Stone slab which is 120 million years covered with the relief map of Ural Region

[jason200669]

The white slabs of Bashkiria

 

google as i cant post link yet

 

Has any news of these ever been confirmed or debunked?

[Boerseun]

Did not do a Google search for it, because it won't be necessary.

 

Suffice it to say that any stone slab 120 millions years old would not have anything intentionally engraved, scratched, or molded on its surface survive 120 million years of erosion.

 

If, by any chance, this particular stone slab has something on it that might resemble the Ural mountains or any other arbitrary form or shape, that resemblance resides totally in the viewers mind - a mind which also seems not to take in mind that the Urals of 120 million years ago also did not look like the modern, eroded version thereof.

 

If you see the Urals on a slab of stone, great. There are more mysterious coincidents afoot.

[Moontanman]

Did not do a Google search for it, because it won't be necessary.

 

Suffice it to say that any stone slab 120 millions years old would not have anything intentionally engraved, scratched, or molded on its surface survive 120 million years of erosion.

 

If, by any chance, this particular stone slab has something on it that might resemble the Ural mountains or any other arbitrary form or shape, that resemblance resides totally in the viewers mind - a mind which also seems not to take in mind that the Urals of 120 million years ago also did not look like the modern, eroded version thereof.

 

If you see the Urals on a slab of stone, great. There are more mysterious coincidents afoot.

 

I did google it, the stones do have carvings on them, the question is how old are the carvings? I think the premise of the carvings being on a 120 million year old slab of rock makes them 120 million years old is flawed to say the least. I have a chunk of marl in my yard that is certainly many millions of years old but if I carved something on it's surface and many years from now it was found would there be a reason to think the carving was many millions of years old? As the great cow says, erosion should have erased any possible carving over that time period but still there is no reason to assume the craving is that old to start with :shrug:

[jason200669]

Forgive me if this sounds a little frustrated.

I ask a simple qustion about an artical, if you cant be bothered to read it please dont dismiss it, just stay quiet.

Rant over

[Moontanman]

Forgive me if this sounds a little frustrated.

I ask a simple qustion about an artical, if you cant be bothered to read it please dont dismiss it, just stay quiet.

Rant over

 

I read it, I was unimpressed.....

[jason200669]

I read it, I was unimpressed.....

 

I have to admit i am disapointed with the maturity of that remark!

 

But! anyway, the intent was not to impress but to question..

If the following paragrapgh did not make you curious then why even reply to the thread, nothing constructive has been added by your statment!

It is not the age of the stone that is of interest but what is carved on it, but haveing read it you would know that and realise your reply wasnt relevant!

 

Scientists found a large stone slab in 1999 that features an relief map of terrain like those that the military has. The map shows canals stretching for 12,000 kilometers and enormous dams. There are rhombs close to the canals, but what they mean is unclear. And there are also many inscriptions looking like hieroglyphs. At first it was thought they represented an ancient Chinese language, but it was established later that was not the case. Scientists cannot yet decipher the meaning of the hieroglyphs.

 

Thanks for your opinion though even if you where unable to answer my question.

[Thunderbird]

The story has only one ambiguous source, makes absolutely no scientific, logical or historical sense what’s so ever.

[jason200669]

The story has only one ambiguous source, makes absolutely no scientific, logical or historical sense what’s so ever.

I agree, i have been unable to find any other source and that is good cause to doubt it, but it got me curious! So much of our history is unknown. In the time man has been walking upright only the last few thousand years have been recorded. How many times during the unrecorded history could man have reached the same technological hieghts we enjoy now and lost it all, just for nature to wipe the evidence away?

[Thunderbird]

I agree, i have been unable to find any other source and that is good cause to doubt it, but it got me curious! So much of our history is unknown. In the time man has been walking upright only the last few thousand years have been recorded. How many times during the unrecorded history could man have reached the same technological hieghts we enjoy now and lost it all, just for nature to wipe the evidence away?

If you are sincerely curious about archeology.. study archeology.

[Moontanman]

I agree, i have been unable to find any other source and that is good cause to doubt it, but it got me curious! So much of our history is unknown. In the time man has been walking upright only the last few thousand years have been recorded. How many times during the unrecorded history could man have reached the same technological hieghts we enjoy now and lost it all, just for nature to wipe the evidence away?

 

That is why I was unimpressed, I've seen many stories of unusual stuff coming from out lying areas of the world especially the vast empty areas of Asia, everything from crashed alien space craft to living Neanderthals and so far they have all been BS. With out a lot more documentation I remain unimpressed...... and I think rightly so, less than mature or not. As for how many times a civilization equal to ours could have been on this earth only to be lost forever? None at all, we will be obviously detectable for many millions of years after we are gone. We create far too many high tech products that simply do not go away in any thing other than geologic time.

[jason200669]

If you are sincerely curious about archeology.. study archeology.

 

Nope, not curious about archeology, the unknown and posibilities.. very curious

[jason200669]

That is why I was unimpressed, I've seen many stories of unusual stuff coming from out lying areas of the world especially the vast empty areas of Asia, everything from crashed alien space craft to living Neanderthals and so far they have all been BS. With out a lot more documentation I remain unimpressed...... and I think rightly so, less than mature or not. As for how many times a civilization equal to ours could have been on this earth only to be lost forever? None at all, we will be obviously detectable for many millions of years after we are gone. We create far too many high tech products that simply do not go away in any thing other than geologic time.

 

Fair enough, although i dont agree completly with your line of thinking i understand it.

It may take millions of years to completly remove all trace of us but how long to remove all but the gound up plastics?

We only inhabit a tiny percentage of this planet and with rising sea levels and other geological events that happen over long periods (or sometimes short) it wouldnt be hard to look for years and never come across anything at all.

I wouldnt be surprised if in less than 50thousand years after man had died out you could walk across an area like London and see no trace of it what-so-ever.

[freeztar]

I wouldnt be surprised if in less than 50thousand years after man had died out you could walk across an area like London and see no trace of it what-so-ever.

 

The next book on my book list is "The World Without Us", which deals with this topic. Have a look at the website if you are interested.

 

The World Without Us - Alan Weisman

[Thunderbird]

If you are sincerely curious about archeology.. study archeology

 

Nope, not curious about archeology, the unknown and posibilities.. very curious

 

If you happen to become aware of a new discovery concerning man’s past it will be because of work done in the field of archeology. I'm afraid however you will never be able to differentiate between what is the newly discovered from what is recorded as history if you are not interested in any thing known up to said discovery . New discoveries can only be recognized in the context of the known. Otherwise they mean nothing to those not interested.

 

What you are saying……. if I am to take you’re post literally, is that you’re not interested in knowing anything that anybody tells you about a subject they have prior knowledge of before yourself. Is that correct if not please explain?

[Moontanman]

The next book on my book list is "The World Without Us", which deals with this topic. Have a look at the website if you are interested.

 

The World Without Us - Alan Weisman

 

I will try to pick that one up too, I have no doubt that 50,000 years from now you could walk across what was London and see nothing of us but we are talking about digging for things and finding things in out of the way places no? Things like titanium, aluminum, stainless steel, plastic would survive for millions of years, and lots of other things under unusual conditions would survive. There is reason to believe that things like newspaper could survive in places like dry land fills for many hundreds if not thousands of years. Yes most things under most circumstances would disappear but enough of the billions of tons of stuff we throw away would survive for many millions of years just like dinosaur bones survive many millions of years. If we found a stainless steel tool in with dinosaur bones it would be pretty good evidence of intelligence at that time. Even things like flint and obsidian tools would survive from that time.

[modest]

The next book on my book list is "The World Without Us", which deals with this topic. Have a look at the website if you are interested.

 

The World Without Us - Alan Weisman

 

I saw him promoting that on the Daily Show - looked really interesting.

 

Fair enough, although i dont agree completly with your line of thinking i understand it.

It may take millions of years to completly remove all trace of us but how long to remove all but the gound up plastics?

 

I think a lot of human creation is more durable than fossilized bone. A bronze sculpture of a human for example would outlast the remains of its builder. We know that bones and fossilized bone lasts longer than humanity has existed - so it is a logical conclusion that human industrialism has never reached our level on this planet before... or we would see signs of it buried right next to our fossilized ancestors. None of them were found wearing wrist watches - as cool as that would be B)

 

~modest