Ancient Sunken City Discovered Off Shores of Cuba. Maybe
Posted by
Hemos
on Fri Dec 07, 2001 03:05 PM
from the it's-not-frickin'-atlantis dept.
from the it's-not-frickin'-atlantis dept.
King Africa writes "Explorers using a miniature submarine to probe the sea floor off the coast of Cuba said on Thursday they had confirmed the discovery of stone structures deep below the ocean surface that may have been built by an unknown human civilization thousands of years ago.
The explorers said they believed the mysterious structures, discovered at the astounding depth of around 2,100 feet and laid out like an urban area, could have been built at least 6,000 years ago. That would be about 1,500 years earlier than the great Giza pyramids of Egypt. " The BBC has a bit more substantative article on this as well - but I do wonder how they assigned the date "of at least 6000 years ago" to this.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Ancient Sunken City Discovered Off Shores of Cuba. Maybe
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 439 comments
(Spill at 50!) | Index Only
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
|
2
(1)
|
2
Atlantis at last! (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Atlantis at last! (Score:4, Informative)
Would have made a good Slashdot story, as well...
Re:Atlantis at last! (Score:5, Informative)
Very interesting, haven't heard of that one. The article lacks any real substance though, other than I found "this island that was in the right place at the right time".
Does anyone know if they surveyed it? Is there any evidence at all that humans lived there? Unusal stone structures? To even make the claim that it could be Atlantis, I would imagine that you need to have evidence of a civilization. It sounds like this guy basically said "Here's an island that fits the time frame, don't bother me while I go back to studying migration patterns of the palezoic."
The one other possibility that no one likes to discuss is that Plato was lying/making this up/a crackpot. It's not modern civilization owns the rights to writing down things that simply aren't true.
carbon dating? (Score:5, Funny)
no doubt by checking the log files on their mainframes, silly.
don't you know that any newly discovered ancient civilization is bound to have been centuries ahead of it's time in technology. don't you watch movies?
Re:carbon dating? (Score:5, Informative)
Carbon dating would be one way, but you might have some issues.
Carbon dating only wors on organic matter. Carbon 14 is an isotope of carbon that is used in dating. Carbon 14 is created by the sun in the atmosphere, organic entities take in carbon dioxide during breathing, a small parcentage of which contains carbon 14, carbon 14 is used by the entity and stored in it.
When the entity dies, the carbon 14 is no longer being replenished from the atmosphere, it decays. You can figure out how much carbon the item would have if it were still alive by looking at similar items, see how much the item has and use the decay rate to find the time.
Nifty, the problems are though that its organic (no stone, no metal. Organic coloring on the metal or stone can be dated by not the inorganic stuff). Also, this stuff has been siting on the bottom of the ocean. Its possible that other sea life/salt/etc has contaminated many organic leftovers (or the organic leftovers have completely rotted away).
However, there are other things you can use to date items that have been underwater. Coral growth is fairly constant and measureable. And any silt that has deposited on top of the stone would also be datable because its organic.
So the 6000 years may not be quite accurate. It may have been 6000 years since it was submerged, but for all we know it may have been abanded for a 1000 years before then.
Re:carbon dating? (Score:5, Informative)
This discovery was mentioned on Art Bell's show about 6 months ago. The researchers sound like quacks and are basing most of their dating assumptions on, well, nothing really.
If they found some intact beams they could use dendrochronology (ie tree ring dating) which is much more precise than carbon dating (+- in 10 year increments depending on whether it is a cutting date or a 'vv' date). That tells you when the beam was cut, which of course brings all sorts of questions about longevity of the structures. In the southwest, where I used to work, there are beams in Taos Pueblo that date back to the 1300s. They are still using them today.
Dating is a very difficult part of archaeology. Everything is based on associations that you must assume hold. They do not always end up being true.
I would wait and see on this one.
Re:carbon dating? (Score:4, Funny)
And here I thought only us computer geeks had trouble getting a date!
Irresponsible, huh? (Score:3, Funny)
"It's a really wonderful structure which really looks like it could have been a large urban centre... However, it would be totally irresponsible to say what it was before we have evidence."
Well, alright then.
RC
I hope it's not R'Lyeh (Score:4, Interesting)
Since the explorers are still alive, and wrote the article, it may be safet to presume it may not be R'Lyeh.
Bork!
odd wording... (Score:4, Funny)
they have discovered what they think are the ruins of a submerged city built thousands of years ago.
Are they implying that the city was submerged when it was actually populated? Or did they mean to say "submerged ruins of a city built thousands of years ago."
What geological phenomena could sink 2000 feet (Score:4, Interesting)
Any geology types in the house?
Re:Ahh...lets see Volcano...earth quake...ect (Score:4, Funny)
You do know that Yosemitie National Park is on top of one the "super" volcano's. I mean if the thing blew again there is a chance it would cause massive loss of life, they are talking 3ft of ash 3000 miles away.
You misspelled Yellowstone.
The effect of natural disasters (Score:5, Informative)
In 1960 the most powerful earthquake of the 20th century moved the Chilean coast 60 feet in 5 minutes.h tm [extremescience.com]
http://www.extremescience.com/GreatestEarthquake.
http://www.usc.edu/dept/tsunamis/chile/ [usc.edu]
In 1998 Hurricane Mitch pushed rivers 100's of feet up mountains, created brand new rivers, caused landslides which changed the shapes of mountains and covered entired cities, and left parts of the land covered in water over a year later. (if you're in Nicaragua look for the "Las Casitas" memorial - the distant mountain which caused the landslide shows obvious changes in its shape).
http://www.osei.noaa.gov/mitch.html [noaa.gov]
http://www.acerca.org/ejd1_results1.html [acerca.org]
Volcanic eruptions can be so great as to cause the birth of islands. There was a well-studied one in the Pacific in 2000, i believe. Also in Nicaragua is an interesting series of small islands caused by a nearby volcano loosing its top - large pieces of land were blown miles away and landed in a lake creating these islands. I dont remember the name of the lake or volcano, though i have some photos at /home.7 62000/762047.stm [bbc.co.uk]
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_
Natural Disasters are called "disasters" for a reason. 6000 years seems plenty for the earth to move a small bit of land a couple hundred metres.
Very strange... (Score:5, Interesting)
politics (Score:5, Funny)
They're still waiting for the government to appropriate funds to provide adequate drainage. The problem is that this would require a government-sponsered lottery. I guess the right-wingers decided they'd rather be all wet.
~z
Re:politics (Score:5, Funny)
Three words... (Score:5, Funny)
Not that old (Score:4, Funny)
An aside: I never thought I'd see the day when this [artbell.com] link would be on topic for Slashdot...
Interview with ADC (Score:3, Informative)
Saw something on TV about this MONTHS ago ... (Score:3, Interesting)
uh... (Score:5, Insightful)
"May 20, 2001 article reports on sonar sightings of what appear to be man-made structures on the seabed near Cuba...."
http://www.andrewcollins.net/page/articles/lostcit y.htm [andrewcollins.net]
"In a press release dated Havana, 14 May 2001 Reuters of London..."
Update on Mysterious Deep Water Sonar Images Off Western Cuba [earthfiles.com]
Underwater City Reported Off Western Cuba [earthfiles.com]
I could go on, but I'll leave that as an exercise for the reader.
Hint: try a google search for "cuba" and "underwater" and "city"
Ya'd think /. would have picked up on this a while ago, but then, maybe not...
I guess "news" doesn't necessarily mean "new".
t_t_b
more info and lame pics courtesy of google (Score:3, Informative)
second interview [earthfiles.com]
More information here on age of site ... (Score:5, Interesting)
This Globe & Mail article [globeandmail.com] has substantially more information on this finding, including the quote below which answers the above question:
The article also makes notes of symbols and inscriptions on the structures and that the images "bear a remarkable resemblance to the pyramidal design of Mayan and Aztec temples in Mexico."
ian.
6000 BC? (Score:3, Informative)
Take a look at this time line [isourcecom.com] for more info.
Now my guess is that they have the dates all wrong. There has always been a mystery behind the disappearance of these people. could a previously unknown catastrophic event have caused these people to be wiped out? a lost city at the bottom of the sea seems to point in that direction.
Re:6000 BC? (Score:4, Interesting)
This must be a new, unknown civilization. The Aztecs did not formally settle in Mexico until ~1200 AD, the Mayans florished in the Yucatan around ~150 AD, and the Olmec started out around 1000 AD.
Actually, the Olmecs started around 1000 BC. Yes, I know it was a typo, I'm just being mean.
An archaeology textbook that happened to be in the vicinity of my computer lists the first Mayan communities at about 1000 B.C., and were well-established by 600 B.C., when they were constructing their pyramids.
Personally, if this is man-made (yes, it probably is, but I don't know if I'd rule out natural geologic processes yet), I doubt very much it would be anywhere near 6000 years old; the oldest known semi-urban civilizations in the New World only date from about 2000 BC, and even then only a handful of groups were moving away from a hunter-gatherer lifestyle. I also doubt that this would be a previously undiscovered civilization, if the remains have only been found in such a small area. Probably would be an outpost of one of the mesoamerican groups, though I'm not sure how they would get there. It's kind of a long way from Tenochtilan, and if they traveled up around the Gulf you'd expect to find other sites with similiar architecture.
Forget Atlantis (Score:3, Funny)
"We've found an extremely large oblong box with a fanciful star shaped clasp. We're sending the robot down now to retrieve the artifact. Looks like it's going to be a great day!"
Bimini Roads (Score:4, Informative)
At anyrate here is a link from Paul Heinrich's Wild Side Geoarcheology entry on the Bimini roads:
[intersurf.com]
Bimini Roads And Atlantis
Bimini Columns And Atlantis [intersurf.com]
Bimini Granite Stones and Atlantis [intersurf.com]
Just wondering....
Biblical Flood? (Score:3, Funny)
That would be a significant enough event. Not to mention most creationist believe that at one time the continents were together etc...
Just a thought...
Read carefully for context: (Score:5, Informative)
"AND WHAT WAS IT THAT AS YOU LOOKED AT THIS SONAR IMAGE, WHAT WAS IT THAT EXCITED YOU?
Frank Muller-Karger, Ph.D., Caribbean expert and Professor of Oceanography, College of Marine Science, University of South Florida, St. Petersburg, Florida:
"When you look at sonar images, it looks sort of smooth, curved and shades - everything is sort of curvy and shades of curves. It looks smooth. So, when you look at these, you do see things that have very strong reflections along straight edges. There are a lot of those things, like you said, over a field of several kilometers, tens of square kilometers.
AND THAT THESE STRAIGHT EDGES THAT ARE BOTH RECTANGULAR AND SOMEWHAT PYRAMIDAL WITH STRAIGHT EDGES ARE ALL OVER THAT SEVERAL KILOMETERS AREA?
Yes, but again, it could be a very unique geological formation. We just don't know. Until we go there and take a very close look, all it will be is speculation and I would hope that nobody - it's very romantic to think, 'Oh, a lost civilization and ruins and all.' And we all would like to see something like that. But I don't think that it's the right thing to do without actually going there. I think it's great they are actually going to go there and take a closer look. Because just from a geological point of view, it would be very interesting also."
t_t_b
dating... (Score:3, Informative)
(amount of detritus covering) / (rate of detritus fall)
The 6000, I'm sure, is a complete guess given the current amount of available data, but I'm relatively confident of sedimentologists ability to estimate ages. Those dirt geologists rock.
Look at the geology! (Score:5, Interesting)
For a city to sink 2000 feet in 6000 years only requires an average subsidence rate of 4 inches a year. While 4 inches a year sounds high at first, you must all remember that this IS a geologically active area with a number of faults, uplifts, and volcanoes. As an example, in one sunny June afternoon in the late 1600's, the city of Port Royal Jamaica plunged 40 feet below the surface of the sea, killing thousands. That's forty feet in ONE DAY. There have also been foundations and hints of other structures on the Bimini shelf and elsewhere around the Carribean that indicate that these kinds of shoreline changes have ocurred fairly consistently throughout the regions history. A look at shoreline maps of many of the inhabited islands, even over just the past few centuries, CLEARLY shows that some islands no longer exist, while others have drastically changed size or shape. If these kinds of changes can happen over a few hundred years, who knows what's possible over a few thousand? For all we know, this region could be sitting on top of an emptying magma chamber for a volcanic vent, or a section of crust that was relieved of some upward tension and subsided. These situations could easily provide subsidence rates far in excess of what would be needed to get this city to that depth.
To make a long story short, the region of the Caribbean tectonic plate is known to be highly volatile and active, and it is under immense pressure from its larger surrounding neighbors (the North American plate, South American Plate, etc). To assume that one section of it could not have dropped 4" a year ignores both the regions history and gological evidence.
You've also got to remember that there are Mayan legends about the Olmec that sound distinctly Atlantis-like. The legends said that the Olmec were the former rulers of the Yucatan who were centered on a great island in the Caribbean. That island, again according to legend, plunged below the sea and destroyed their civilisation. There are other similar legends throughout Central and South America about the "educators" (like the Viracocha's of the Andes), a people who came among them and taught them construction, farming, and astronomy, and who spoke of their destroyed homeland. Archaeologists have marveled for years at the consistency of these legends from one region to another, and tin-foil-hatters have attributed them to everything from Atlanteans, to the Irish, to space aliens. It's much more realistic to think that these "Viracochas" may have simply been a Caribbean civilisation destroyed when their home area dove beneath the waves.
Re:They just make up a number (Score:3, Informative)
Basically, living things take in this carbon isotope as long as they are alive, maintaining a fairly constant level of that carbon isotope. When they die, they no longer take in more of that carbon isotope, and the levels of that isotope diminish at a fixed rate. Carbon dating works by measuring the difference of levels of that carbon isotope in an object against the baseline and then computing the time elapsed based on that difference.
I know of no reason why salt water would change this rate of dimishment of this carbon isotope. But then again, I am neither an archeologist or a physicist.