Ancient civilizations covered with sand

2024 Author: Seth Attwood | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-16 15:55

A long time ago, in my childhood, I always wondered - why are archaeologists digging everything up? Why are all ancient cities buried under impressive layers of soil, sand, rubble and clay? I asked my parents, pointing out to them, submerged in the ground on the floor of the floor, ancient buildings - why? I was offered a completely traditional version of the "gradual immersion of buildings in the ground" and "the growth of the cultural layer." I was completely confused by a short film about the archaeological excavations in Mangazeya. I myself saw with my own eyes how archaeologists unearthed the remains of the city at a depth of more than two meters! But I know that in the Far North the cultural layer is growing very slowly. The usual 1 cm per 100 years of soil growth, as in the middle lane, is far from there. Yagel grows in the tundra for two months a year, almost no rotting occurs. And everything is keeping up very well. And in our time, you can find the remains of the expeditions that died at the beginning of the twentieth century and enjoy the stocks of their provisions. Why did Mangazeya end up at such a depth? Here you can remember both Troy and Babylon, and the buried Sphinx and almost all archaeological finds.

Further more. We learn not only to look, but also to see. Here is the Hermitage. I myself am surprised how I did not pay attention to the disproportion of the first and second floors before! After all, I looked at him hundreds of times! Pay attention - the first floor is much lower than the second and looks mundane. And the windows, the very windows that should have been above the ground, are immersed in it almost completely. I tried to reconstruct part of the facade (sorry for the inept photoshop), but now you can imagine how the palace should look like. Quite another matter! He's just handsome. Everything is harmonious.

I recall that many rooms of the Winter Palace are located below ground level. Who would do submerged rooms in swampy areas? Moreover, the semi-basement is obviously more expensive than the first floor. It is always cheaper to make just a foundation and put the first floor on it than to arrange a second-rate room and waterproof it. No wonder, in modern construction you will not find semi-basements. Only if it is predetermined by additional technical conditions.

There is also evidence that the "sinking" did not happen gradually. On the axonometric plan of St. Petersburg 1765-1773. (only 70 years after the start of the construction of the city) houses with semi-basements are clearly visible. What have already settled? At the same time, on many houses, pay attention to the second fragment, the owners were forced to add entrances to the second floor, since the first was too low. An explicitly constrained architectural solution.

And in the last picture we can see at all - the ground level surrounding the buildings is much higher than the level in the courtyards. Look - the house on the right - inside the courtyard, the first floor is not buried in the ground, but from the street it is a semi-basement.

Something in the 20th century, houses did not sit like that, for all a hundred years. This is not difficult to prove. Look at the photo.

View of the Trinity-Izmailovsky Cathedral in 1903 and 2012. The building on the right did not sink a bit. As the basement was in 1903, it remained in 2012. the street around the building.

But let's move on to other regions. I have collected thousands of photographs of houses with the first floors brought up. They are in the central part of Russia, in the south, and there are many of them in Siberia.

Here is Arkhangelsk:

Here is Vladikavkaz:

Here is Kostroma:

The list goes on and on. By the way, in the last photo we see a typical example: “wooden houses on stone basements”. It is absolutely not a reasonable decision from the point of view of common sense - to build a semi-basement of stone, practically the first recessed floor, and on it there is a wooden structure. This can only be explained by the fact that the one-story stone building was brought in by the soil as a result of the disaster, and it was necessary to urgently build on it another from what was at hand. There are many such buildings in St. Petersburg and in other cities. They were depicted by artists already at the end of the 19th century, so that the version of the "subsidence" and "cultural layer" does not work. And judge for yourself, how the cultural layer can accumulate in the city - is that here, the streets are not swept? A version concerning St. Petersburg was voiced that an additional layer of earth was formed as a result of deepening and clearing of canals and rivers. But from the axonometric plan we can clearly see that the houses were submerged already in 1765. Meanwhile, on the same plan there are no embankments yet, canals have not been dug, but there are only drainage ditches. And judge for yourself - could the builders afford to cover the floor of the royal palace? Well, what is the house of a merchant, and that noise will be, and the palace ?!

The points above the i are set by the fact of the excavations of the Luzhitsky monastery in Mozhaisk. In 1999, a layer of earth of about 2 meters was removed around it. The previous level of the walls was exposed, and tombstones of the 18-19th century were also dug, which suggests that the catastrophe happened not so long ago. By the way, the church has acquired a completely harmonious look. For a long time already I drew attention to the extraordinary "squatness" of our churches. Bell towers, towers, as if caps are not in size, piled on the dwarf. Everything is explained simply: everywhere, everything is covered with a layer of soil of 1, 5-2 m, the churches, half-submerged in the ground, have lost their original appearance.

Here we come to the most important assumption. The fact is that now they talk and write a lot about the former greatness of Hyperborea, Great Tartary, Russians and Slavs in general. But somehow it does not fit - how could such a great power suddenly collapse? We see that our ancestors possessed unprecedented technologies, a vast state, colossal wealth. And where did it all go? How could the dark forces seize power and wipe out almost all the evidence of our past from history? How did they manage to plunge humanity into the darkness of the Middle Ages?

Only one answer can be given to this - the Great Tartary was destroyed by a Global Catastrophe. A catastrophe on a cosmic scale destroyed almost completely the population of the largest country in the world - the Russians and threw them back into the Stone Age. We can only try to determine what kind of catastrophe it was.

Perhaps, and most likely, there have been several such disasters in the history of mankind. Surely, they were of a different nature - pole shift, global tsunami, volcanic winter, etc. But the last catastrophe, and as we see it happened quite recently (200-300 years ago), is somehow connected with the loss of soil and sand. Most likely, it was accompanied by other phenomena (earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, meteorological phenomena, strong and prolonged cooling) - here is the word for a true scientist. But there is no doubt that the European part of Russia and Siberia is littered with soil, cosmic dust or something else. At the same time, it is clear that Western Europe and other continents were not subjected to such a blow. Maybe they will correct me, but I have not found so many buildings buried in the ground anywhere else.

As for St. Petersburg, it probably also suffered a flood. But not enough to wipe the city off the face of the earth completely, although the buildings were significantly damaged. There is a theory according to which the Neva was formed quite recently. Note that the old maps of Ladoga Lake either do not exist at all, or it is very small. Researcher A. A. Nikonov came to the conclusion about the catastrophe. He discovered that at some time the waters of Lake Ladoga broke through to the Baltic in the region of the Ivanovskie rapids. Similar events took place in Karelia in our time, when a whole lake suddenly descended. However, Nikonov sends us to distant historical distances, as is customary in traditional history (TI), and we see that this catastrophe happened quite recently. And this can be found a lot of evidence, albeit not obvious, thanks to the efforts of the forgers, but still lying on the surface.

Take at least a medal issued by Catherine II in 1796 "In commemoration of the rule over two countries"

Here we do not find the Neva, although other rivers, even small ones, are very clearly marked. But on the site of the Neva, "Nevskie Lakes" are depicted. What's this? Cartographer error? And what kind of lakes are they? What do our scientists know about them?

Here's another simple example. If you build a graph of the growth of the population of Russia, then its back end, given the known rates, it will run into the notorious year 1700. Around these times (plus or minus one hundred years), the population of our country was almost completely destroyed. However, we are invited to believe the version that several hundred thousand of our ancestors for tens of centuries telepathied on the territory of our country, in order to then explosively increase the population. Wherever you stick, everything happens in an explosive manner: population growth, technical progress, and the development of productive forces. And all these are tolerances for the sake of official science. I do not believe. I do not believe that there were 2-3 children in Russian families, and then they abruptly switched to 10-14. It is also the fact that our ancestors wore the same clothes for thousands of years, rode carts and lived in huts. And then suddenly they came up with everything, or almost everything, that is technical in the whole world.

Only a catastrophe can explain the sudden destruction of a great country, oblivion of ancient knowledge and technologies, loss of Vedic faith, Europeanization of ancient culture.

A. Kungurov and other researchers are trying to explain the death of Great Tartary by a nuclear strike from hostile forces. Shown by numerous craters and craters. Alexei Kungurov considers a nuclear strike to be because he lives in the 21st century; if he lived in the 19th century, the strike would be TNT. Meanwhile, if we look at the Moon closest to us, or Mars, or Mercury, or other satellites of the planets not covered by the atmosphere, we will find a picture similar to some regions of the Earth. Indeed, the lakes near Chelyabinsk resemble lunar craters. Only the presence of a biosphere on our planet quickly smooths out such a relief, turning it into reservoirs, hiding it with vegetation and destroying it with man-made means.

Chelyabinsk region

Mercury

But if you think about it, then our astronomers have never witnessed at least one impact of a meteorite that led to the formation of a crater. Common sense dictates that in order to form a crater with a diameter of tens or even hundreds of kilometers, an impact of colossal force is required. There are huge craters carved into the hard granite rock. Such blows that would most likely shatter the planet.

It is worth remembering the Lanaf crater, 400 kilometers from Mumbai. The ground here is solid basalt - a very hard stone. Nevertheless, the "asteroid" knocked out a hole 500 m deep and 2000 m and 500 m in diameter. No traces of a cosmic body, as in other craters, were found.

In addition, there is no explanation why in some cases there are slides in the middle of the craters, while others are not. Moreover, these slides by no means consist of meteorite matter, but just preserve the layers in the section, as well as outside the explosion.

There is a theory of S. I. Sukhonos, and his article "CRATERS OF THE THIRD KIND ON THE SURFACE OF THE PLANETS AND THE ETHERIC HYPOTHESIS OF THEIR ORIGIN", to which I am addressing you. I will tell you more about this topic in other articles, but for now I will only point out that the author assumes a completely different mechanism for the formation of craters.

In his opinion, craters are formed as a result of the collision of a torus soliton - "ether donut" with the matter of a planet or satellite, as a result of which a reaction occurs with the destruction (annihilation) of matter. It depends on the direction of rotation of the torus soliton whether a hillock is formed in the middle of the crater or not.

This theory effectively explains the numerous craters on the bodies of the solar system, as well as craters formed in our time on the territory of our country, which official science does not really like to remember.

But back to our rams. I have not heard anyone notice the simple fact that there are no sandy deserts in America. Rather, in North America there is one small - Chihuahua, well, very small. But in the South, I never found it. But on our continent and in Africa, every desert is a cemetery of a great civilization. Gobi, Sahara, Central Asia, Kuwait deserts - all of them keep ancient cities, canals, rivers, roads, temples and pyramids under their sands. On the one hand, scientists explain this by the inept actions of our ancestors, which led to an ecological catastrophe. On the other hand, geologists explain the formation of a huge amount of sand by the destruction of mountain ranges and the removal of their remains to the plain by rivers. While the first process can be counted in tens of years, the second requires millions. It turns out that either our ancestors lived in the sands all the time, or the sands suddenly appeared. Judging by the old maps, there is no smell of sand in this area. And how could it be otherwise - this is a densely populated area with dozens of mighty rivers. Then where did the dunes come from? They would occupy the main agricultural land. Let's take, for example, which is closer - Central Asia. A fragment of the 1578 map (official

chronology). It should be noted here that on all maps earlier than 1700 (the time of the alleged catastrophe), the Caspian Sea has a completely different shape. Just don't make idiots out of our ancestors. You can even understand if distant geographical objects are incorrectly depicted, where there are no cities that are described according to rare travelers. But a densely populated area, and we see an abundance of cities around the Caspian, cannot be drawn with such global errors. There is no Aral Sea at all. Caspian - oval shape. There are a large number of rivers and cities in the area of modern deserts that we have no idea about. Definitely, we can conclude that the regions of the Kara-Kum and Kyzyl-Kum deserts were densely populated. There were mountains and cities, rivers and lakes. At the same time, the rivers had a completely different direction than the current ones. The sands are not marked on the maps. Let's go further, on the old maps there is no Gobi Desert, Takla Makan. Numerous cities and rivers are also marked in these areas. Actually, archaeologists found buried cities in the Gobi and other deserts, mummies - the cards do not lie. But they took their finds tens of thousands of years, which does not fit in with cartography.

But where did so much sand come from? If you believe that rivers inflicted it, where did it come from? As studies have shown, the mountains in the basin of these rivers consist of completely different rocks. Here is what the researcher V. B. Fedorovich: “In the Aral Kara-Kums, in the sands of Big and Small Barsuki and on the eastern shores of the Aral, the sands are dull white. Each grain of them is rounded and polished, like the smallest pellet. (ie, it is of marine origin - approx. mine) These sands consist almost exclusively of quartz alone - the most stable of the minerals - and a small admixture of smaller black grains of magnetic iron ore and other ore minerals. These are old sands. Their life path was long. It is difficult to find now the remains of their ancestors. Their genus originates from the destruction of some ancient granite ridges, the remains of which are now preserved on the surface of the earth only in the form of the distant Mugodzhar mountains. But since then, many times these sands have been re-deposited by rivers and seas. So it was in the Permian, and in the Jurassic, and in the Lower and Upper Cretaceous. They were last washed, sorted and redeposited at the beginning of the Tertiary period. After that, some layers turned out to be so tightly soldered solutions of silicic acid that grains merged with cement, forming a hard, fatty in fracture, pure as sugar, quartzite. But even this strongest stone is affected by the desert. Loose layers of sand are blown out, hard stones are destroyed, and again the sands are redeposited, this time not by sea or river water, but by the wind."

That is, according to the scientist, the sands have been here for millions of years. It's just strange that our ancestors did not notice them. Just as they did not notice the presence of the Aral Sea, and the fact that the Syr-Darya and Amu-Darya flow not into the Caspian, but into it. In theory, the rivers could cause sand, destroying the nearby mountains, but bad luck - the Tien Shan, Alai and Pamirs do not consist of quartz deposits, from which the sands of the Central Asian deserts could have formed. And in general, this theory does not find confirmation - many large rivers (Ganges, Indus, Yangtze, Amazon, Amur …), although they originate in the mountains, did not even form a hint of sandy deserts. And then, it would be inexplicable behavior of residents living in this region, watching how the river washes their lands with sand. People have mastered irrigation a very long time ago, and for a very long time they knew how to arrange canals, change river beds, and equip banks. But we see cities covered with sand. I am sure that if we excavate, then under the sand we will find clay - the remains of soil. That is, fertile lands were suddenly, or within a short period of time, covered with sand.

In the case of the European part of Russia, this is not sand, but soil or something else close in composition to ordinary soil. Hence the explanation for the strange fact - the widespread death of trees about 200 years ago. We hardly find trees older than two hundred years in our country, even in Siberia, in the Perm Territory and other places where the forest has never been completely cut down. According to researchers, in such places the forest should look something like the one in Shishkin's painting. Have you seen such places?

There are theories that they were destroyed by a global fire. But then there would be huge ashes. And then, someone tried to calculate how much oxygen will burn out in this case from the atmosphere? More similar to the truth is the version that the surface of the Earth in some regions was covered with a layer of dust or soil. In this case, all vegetation, including trees, will die. The population will lose crops for several years, hence the famine and pestilence. If it was dust, then solar radiation will decrease, which means that there will be a severe cooling.

In the above graph of the width of the annual rings of trees, we see that the strongest failures occur at ± 1698, 1742 and 1815.

That is, during these years, our territory has undergone some kind of cataclysms.

If we take a closer look at old photographs, for example, of Prokudin-Gorsky of the beginning of the century, and compare them with modern ones, then we are forced to note that there were much fewer trees at that time, or they were very young. Here are the photo comparisons (on the left, early 20th century):

I do not know how to explain this fact otherwise than by slowing down the growth of plants or by destroying them. You can get more details with this here:

Thus, we came close to the revealed fact: most of Russia relatively recently, 200 years ago, was covered with solid sediments. Other civilizations, Central Asia, Mesopotamia and Babylon, Egypt, Khara-Khoto (Gobi), Sahara, Takla Makan and others, were most likely covered with sand earlier. We can only guess what caused such a catastrophe. But it was she who led to the fall of Great Tartary.

We could assume that the Earth fell into the cosmic dust zone, but in this case, precipitation would fall more or less evenly over the entire surface of the planet. In the case of sand, we see that it lay selectively, precisely on the areas of ancient civilizations. And in the case of soil - to the territory of Russia. At the same time, it is not clear why in one case it is sand, and in the other - soil.

There is an assumption, and it has a basis, that the progress of mankind is artificially restrained by external forces. In particular, and by "falling asleep" the foci of development. As an example, to prove that this is possible, let us cite the case in the Plesetsk district of the Arkhangelsk region, in 1983. Here is what V. Fomenko writes about this (please, not to be confused with the historian AT Fomenko) in his book "ALIENS ALREADY CONTROL THE EARTH!" (this book is a full-fledged scientific work):

"7.3.3. According to reports (remaining "for official use") that came to Moscow from the Arkhangelsk region from the civil defense authorities, the sanitary and epidemiological service, the meteorological service and other sources, on December 15, 1983, from 8 to 12 o'clock, a huge amount of dust fell on the territory of the Plesetsk region (west of Plesetsk). sediment of dark gray color on an area of 160 by 80 km….

7.3.4. Before that, from 13 to 15 December there was a snowstorm with snow, which was almost over by the time of the dust. According to the first rough estimate, reported by the civil defense operational duty officer, the area of dust deposition was about 2000 km2 with an average thickness of the dust layer of 4 cm. The air temperature at that time was -6 ° С, the west wind was 5 m / s. The top of the cone (the shape of an area covered with dust looked like an isosceles triangle with strongly rounded sides and corners, like a flower petal) near the village of Konevo. There were also some spots. According to another report of the civil defense in the area of the city of Kargopol, dust fell together with snow on an area of 6,000 km2. The layer thickness is up to 6 cm. The third report of the chairman of the regional executive committee gives an area of dust deposition in the Plesetsk region of 5000 km2. When flying around by helicopter, an area of 10,000 km2 was obtained. The civil defense headquarters also reported by another telegram that during the period from 7 to 12 noon on 15.12.83, black-gray dust fell in the territory adjacent to Ken Lake, in places with a layer of up to 5 cm. Inspection with civil defense devices showed the absence of radiation. During the period of dust fall, according to eyewitnesses, it was as dark as night."

The author estimates the mass of the fallen dust at 300 million tons. At the same time, the book contains other facts of the discharge of solid precipitation from UFOs, no less grandiose. Of course, in this case we are talking about something completely different - about cleaning the atmosphere. But in fact, it is important for us to understand that it is not difficult for some intelligent beings to move such colossal volumes.

If we admit that our development is being constantly monitored, then many seemingly absurd actions of mankind can be easily explained. Here is the poisoning of people with GMO products and chemistry, although there is no need for this, and the use of oil as the main energy source, and the destruction of entire regions with the help of drought and AIDS, and the arms race, while any war is 1000 times more expensive the world, and much more. At the same time, it should be recognized that someone is protecting us. The same regular cleaning of the atmosphere. According to V. Fomenko, a global catastrophe with irreversible glaciation would have happened to our planet long ago, if THEY had not cleared the atmosphere of beryllium and lead. And the numerous asteroids that threaten to crash into the Earth many times? And they always fly by … somehow strange …

Although there is another version. Researcher Valery Pavlovich Kondratov (see the video "Fabric of the Universe. Part 5."

Indeed, a flat, almost rectangular area. And its edges look like after processing by a giant excavator:

The author gives a lot of evidence for his version, I recommend watching his video. We are interested in his option of dumping unnecessary waste rock onto the continents by means of pumping through pipes. Hence the colossal amounts of sand.

Well, that's also an option. But he does not explain the drift of buildings in Russia.

There may be many versions, but one must not close one's eyes to the facts. I would like our scientists to get involved in the problem for real, and not with the aim of falsifying and brushing it off. Yet they have more materials and experience in such work.