Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Explorers find underwater city ruins in the Caribbean, may prove that Cuba was once connected to South America   ( divider line
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

4900 clicks; posted to Main » on 07 Dec 2001 at 12:47 AM (16 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

55 Comments     (+0 »)

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

2001-12-07 12:51:49 AM  
Could it be? Gasp! ANOTHER Atlantis?
2001-12-07 12:54:28 AM  
This is old news...but it's still damn cool. I'm cuban, maybe I can cash in somehow.
2001-12-07 01:41:46 AM  
You realize, of course, that the city was built by aliens.
2001-12-07 01:58:09 AM  
A great archaelogical find, but this poor summary is likely to get the creationist trolls commenting.
Tectonic theory does not allow for Cuba to seperate from the Yucatan penninsula in 6500 years. However many cultures did have seafaring capabilities for millenia before then, and the same is true for cultures all over the world
2001-12-07 02:38:09 AM  
I am quite amused at the fact the poster of this link thinks that the Yucatan penninsula is in South America.

America's education system at work.
2001-12-07 02:41:04 AM  
Ack! That should read peninsula on the last post. I plead fat fingers.
2001-12-07 03:43:53 AM  
Based on Pursuant's comment, does this mean there was a civilization around millions of years ago? Specifically, when the big ass rock-from-space hit out near the Yucatan? Interesting...
~El Primo!~
2001-12-07 04:58:39 AM  
I think it was put there by a prankster god, who was trying to fvck with our heads.
2001-12-07 06:12:37 AM  
Cuba!?! I got your Cuba right here pal!
2001-12-07 06:50:01 AM  
I saw this special on Atlantis on Disc. Channel. And they talked about these rock formations. Apparently they look like a road leading to somewhere, they haven't been able to find a city. This lead to specs of Atlantis. But skeptics say that the rock formations occur naturally with that type of rock so it is all much ado about nothing.
2001-12-07 07:35:43 AM  

must be the warming, causing oceans to rise and all.

It's too damn hot here for December. Damn Global Warming
2001-12-07 08:02:37 AM  
"In an earlier high-profile find, ADC was testing equipment in late 2000 off Havana Bay when it spotted the century-old wreck of the American battleship USS Maine. The ship had not been located since it blew up mysteriously in 1898, killing 260 American sailors and igniting the Spanish-American War."

Huh? The Maine sank in Havana Harbor, in only about 50 feet of water. The Navy brought the hull up in the 1920's. There was an article in National Geographic about this a couple of years ago.

After the investigation I think they did sink the wreckage in much deeper water, maybe that's what they found.
2001-12-07 09:02:13 AM  
Mog: Claim that you are a direct descendant of the people who built it and claim the whole place for yourself.
2001-12-07 09:27:38 AM  
To add on to what RobbieFal was saying. Here in New York, it was almost 70 yesterday. Now I thought that the La Nina effect was supposed to bring cooler temps to the area by shifting the jet stream south, the opposite of El Nino.
This warm weather is frightening. I was wearing shorts and a t-shirt on saturday.
2001-12-07 09:36:00 AM  
As for another theory, during the ice ages, the water level drops drastically. I wouldn't be surprised if this city was covered by a combo of melting glaciers AND geologic activity.

FYI: Discovery Channel and TLC tend to be full of shiat more often than not. Don't learn archaeology from them. And NEVER read Chariots of the Gods. the end.
2001-12-07 10:06:52 AM  
relaximus, millenia means thousands of years, not millions. humans weren't capable of this 2 million years ago, we were dumbshiats back then. but don't ask me, i aint no archeologist.
can't be global warming either, 2100m is way too deep.
the big rock hit at 65million, same time as the indian lava flows and the dinosaur extinction.
2001-12-07 10:11:31 AM  
geez, that article seems pretty untrustworthy

for those interested in the USS Maine's real history

hurumph ... sorry I don't have killer html skillz
2001-12-07 10:20:22 AM  
Fry sauce, I did study archaeology, thats why if you read what was written, you'll see that i said part of it could have been global warming. would have to look at topographical maps, but there is always the possibility that a section of low lieing land was cut off from the ocean by other geologic formations, that when broken flooded the whole basin. Same type of thing that caused the great salt lake, black sea, and in fact most seas.
2001-12-07 10:30:19 AM  

if you ever listen to artbell, you knew about this half a year ago.
2001-12-07 10:54:21 AM  
because art bell is such a great source for news...
2001-12-07 10:56:14 AM  
and Thermos is a great source for warm soy milk
2001-12-07 11:09:01 AM  
Oh, crap! It's R'yleh!
2001-12-07 11:09:03 AM  
"ADC is the deepest operator among four foreign firms working in joint venture with President Fidel Castro's government to explore Cuban waters containing hundreds of treasure-laden ships from the colonial era."
Does this strike anyone else as a desparate move by a bankrupt country that actually aggressively stifles any activity towards a self-sustaining economy?
This is the national equivalent of being so po you have to search through the couch cushions (yours and others') for beer money.
2001-12-07 11:10:32 AM  
Perrin, at 18Ka, the ocean was a mere 100m lower than it is now. But the ruins were 2100m deep. So I agree, a SMALL part is due to global warming. I don't think the flooding theory can apply to these ruins.
2001-12-07 11:11:46 AM  
. . . proofread before adding comment . . . proofread before adding comment
2001-12-07 11:19:42 AM  
Overpaid Slacker: You worry about desperate when you misspelled poor as po!? (Just kidding)
2001-12-07 11:29:40 AM  
Corporate Mofo,

ALLRIGHT a Lovecraft reference.... ROCK ON....
2001-12-07 12:18:12 PM  
Bug: They're called ILLUSTRATIONS. There are no actual pictures of anything underwater.
2001-12-07 12:23:01 PM  
Mercury: i didn't want to get too technical with you.... remember your whole Bum Farking Egypt fiasco?
2001-12-07 12:24:56 PM  
bug: ?????
2001-12-07 12:31:26 PM  
"And NEVER read Chariots of the Gods. the end."

Too late, I already read that.
I also cought the "Maine" mistake. They must have just found where we sunk it after pulling it out of Havana Harbor.
2001-12-07 12:33:00 PM  
"we were dumbshiats back then"

back then? what about now?
2001-12-07 12:38:18 PM  
cyberspaceorbit.comView Full Size

Gee, I don't know. Do we really want to bring the terrible wrath of The Old Ones down upon us? Maybe we should just forget about this...
2001-12-07 12:38:28 PM  
While this sounds marvelously intriguing, I'm extremely hesitant to believe all of this. I'd be *very* skeptical about what they're calling structures and streets and so forth.

The press release describes "an urban development partly covered by sand. From above, the shapes resembled pyramids, roads and buildings...." I'd be very leery of accepting their interpretations of what they're seeing.

This reminds me very much of the so-called "Bimini Wall" that was described by Von Daneken (author of those "Chariots of the Gods"-type books) and others. These folks claimed that the "Bimini Wall" was part of Atlantis or some other such nonsense.

This so-called "wall" turned out to be a fractured and jointed limestone reef complex. Limestone tends to break and then erode along very even, regular lines, and can appear to be fitted stonework or brickwork in some circumstances. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if these folks are seeing limestone that was fractured by seismic activity, along with larger, fractured and tilted blocks of either limestone or volcanic rock. After all, the article itself admits that this is an area of seismic and volcanic activity.

And as for "circular formations," those are very common in limestone areas and are usually the result of underlying sinkholes.

Adding to my suspicions is the fact that the person making the announcement is "an ocean engineer" -- i.e., NOT an archaeologist. I'd take this thing more seriously if there were some reputable university's archaeology team
associated with such an announcement, not a private exploration company.

just my 0.02 pence.
2001-12-07 12:50:22 PM  
NMTurtlelady brings up a good point. So often crackpot theories are brought forward by people who don't have the expertise to make intelligent conclusions based on the data. That's not to say that great new discoveries haven't been made by people like this, but it is usually after someone with some background in the area has looked at it and verified it.

If you find this kind of story compelling, (as I do), I would suggest a book titled, "The lost civilization of the stone age," by Richard Rudgely. Very good book that doesn't really extrapolate into wild ideas based on the current data we have.
2001-12-07 01:41:26 PM  
[image from too old to be available]
2001-12-07 02:16:18 PM  
yeah i'm skeptical too. how many of these blocks were there and are there similar blocks in ancient ruins on land? the researchers were also skeptical and offered no concrete interpretations, only discriptions of what they saw. but not a lot is going to happen, geologically, in 5000 years or whatever. plate tectonics operates on huge time scales and like i said earlier, the oceans were only 100m shallower at most in the recent past.
2001-12-07 02:17:28 PM  
chilly willy, ha! good point.
2001-12-07 02:32:21 PM  
Fry_sauce: Are you by chance a geologist or studying geology? If so, I have a question. Have you ever heard of the "Crustal Displacement" theory originally proposed by Charles Hapgood in "Path of the Pole"? I've always wanted to ask a geologist about it. I know Einstein was a big fan and proved it was not impossible mathematically.
2001-12-07 02:35:35 PM  
Deboard, are you referring to the theory that suggests an occasional sudden "flip flop" of the crust of the Earth over the liquid mantle?
2001-12-07 02:41:05 PM  
Demosthenes: No, not quite, that is what writers such as Rand Flem-Ath have proposed based on not understanding the original theory. Hapgood's theory was that the crust could slip occasionally because of the unequal distribution of mass in ice at the poles. However, he believed it would occur over several thousands of years, but still rather quickly in geological terms I suppose.
2001-12-07 02:47:32 PM  
Yes... that's the one I mean....
2001-12-07 02:48:31 PM  
I meant "sudden" in a geological sense... ;-)
2001-12-07 02:49:56 PM  
Sorry, theres a rather big difference between Hapgood's original theory and what has been made of it lately in books. I just wanted to make sure you weren't speaking of the one that says it all happened in like a day and can explain what happened to atlantis, elvis, and bigfoot.
2001-12-07 03:21:53 PM  
Paraphrased form the article:
"Zelitsky said the structures may have been built by unknown people WHEN THE CURRENT SEA-FLOOR ACTUALLY WAS ABOVE THE SURFACE"

duhhh... do you think so???
2001-12-07 04:11:54 PM  
I haven't heard of the theory, but I would be extremely skeptical of any theory that suggets huge, rapid motions on the part of crustal plates. As stress builds, it's releived along relativley smaller faults on the interior of each plate, the entire thing would have a hard time moving as a whole that quickly. the plates are too weak and in fact, most geologists are puzzled as to why oceanic plates aren't pulled apart as they spread. How old is the Hapgood theory? Plate tectonics was accepted by geologists around 1970.
2001-12-07 04:48:58 PM  
Fry_sauce: I believe "The path of the poles" was published in the 50s or 60s. It must have been the 50s actually, because Albert Einstein wrote the preface to the book. His proposal was that it would be gradual, but faster than allowed by plate tectonics. Later on, many crackpots latched onto the idea and came up with the idea that it would all happen in a day or a few days and would cause a huge catastrophic end to civilization. I know Hapgood fought with a few of them in his last years, but he never managed to keep them from hijacking it.

I know only the basics of geology and less about plate tectonics, but I ended up reading one of the more wild books based on his theory, and thought it was a little too fantastic, and read his book after that. I've always wondered how geologists felt about it though. I would recommend that book and another he wrote called, "Maps of the ancient sea kings" though if you are interested.
2001-12-07 04:52:49 PM  
This kind of shoddily prepared psuedo-science is great fodder for the Ctuluthu role playing game. Nice pic, Demosthenes.
2001-12-07 04:55:50 PM  
Corporate Mofo-Nice Lovecraft reference,but I think R'yleh was in the Pacific.I think we're safe currently....
2001-12-07 05:09:57 PM  
I always thought that R'yleh was right off the coast of Antarctica....
Displayed 50 of 55 comments

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.