Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I believe the outer crust was supported by a more solid inner core. And it was the outer core that collapsed. And that is why the Bible states the fountains of the deep opened up. The hydraulic pressure cushioned the collapsed which would explain for the buildings still being intact today. It was not just a local collapse, but vast square miles of land simply sank into the ocean depths.
OK I think I understand what you are saying. It is conjecture right?
I believe the outer crust was supported by a more solid inner core. And it was the outer core that collapsed. And that is why the Bible states the fountains of the deep opened up. The hydraulic pressure cushioned the collapsed which would explain for the buildings still being intact today. It was not just a local collapse, but vast square miles of land simply sank into the ocean depths.
There is no geological evidence for such an event and it just doesn't pass the common sense test. What you're doing is taking the literal passages from the Bible and trying to invent some scenario in which it could happen. The problem with that is the fact that the Bible isn't describing real events that actually happened. The words "fountains of the deep" seem to suggest that vast underground oceans existed and that somehow land had formed above them and then broke apart when Noah's flood took place. These events are physically impossible. Why do you have to take all of these stories literally?
Other than that one quack website, can you point me in the direction of other evidence that confirms this discovery? I tried to google it, but wasn't getting anything of use.
There's a lot out there about this find. Here is a link by Andrew Collins that speaks of this discovery. I personally do not believe it is the city of Atlantis. I do believe it was one of the cities that existed before the flood, and before the collapse of the earths crust. And that is why we are looking at a large area of man-made architectural designs 2,000 feet below the surface of the ocean. Consider the link below.
At the peak of the last ice age sea levels were 390 feet lower than they are today, and have been rising ever since because of glacier melt, but more because of thermal expansion... I could well understand cities underwater ( providing people built cities 18,000 years ago ) as humans did and still do tend to build along the shores of oceans....But I find 2000 feet under a bit hard to swallow....
There ya go Campbell, I've allowed you to deflect me off topic once again.
There's a lot out there about this find. Here is a link by Andrew Collins that speaks of this discovery.
I see that this so called discovery was made in 2001 and all sorts of incredible claims and being made and it's being stated that it's going to be such powerful new evidence that we'll have to revise our history books. Well, that was eight years ago and it appears to have fizzled out. I have seen documentaries that show unusual underwater formations near the Bahamas but many people believe that the actions of waves and other natural processes cause rock to be shaped into formations that may appear to be manmade. I think that Edgar Cayce even predicted that Atlantis would be discovered in that region decades ago but that doesn't seem to have happened.
There is no geological evidence for such an event and it just doesn't pass the common sense test. What you're doing is taking the literal passages from the Bible and trying to invent some scenario in which it could happen. The problem with that is the fact that the Bible isn't describing real events that actually happened. The words "fountains of the deep" seem to suggest that vast underground oceans existed and that somehow land had formed above them and then broke apart when Noah's flood took place. These events are physically impossible. Why do you have to take all of these stories literally?
The Bible has proven itself to be historically very accurate, and it appears you are willing to ignore that accuracy. I take all the stories of the Bible literally, because the Bible has shown us time after time, that most of the stories are literal.
Even those who discovered this underwater city will tell you, that the city is near an underwater geological feature know as the Cuban shelf, which falls off sharply in a series of shelves which drops down to several thousand meters, and it is on one of these shelves, in around 600 to 700 meters of water, where the structures are found. What does not pass the common sense test, is when the Bible keeps telling you the truth, and that truth is confirmed by historical discovery. Why do you keep ignoring that truth? The Bible has a long history of making fools of those who ignore it, and then try to replace it's wisdom with their mistaken beliefs and theories. Just in recent days, the (EXPERTS) were telling us that Israels two Kingdoms did not exist, and king David was just a myth. Yet a recent discovery at a place called Tel Dan, made those experts look like fools. And that is why the God of the Bible tells you, the wisdom of this world, is but foolishness to God.
But this story's better written, more detailed, and with the obligatory scantily-clad and submissive Eve-figure. BTW, where do these vast under-Earth cities get some print time in your wonderful, all-encompassing bible?
(Oh, and BTW, I'm still awaiting your quick definition of ""transitionals". Should only take you about 2 - 3 minutes of typing, and then we'd all know what you know, and we could stop arguing about the thousands of transitionals (as we erroneously identify them, according to you...) that we have already cataloged. Please help me out here!
Thanks in advance. Still no response from Acambaro. Wonder what's keeping them......
There's a lot out there about this find. Here is a link by Andrew Collins that speaks of this discovery. I personally do not believe it is the city of Atlantis. I do believe it was one of the cities that existed before the flood, and before the collapse of the earths crust. And that is why we are looking at a large area of man-made architectural designs 2,000 feet below the surface of the ocean. Consider the link below.
It could be man made alright...It could be the ruins and discards of cement, etc. from the disposed of remnants of missle silos,etc. from the 1961 Cuban crisis.
I see that this so called discovery was made in 2001 and all sorts of incredible claims and being made and it's being stated that it's going to be such powerful new evidence that we'll have to revise our history books. Well, that was eight years ago and it appears to have fizzled out. I have seen documentaries that show unusual underwater formations near the Bahamas but many people believe that the actions of waves and other natural processes cause rock to be shaped into formations that may appear to be manmade. I think that Edgar Cayce even predicted that Atlantis would be discovered in that region decades ago but that doesn't seem to have happened.
This discovery is even spoken of by Brian Handwerk for national Geographic News in May 28, 2002. And it appears that some of the structures are as deep as 2,500 feet.
In July of 2001, geologist Manuel Iturralde who is the senior researcher of Cuba's Natural history Museum, sent down a remotely operated Vehicle to videotape the structures. The images set back confirmed large blocks of stone that were about 8 to 10 feet. Some of the blocks appeared deliberately stacked, some where circular while others were rectangular, and some were in the shape of pyramids. It was also pointed out that the appearance of the structures appeared to be granite, which was not found in Cuba.
This site as I have stated before covers an area of 7.7 miles, and there they have stated, you can see roads, pyramid shaped temples, with smaller buildings. And you might be right, this discovery my fizzle out, just like the Figurines of El Toro Mountain. No scientific review, just more evidence ignored, because it does not fit in with their scientific method, or belief. And this is pretty much what I have come to expect from todays science. Yet I can even give you a better example, found at the bottom of Rock Lake in the state of WIsconsin are some very large man made pyramids. There may be as many as ten of them. Yet to date, I have yet to see anyone from the scientific community even consider such a find.
Where on earth are these guys? Consider the link below.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The World As We Thought We Knew It!
BTW, where do these vast under-Earth cities get some print time in your wonderful, all-encompassing bible?
Still no response from Acambaro. 
Wonder what's keeping them...... 
