Lost city found off Mumbai:

[jeffreyab]

There are several reports that a lost city has been found on the ocean floor off Mumbai. Current theory has it being submerges at the end of the last ice age around 9,000 years ago, 2,000 years before the Sphinx was created.

Links:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1768109.stm

http://www.hindunet.org/saraswati/khambat/khambat01.htm

http://www.archaeologyonline.net/artifacts/lost-city.html

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/EE02Df02.html

Looks like the original discovery was back in 2002.

The current dating would not only make it the world's oldest city but it predates the previous earliest city by the same amount of time that it predated us.

However the site is very difficult to work on and most of the pronouncments made in the BBC article are by Graham Hancock a sort of Anglo-Indian Erich von Daniken.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graham_Hancock

Comments

New Stuff

[minnehaha.livejournal.com]

First a new mouse, and now a new city.

This is a good day.

B

[darthparadox.livejournal.com]

Given Hancock's (for some reason, I typed "Hackcock's" there at first) history, this is an eminently reasonable question: have his statements been backed up by any scientists that don't have a precursor civilization agenda?

[mindme.livejournal.com]

I've encountered this hare krisnha guy in Seoul who argues vigorously against evolution. His problem is it doesn't disprove a Christian "young earth" hypothesis but it disproves a Vedic "trillion year old earth" hypothesis. Since his religious text claims human civilization has been around for a billion years or so, evolution has to be wrong. He spends considerable time trying to argue chips in shale rock are 500 million year old footprints etc. I'm sure this is going to soon work into his thesis.