By David DeFino
About 15,000 years ago (13,000 BCE), the last great Ice Age came to an end. The temperatures rose and many areas of the northern hemisphere were under an “altithermal” climate that was several degrees warmer than today. The sea levels began to rise at a rate of 10 ft per century from their ice age lows of 350 ft below todays levels. This continued for close to 2,500 years.
The Younger Dryas Event
Then, in 10,500 BCE, The Younger Dryas event halted the warming, and plunged the Earth back into an ice age that lasted for 1,000 years.
Some scientists believe this was caused when the North American ice sheet receded past the St Laurence river causing all of the fresh water melt from the glaciers to flow up the St Laurence into the North Atlantic disrupting the Gulf Stream (previously, the melt water would have been flowing down the Mississippi into the Gulf of Mexico.)
Others have postulated that the Younger Dryas event was caused by a meteor impact. Evidence for this theory includes carbon rich soil layers that mark the start of the Younger Dryas event containing nanodiamonds, metallic microspherules, carbon spherules, magnetic spherules, iridium, charcoal, soot, and fullerenes enriched in helium-3.
Whatever the case, it is believed that the Younger Dryas event spelled doom for the Clovis people living in North America at the time. Many people believe that the Clovis people were of European descent and that they travelled to North America during the end of the last great Ice Age.
But could Clovis, or anybody living on Earth 10,500 years ago be advanced? Recently, the History channel ran a show about what would happen if every human on earth left. The show basically described the weathering of our technology, and how it would fall apart. After 10,000 years (the show claims) all that would be left of our civilization would be things carved in stone (like Mt Rushmore, or the Pyramids). All of our metal, wood and paper would have long since corroded and broken down. Therefore, we would not know how advanced such a civilization would be.
Modern archeologists dismiss the possibility of any civilization existing at the time. However, I suspect that any advanced civilization at the time would have been coastal based, and at the time of Younger Dryas, the sea levels were 100 ft below what they are today making any remains of costal civilizations deep under the sea.
Is There any Evidence of Civilization before Younger Dryas?
Grahm Hancock made a documentary that proposes that both the Pyramids at Giza, and the temples of Angkor Wat are built to mimic the placement of constellations in our sky at around 10,500 BCE. He claims that these structures were built on the remains of previous structures. (Although there is evidence that the Sphinx, and possibly even the Pyramids actually were built around 10,500 BCE and later repurposed by the Egyptians). Instead of explaining his theory here, I am embedding his documentary below for you to watch.
What Other Evidence Exists for pre Younger Dryas Civilizations?
Anyone who has been paying any attention to anything over the past 20 years is well aware of the Mayan calendar and it supposed 2012 doomsday. What most people don’t realize is that the Mayan calendar never predicted the end of the world. Instead, it predicted the end of this age of mankind. That is significant because there were many ages before this one as there will be ages after this one. Were the Mayans aware of an earlier civilization (or age) of man?
As I have stated before, Preceding the Younger Dryas event, the Earths sea levels were 100 ft lower then they are today. Any costal civilizations, would have been in areas now underwater. Of the cost of the Bahama Islands lies a strange series of rocks known as the Bimini Road. Most scientist dismiss these rocks as being natural formations. What evidence do they have to make that assumption? Simple: “The rocks that make up the Bimini Road have been under water for 10,000 years, and there were no civilizations capable of building them 10,000 years ago.“ This is a great paradox of science. The evidence of a civilization living 10,000 years ago is dismissed because there is no evidence of a civilization living 10,000 years ago.
Much like the Bimini Road, the Yonaguni Monument is argued by many scientists to be a naturally occurring structure based entirely on the notion that it couldn’t have been built by a civilization because the last time it was above water was 10,000 years ago and there is no evidence of civilizations then.
Dwarka and the Indian Undersea Cities of the Gulf of Cambay
Recently, several cities off the coast of India have been discovered. All of these cities were last above water around 10,000 years ago. These cities had been described in Ancient Hindu texts, but had long been considered myth by modern science. Why? Because modern science claims there were no civilizations 10,000 years ago. However, these cities are so well preserved, that science can no longer ignore them. Does the existence of Dwarka eliminate the only argument against the man made origins of other sites like Bimini Road and Yonaguni Monument? Check out these documentaries about the findings at Dwarka:
Greek philosopher Plato told the story of the lost civilization of Atlantis in 350 BCE. In Plato’s story, Atlantis was destroyed 9,000 earlier. This would place the sinking of Atlantis around the same time as the end of the Younger Dryas event.
There are other sites that I have not mentioned that all show signs of man made structures under the seas. All places that would not have been above water when conventional science says civilization began.
Science tell us that civilization began in Egypt and Samaria around 3,200 BCE. This is why most scientists are reluctant to accept that any structures found under the sea in places that would have last been above sea level before the Younger Dryas event could possibly man made. These places would have existed 7,000 years before the currently accepted birth of civilization. However, modern science also claims that humans have evolved into our current incarnation about 1 million years ago. We have had the same brain capacity, and the same powers of deduction and reason for that entire time. With that in mind, it seems illogical to think that civilization, and all the advancements that come with it would have only evolved in the last 5,000 years. That would mean that we had the capacity to do everything we do now for 1 million years, but only did it in the last 0.005% of the time that we have been able to do it. Logic dictates that we would have become civilized much earlier, and then some catastrophic event caused us to regress.
Is there a Precedent for the Regression of Civilization?
A lot of people say that once we learn something, we do not regress. That is untrue. All we have to do is look to the Roman Empire for proof of the regression of civilization. At the height of the Roman Empire, Roman citizens enjoyed air conditioned and heated homes, Running water, toilets and power tools. After the fall of Rome around 500 CE, it took our civilization over 1,000 years to advance to what the Romans had. We did not have indoor plumbing and toilets again until the mid 1800’s. We didn’t develop air conditioning again until the 20th century. Rome fell due to over expansion and poor management by lousy leaders. A global cataclysm such as the Younger Dryas event could have easily plunged humanity back into the stone age.
I have included below for reference Temperature fluctuations over the past 22,000 years showing the abrupt cooling during the Younger Dryas. This chart is derived from measurement of oxygen isotope ratios from the GISP (Greenland Ice Core Project) Greenland Ice Core.
That adreessds several of my concerns actually.
If my problem was a Death Star, this article is a photon toprdeo.
[…] that would place this objects creation to before the end of the last ice age. Some researchers (myself included) believe that mankind had developed a somewhat advanced civilization that was wiped out by the […]
That’s really thninkig at a high level
[…] you have read my earlier piece on the Younger Dryas, you can guess where I am going with […]
Your place is valueble for me. Thanks!?
I feel sastified after reading that one.
Thanks very beneficial. Will share site with my pals
This might be out of context, but I am surprised about one thing.
It has been my understanding, for many years, that the sea level difference around 10,000 years ago was not 100 feet, but over 100 metres! That is three times as much, and actually makes the idea of hidden offshore cities much more likely.
From what I understand, pearl divers can possibly dive down to around 33 metres, but 110 metres has been impossible for human beings: until the aqualung was invented in 1942!
THAT appears to me, the primary reason that most of these cities and other coastline structures could not be discovered until the quite recently.