Days
Commentator
Now what? You disagree the evidence is evidence? LOLYou need to pull your nose out of your stratified historical perspective and look at the hard evidence. Where was the ice - during the ice age - where was there ice on earth? In North America and in Europe, the ice came down about half way, covered the northern half of those continents. But now how about on the other side of the globe? Alaska and the Russian tundra were not only ice free, they were tropical.
That's not a hypothesis. That's where the ice was.
So now where was the Arctic Circle? Greenland and Iceland were likely the North pole.
There are theories that try to figure out how the earth shifted. Anything from pole shift to magnetic pole shift to tectonic plate shift... something had to happen cuz Antarctica was ice free in the not too distant geologic past.
Looking at the Carolina Bays event, this was obviously a small moon, maybe 500 miles in diameter that exploded when it hit our atmosphere. The heat from such an event would have caused real climate change. Now, where was the ice? The ice ended right about the middle of the strike; so it hit the edge of the ice cap. No doubt it melted most, if not all of the Arctic ice cap.
Still no hypothesis, this is just restating the evidence, this happened.
Now for some BASIC PHYSICS. As in... the very first formulas you learn in school. Combining force vectors. When two objects strike, the final motion of the combined mass is the result of the speed, mass, and direction of the original two forces. The entire moon hit the earth in a southeast direction, so the earth's spin would have been affected (obviously) in a southeast direction... moving the edge of the Arctic Circle down to where our eastern seaboard is today (obviously).
We have the starting location and the ending location. Simple stuff, still no hypothesis, we know where the ice was and we know where we moved to and we know the ice cap was melted... We have half a million craters overlapping each other in what was obviously a single strike.
That's the evidence, there's no hypothesis there, that's just the evidence, WTH are you laughing at? the evidence?
While I've been writing this thread, evidence has poured in on "pre-historic" history. First of all, if we have evidence, then it isn't pre-historic, we have history, it is just very old history and it takes some effort to piece together the evidence, but that was always the case... ask me, that's what makes it fun. but to pretend that history began 6000 years ago in Sumeria, that's plain stupid, we have ruins all over the world that date back ten thousand and twenty thousand and even thirty thousand years. And we have geologic evidence that matches the archaeologic timeline. I am just commenting on the evidence, not making it up. We know where Mu was, we know where Atlantis was, there were historians in ancient Greece that traveled to Egypt and studied the temples, we have their writings, isn't that history? (the best there is)
Atlantis... in Mauritania... all along...
The Lost City of Atlantis - Hidden in Plain Sight - Advanced Ancient Human Civilization
Bright Insight
Published on Sep 4, 2018
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This is How We Know Atlantis Existed…AND Where – Lost Ancient Civilization Hidden in Plain Sight (2)
Bright Insight
Published on Sep 24, 2018
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ancient Map PROVES The Lost City of Atlantis is The Eye of The Sahara – Ancient Civilization
Bright Insight
Published on Oct 30, 2018
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Three reasons BRIGHT INSIGHT is RIGHT about Atlantis!
Charles Kos
Published on Nov 6, 2018
Last edited: