japan atlantis- yonaguni monument

Discussion in 'Science and Nature' started by grass man420, Nov 14, 2011.

  1. these monuments/pyramid/temple were found off the coast of japan , they date back to over 4000 years . who built them? are they really natural like they claim? they are i think 2000 years older than the egyptian pyramids. there weren't supposed to be intelligent humans alive at that time, so we must have our history entirely wrong, if they were in fact, man made.
    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIu2rA0yd9s]Japanese Atlantis - Japan - YouTube[/ame]
    Yonaguni - the mysterious underwater pyramid structure at Yonaguni Jima, Japan
    Yonaguni Monument
    we may never discover the truth, but its fun to ponder what the truth is.
  2. Stole it from one of the links.. Back when The History Channel was good.

    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HGEpg9V41Qg]Japan's Mysterious Pyramids (Yonaguni) - FULL VERSION History Channel Documentary - YouTube[/ame]
  3. I finished that video. It was a neat watch.. I can see why the one dude was saying it was just natural, at first, but the face with the headdress at the "stage" sealed it for me.
  4. yeah i dont think there man made, theres to much precision. but again the question comes up, who built them? was it just humans or aliens? or a combination of both. either way its extraordinary the implications. cause if its just humans , were apparently smarter than we thought, if its aliens then thats cool they exist and are helping us lol
  5. #5 420stonedpanda, Nov 14, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 14, 2011
    If they're 2000 years older than the 3 Pyramids at Giza then they have to have been built around 4500BC. If that's the case they won't even be the oldest human temple complex (the oldest is I think Gobekli Tepe(sp?) which was built in the 9th Millennium BC)...

    Such a stunning place either way though.

    Also, I just read that they proved they were artificial, though this website is probably full of shit as it only cites 'marine geologists' as the people who proved that it's artificial...
  6. Wasn't really trying to bring aliens into it.. With or without aliens, it could of been done. They didn't really have labor laws back then, lol, doesn't take much to get a following and then force them to do your bidding.

    I know this might be up there with the alien theories, but I've always thought that there was a group of slightly more intelligent humans back then. Like the first homosapiens with reasonable intelligence seen how they could us fear/god tactics to control the rest, got a foot hold for a bit, but as the rest started playing catch up, they began to lose their grip.
  7. Yeah, they talked about that in the video. The one guy thinks it was just created that way from the water, but here is my problem with that. At the very end, the same guy was talking about a place they found above ground not too to far away and how it mimics the underwater place. The guy said they must have seen the natural formation and mimicked it.. But if it was created by water rising, and being underwater, and not being rediscovered til the 80's makes me think those people would of never seen it if it was natural.

    Also, if you watch the video (I'll try to find the time of it) there is a place called "the stage" which looks like a stage. The spot where they were talking about a face, you can see a headdress type thing carved into the rock. That right there was enough to tell me it wasn't natural.
  8. Starts at 32 minutes. If they're still not studying this place, they should take a good look at it. I think the humans who did it did it there cause the rock was probably easy to work with.
  9. There's another way of looking at that. The underwater formation isn't mimicking what's found on land, but is just another example of local geology as found on land there. All way too out of proportion with humans to be of use. Each 'step' to the platform is massive.

    Sorry about a long post, but it rebutts all the photographs and formations. Sorry too that the links to the pics don't work, they were taken down after posts like the below at: http://www.ramtops.co.uk/yonaguni.html

    ".. http://www.teamatlantis.com photos from webpages:
    1) http://www.eagle-net.org/phikent/japan/japan_5.jpg
    Cliff face showing blocky erosion morphology with joint bounded blocks, straight structure is a dike (probably diabase). Blocky upper surface produced by decouplment of horizontal joint or bedding plane (decollement fault) and eroded during gravity slide.
    2) http://www.eagle-net.org/phikent/japan/japan_2.jpg
    Joint bounded erosion block.
    3) http://www.eagle-net.org/phikent/japan/japan_5.jpg
    Same as #1
    4) http://www.eagle-net.org/phikent/japan/japan_6.jpg
    Top of cliff showing blocky erosion morphology with joint bounded blocks. Blocky upper surface produced by decouplment of horizontal joint or bedding plane and eroded during gravity slide (notice the gravity slide would be towards the cliff face i.e. in the dip direction of the joint or bedding surface.).
    5) http://www.eagle-net.org/phikent/japan/japan_7.jpg
    Top of cliff showing blocky erosion morphology with joint bounded blocks.
    6) http://www.eagle-net.org/phikent/japan/japan_8.jpg
    Joint bounded cliff face. Note what appears to be a talus slope at bottom of the outcrop
    7) http://www.eagle-net.org/phikent/japan/Japan_10.jpg
    Top of cliff showing blocky erosion morphology with joint bounded blocks. Blocky upper surface produced by decouplement of horizontal joint or bedding plane and eroded during gravity slide (notice the difference in weathering between the cliff face and the upper joint surfaces, decouplment and gravity slide is probably a result of weathering of ancient cliff face and tectonic activity (i.e. earthquake)).
    8) http://www.eagle-net.org/phikent/japan/Japan_11.jpg
    Top of cliff showing blocky erosion morphology with joint bounded blocks. Blocky upper surface produced by decouplement of horizontal joint or bedding plane and eroded during gravity slide.
    9) http://www.eagle-net.org/phikent/japan/Japan_12.jpg
    Rhomdehedral jointed blocks. Note the apparent decoupment of the block beside the diver. Note the brittle fracturing of the surrounding blocks. These erosional features are typical of a gravity slide.
    10) http://www.eagle-net.org/phikent/japan/Japan_13.jpg
    Clearly congregate joint sets. Typical of what one would expect if the rock was stressed by compression either by tectonic activity or volcanic intrusion.
    11) http://www.eagle-net.org/phikent/japan/Japan_14.jpg
    Same as #9. Note the conchoidal brittle fractures observed in the top right corner.
    12 ) http://www.eagle-net.org/phikent/japan/Japan_15.jpg
    Note how vertical and deep the base of the cliff is (very similar to that of the cliffs on the shoreline of the island) as well the stepped cliff surface and the brittle fracturing of some of the upper surfaces. All consistent with a gravity slide of a jointed rock outcrop.
    13) http://www.eagle-net.org/phikent/japan/Japan_16.jpg
    Top of cliff showing blocky erosion morphology with joint bounded blocks. Blocky upper surface produced by decouplment of horizontal joint or bedding plane and eroded during gravity slide. Note the conchoidal brittle fractures.
    14) http://www.eagle-net.org/phikent/japan/Japan_17.jpg
    Weathered upper rock surface. Grove is most likely a weathered dike partially removed through decoupment and gravity slide mass erosion at a much older date than the other examples. Note the weathered diagonal joint on the right side of the photo.
    15) http://www.eagle-net.org/phikent/japan/Japan_18.jpg
    Weathered upper rock surface which looks volcanic, although it could be sedimentary (no information about the photo is given for some reason) Could be tree casts if rock is volcanic in origin. That is structures that form when lava flows, pyroclastic flows or ash surrounds or buries upright trees, later the trees rots or burns away. If the rock is sedimentary it could also be tree casts, if the sediments were deposited rapidly, or it could be potholes (i.e. holes drilled by rock fragments rotated by current induced localized vortices over long periods of time.
    16) http://www.eagle-net.org/phikent/japan/Japan_19.jpg
    Don't know what they are trying to show here. Upper surface looks like a volcanic flow of some kind..
    17) http://www.teamatlantis.com/plan/images/pyramid.gif
    Pyramid? Very hard to tell from this photo. Looks like a joint bounded block as part of a gravity slide talus slope.
    18) http://www.teamatlantis.com/plan/images/cut.gif
    Looks volcanic and highly weathered... possibly a collapsed lava tube. Note the degree of weathering from the joint bounded blocky erosion features in the above photos. I hope they are not suggesting that these were both carved at the same time.
    19) http://www.teamatlantis.com/plan/images/flat.gif
    Flat? No Idea what this photo is support to represent. Looks like a volcanic flow with a surface of brittle fractures a result of mechanical erosion of the face.
    20) http://www.teamatlantis.com/plan/images/mound.gif
    Burial mound?
    Extremely poor quality photo. Looks like the leading front of a solidified lava flow (i.e. pillows).
    21) http://www.teamatlantis.com/plan/images/angle.gif
    Congregate join set bounded erosional morphology.
    22) http://www.teamatlantis.com/plan/images/well.gif
    Looks like a lava flow with a lava tube opening. Highly weathered.
    My god... Finally some photos with captions, unfortunately they are not that detailed.
    23) http://www.teamatlantis.com/plan/images/web1a.jpg
    Joint bounded erosion surface
    24) http://www.teamatlantis.com/plan/images/web2a.jpg
    Photo caption states "Such rectilinear features rarely, if ever, occur naturally".
    Completely untrue... erosion of jointed rocks often form rectilinear features. This fellow should take a walk along the shore of Yonaguni Jima.
    25) http://www.teamatlantis.com/plan/images/web3a.jpg
    Strong current is claimed in the caption, but it is not strong enough to significantly deflect their respirator bubbles.
    26) http://www.teamatlantis.com/plan/images/web4a.jpg
    "perfectly right angles"? Not exactly perfect, but that is not uncommon for joint geometry. They never seem to mention the angles that are not 90 degrees in any of these captions.
    27) http://www.teamatlantis.com/plan/images/web6a.jpg
    Photo caption "Could strong currents have simply sheared off layers of Yonaguni's sandstone..."
    Wow the first snippet of geological information I have seen so far.
    Strong currents?
    More likely an earthquake induced gravity side, which is obviously common in the area or else there would not be those cliff on the island's shoreline. Note the non-right angles and conchoidal fractures. Suction during submarine slide is most likely explanation for removal of small debris and the clean look of the outcrop.
    28) http://www.teamatlantis.com/plan/images/web7a.jpg
    The photo caption says "Did ancient humans once walk upon these giant platforms..."
    Considering how little weathering and coral growth it must have been very recently.
    29) http://www.teamatlantis.com/plan/images/web8a.jpg
    Same as #7.
    30) http://www.teamatlantis.com/plan/images/web9a.jpg
    Same as #9-11.
    31) http://www.teamatlantis.com/plan/images/web10a.jpg
    Photo caption reads: "Two vertical monoliths (see up-date 6/1/98). Are these two verticals stones what remains of an ancient calendrical device..."
    More likely this is another example of a joint decoupment due to earthquake induced mass erosion. Kind of gives one an idea as to how unstable the cliff face actually is.
    32) http://www.teamatlantis.com/plan/images/web11a.jpg
    Photo caption states "This stone archway... is symmetrically composed of five blocks...".
    Looks like part of a talus slope (the debris from a gravity slide) or a small translation decollement fault (i.e. an earthquake has caused movement along a horizontal joint or bedding plane separating two joint bounded blocks.
    One also need to look more closely at the degree of weathering of joint surfaces which is very different from the other outcrops suggesting that this is a lot older surface
    33) http://www.teamatlantis.com/plan/images/web12a.jpg
    Same as #31.
    34) http://www.teamatlantis.com/plan/images/web14a.jpg
    Photo caption states "A curious diver peers off an underwater cliff...".

  10. Lol, kind of hard to see photos that refute other photos without photos. Plus, nothing in the description of the pics makes me think there are any to debunk the "stage" area. If that stage wasn't there, I'd be more inclined to think it is all just a natural fluke.
  11. haha your probably right i jumped on the band wagon for aliens too quick.
    but it could still be a possibility. the site should be getting investigated more. so we can find out more about it.
  12. #13 m00zix, Nov 14, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 14, 2011

    What the fuck happened to the history channel?
  13. #14 m00zix, Nov 14, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 14, 2011
    What the hell@the second video. All these scientists speculating that because the pyramids are so similar and there are similar structures around the world that that information HAS to have been shared from one ancient civilization to the next. Really? Each civilization just couldn't discover math on their own? lol I mean, it's highly unlikely that the ancient peoples traveled around the world sharing their knowledge of things. I won't deny that it's a possibility, but it just seems more likely that each civilization individually discovered mathematics

    First 17 minutes of the video are pretty much a waste of time. They go on blabbering about things somewhat relevant to the structure...

    Now they're talking about their feelings?! YOU'RE NOT SCIENTISTS! Hahahaha.

    I'm not convinced at all that those "faces" in the stage are faces. I think it's like that one white dude said, it's probably a natural structure for the most part and may have been used by humans/some traces of this may be present (for example the "hieroglyphs.") That was a pretty interesting watch, but once the video ACTUALLY got started around 18-20 minutes, I became more and more convinced the structure was a product of natural processes. The main points that almost cement this view is the fact the structure is one solid rock and similar erosion can be witnessed along the coastline.
  14. I totally agree about independent learning. After seeing how well convergent evolution works, there is no doubt in my mind that the same attributes of a species can spring up independently of each other at different times.

    Lol, yeah, and the part where the diver said "It was like God was saying to check it out" or some shit, lost a couple points on my end..

    I'm not ruling out the natural process, but like I said, once I seen that "stage" area, I was set. I kind of regret using this site cause they talk about UFOs, crop circles, and the face on Mars, but it has some nice photos.

    Siriusly - Ancient Civilizations - Yonaguni


    I think they're reading into it too much though. If Atlantis was real, I wouldn't even think for a second it was this place.. I don't see it as natural, but I don't see it was some super advanced, lost civilization. I just see it was a spot where man was earlier than what we thought and liked to carve shit out of rocks, lol.

    I mean we learn new stuff everyday, even about our own past, but when you teach the same thing over and over for years, a new concept isn't the easiest to take in.
  15. They aren't photos that refute photos, they're statements about the claims that the website made about each of the sites in the movie. Each of the features, such as the steps and stage, have sound and mundane reasons for their existence. All features are explained above by a geologist and compared to natural rock formations that lie within a few hundred yards of the underwater site.

    The formations on land, which continue further up the coast are natural beyond doubt. In light of this, finding something which echoes the natural perfectly can only lead to one conclusion - it too is natural.

    The 'stage' is simply a flat slab of rock of the same type as is present on land. Using the word 'stage' to describe it is emotive, used to imply a use and meaning where there is none. The 'stage' would have been too high to climb, and the 'stairs' leading up to it are each about 12 feet high.

  16. I checked out the page and read the whole back and forth between the 2 people. Seemed like it was just a pissing contest of "well you're not a geologist" then "yeah, you're not either.." At first I was thinking those photos were ones he made, from the originals, to point out what was seen, but now I see they were just links to the originals.

    I was just thinking though, who says it can't be natural then used by man? Cause the headdress (provided they weren't just adding in with the incorrect overlay for the video) is far from natural to me.


    Now I realize someone put an overlay on that to make it more pronounced, as was in the video, but if accurate, there is nothing that can convince me that that part at least isn't man made.

    An island culture living there (would be before the end of the ice age I guess) could of made great use out of something like that.
  17. No one here disputes the possibility of man leaving it's mark/s on the vastly natural structure.
  18. That raises the next question as to when. The "face" part seems like it's up higher than most, as ice began to melt and water level rises, they may have gotten there when that part was the only part sticking out. Or they may have done it before it was entirely covered, which would make us rethink a few things.

    I can see the majority of that forming naturally and the "locals" thinking it was made for them by the sea gods, or by the gods long ago and no longer used. Trying to put myself in their.. I guess sandals.. if they thought it was made for them, it wouldn't surprise me one bit if they fashioned a sacrificial platform. Virgins, sheep, whatever they can drain of blood to offer up so they can catch more fish or not be killed by the ocean, lol.

    Kind of like when you're on a hike and you see what looks like a perfect chair cut out from some rocks, there is probably a flash of an idea that it was made just for you to sit down in.
  19. No, the comments I've posted above are from a geologist, the other respondent isn't.

    Absolutely. But there's no evidence that it was, that's the problem. There are no artifacts anywhere in the area that show it to have been in use by humans, If carved by them there would be a substantial amount of it. Even if it was just adapted, there would be evidence, either around it or on the nearby islands, of signs of their lives. As we didn't have metal around the time this was alleged to have been used, they would have left tool marks, chips of stone, used stone chisels, but none have been found. I think really though that what kills it is that it's entirely out of context with the size of humans.

    It's also one thing to say that a tribe had merely adapted a natural formation - or that they'd actually carved and created what's there. The thinking gives a totally different perspective on the scale of any mystery that it might have.

    As in the geologists comments above, it's just eroded pillow lava folds.


Share This Page