Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
It could not have been called Long Island Valley because:
The global sea level was about 150 metres lower during the peak of the last Ice Age, and was at its lowest about 20,000 years ago. The sea was below its present level from 100,000 to 5,000 years ago. Human beings, and all the normal vegetation and fauna of the neighbouring land-mass, extended onto the continental shelf during the period when the sea level was lower than at present, that is roughly from 100,000 years ago to 5,000 years ago. When the sea level rose again, while the ice caps were melting, vegetation was killed off by salination and inundated (gradually), while animals and people who had been on the continental shelf moved back onto the continents where they joined the people who had been living there anyway. Flood myths that occur all over the world are the "folk memory" of the experience of suffering 10,000 years of (slowly) rising sea level, and the continuous loss of hunting and foraging territory. [Who knows how fast the change really occured?] There is a continuing need to discover, categorise, and date more prehistoric archaeological sites offshore. Work by amateur archaeologists and chance finds by trawler fishermen, scuba sports divers, and sponge divers who may recover stone tools from the seabed can be of great importance. |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
The reason I brought this up is I met a a commerical
fisherman who has found numerous Mamoth tusks and plotted the projected extent of the prehistoric shoreline based on these findings. The most amazing thing is he found an underwater site rich in artifacts that he believes is a 15,000 year or older city off the eastern seaboard. He has pulled up what he believes is a 15,000 year old carved stone cup, and also some larger pefectly regularly shaped stones that were too big to bring back. Unfortunately the scientific community wants him to give up all his data for nothing, and just hand over 11 years of artifacts and notes he has collected. None of them will validate any of his findings. Without a formal education he has been unable to obtain any grant money for such research. If true, this would be the first verified underwater site. Previous locations have been determined to be naturally formed rock ledges. Another argument against such findings is the theory that most if not all his findings were washed out by glaciers. This does not explain the fact that the "city" site is located on a sea mount. I will post some pictures of some of the treasures he has found. Bart |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
There definitely was a "valley" that ran North to South on Long Island and
extended up into Connecticut. It is referred to as the Connetquot Mel****er Channel and compromises the Connetquot and Nissequogue Rivers. They are now separated by the Ronkonkoma Moraine Gap. "Bart Senior" wrote in message ... The reason I brought this up is I met a a commerical fisherman who has found numerous Mamoth tusks and plotted the projected extent of the prehistoric shoreline based on these findings. The most amazing thing is he found an underwater site rich in artifacts that he believes is a 15,000 year or older city off the eastern seaboard. He has pulled up what he believes is a 15,000 year old carved stone cup, and also some larger pefectly regularly shaped stones that were too big to bring back. Unfortunately the scientific community wants him to give up all his data for nothing, and just hand over 11 years of artifacts and notes he has collected. None of them will validate any of his findings. Without a formal education he has been unable to obtain any grant money for such research. If true, this would be the first verified underwater site. Previous locations have been determined to be naturally formed rock ledges. Another argument against such findings is the theory that most if not all his findings were washed out by glaciers. This does not explain the fact that the "city" site is located on a sea mount. I will post some pictures of some of the treasures he has found. Bart |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Nice 3D map of valley:
http://pbisotopes.ess.sunysb.edu/reports/dem_2/ "Bart Senior" wrote in message ... The reason I brought this up is I met a a commerical fisherman who has found numerous Mamoth tusks and plotted the projected extent of the prehistoric shoreline based on these findings. The most amazing thing is he found an underwater site rich in artifacts that he believes is a 15,000 year or older city off the eastern seaboard. He has pulled up what he believes is a 15,000 year old carved stone cup, and also some larger pefectly regularly shaped stones that were too big to bring back. Unfortunately the scientific community wants him to give up all his data for nothing, and just hand over 11 years of artifacts and notes he has collected. None of them will validate any of his findings. Without a formal education he has been unable to obtain any grant money for such research. If true, this would be the first verified underwater site. Previous locations have been determined to be naturally formed rock ledges. Another argument against such findings is the theory that most if not all his findings were washed out by glaciers. This does not explain the fact that the "city" site is located on a sea mount. I will post some pictures of some of the treasures he has found. Bart |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Nice site Gilligan.... very interesting.
CM "Gilligan" wrote in message ink.net... Nice 3D map of valley: http://pbisotopes.ess.sunysb.edu/reports/dem_2/ "Bart Senior" wrote in message ... The reason I brought this up is I met a a commerical fisherman who has found numerous Mamoth tusks and plotted the projected extent of the prehistoric shoreline based on these findings. The most amazing thing is he found an underwater site rich in artifacts that he believes is a 15,000 year or older city off the eastern seaboard. He has pulled up what he believes is a 15,000 year old carved stone cup, and also some larger pefectly regularly shaped stones that were too big to bring back. Unfortunately the scientific community wants him to give up all his data for nothing, and just hand over 11 years of artifacts and notes he has collected. None of them will validate any of his findings. Without a formal education he has been unable to obtain any grant money for such research. If true, this would be the first verified underwater site. Previous locations have been determined to be naturally formed rock ledges. Another argument against such findings is the theory that most if not all his findings were washed out by glaciers. This does not explain the fact that the "city" site is located on a sea mount. I will post some pictures of some of the treasures he has found. Bart |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
http://www.njscuba.net/artifacts/obj_arrowheads.html
"Bart Senior" wrote in message ... Not a cup. I think it is a lamp where small bits of animal fat were burned to provide light. Small JPEG Picture attached. |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Bart Senior wrote:
Not a cup. I think it is a lamp where small bits of animal fat were burned to provide light. Certainly possible... think how far a step it is from an animal fat lamp to a Fresnel lens... Not trying to challenge you, why is it not a cup? Looks like it would make a good drinking vessel... a bit on the smallish side... BTW thanks for the links Gilligan. Very interesting reading. Regards Doug King |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hey Guys,
I don't think it is either. It looks to me like a morter for grinding. OT |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
If the person was left handed I'd agree.
The cup fits in your right hand so well. It would be uncomfortable to grind anything in it. "Thom Stewart" wrote Hey Guys, I don't think it is either. It looks to me like a morter for grinding. Bart |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Then again it could just be "a neat looking rock".......
CM "Bart Senior" wrote in message ... If the person was left handed I'd agree. The cup fits in your right hand so well. It would be uncomfortable to grind anything in it. "Thom Stewart" wrote Hey Guys, I don't think it is either. It looks to me like a morter for grinding. Bart |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Nova Scotia trip report (long) | Cruising | |||
How long can a boat stay anchored in one place? | General | |||
OT - My reply to McDiarmid (politics and long) | ASA | |||
Dilemma; Extra long shaft to long shaft? | General |