
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 10:17 am
Location: Ireland
Contact:

Re: Mud flood in the 19th century?

Postby Wild Heretic » Mon Dec 04, 2017 4:50 pm

The maps have opened a much bigger Pandora's box than I had initially researched a few weeks ago. This is why it is taking so long to come up with some organised writing. It's overwhelming. I'm not an academic or writing a book or disertation, but it is feeling like one at the moment.

Libya got quaked bad let's just say.
"When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."


Return to “Concave earth and the glass sky”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest