Watching the great documentary about past civilizations and the last apocalypse (Younger Dryas), here are my two cents or comments which I would like to say.
First, as Mr. Hancock says, archeologists believe people arrived in the Americas around 12.000 B.C. Archeologist Niede Guidon (now 89 y.o.) in the northeast of Brazil was managing a park in Serra da Capivara (without money to manage it, being damaged by tourists etc.) and Carbon 14 already dated human presence who lived there about 100,000 B.C. Unfortunately archeologists deny even Carbon 14 results to keep their lies around.
Another comment regards that Plato says (not sure if in Timaeus or Critias, even though I think it is Critias) that Egyptian wise people knew that in the past the civilizations had been destroyed many times by fire or water. When it is by fire, a celestial body that goes around the planet falls and only those who live near a fount of water (or in those caves with pits Mr. Hancock showed in Capadocia) survive. When the destruction is because of water, only those in the mountains survive. So if we take this as a truth there are 2 different kinds of global destruction related to nature, not only one, and in my humble view, Mr. Hancock puts both together. Ice age is just a theory. The fathers of this theory, Cuvier and Agassiz, believed that the planet had suffered a pole shift but the scientists at the time rejected the idea because they believed the planet doesn't have a inner power enough to move the planet. Satellites show the planet has this power as strong earthquakes cause a small (1 inch) pole shift. As closer to the pole is the earthquake, bigger should be the pole shift according to a mathematical study. What I want to say here is that a big earthquake close to the pole may cause a pole shift which will cause the ice to melt and vulcanoes to erupt and cover the surface with ashes and there will be no light for 3 days. Open the Bible, read the creation of the planet, when there is 7 days of flood, when the sun was created in the fourth day and you will have an idea. Or read Gilgamesh and you have a similar idea. Or read myths and legends from different peoples and tribes in different continents and you will find the same thing. You may also find (as I did) a legend with the expression "global warming" saying it happened before the past apocalypse and flood, and this legend was printed before the 1970s, when scientists began to use this expression. So what I would like to say here is that we are very close to the next natural apocalypse in my view as Mr. Hancock shows.
Years ago archeologists (I think) found a frozen Mammooth with tropical food in Siberia. This mammooth died suffocated. Nothing can explain this except a pole shift with earthquakes and carbon dioxide and other gases emitted from the interior of our planet. Ice age theory is wrong because the globe didn't freeze. If you go to Brazil you will see about 12,000 years ago in the northeast there were bears and other animals who live in cool weather and today it is much hotter there. The same happens in the deserts in north Africa. It is hotter today. But the opposite happened in Siberia, today is much colder than 12,000 years ago. The only thing that will explain this is a pole shift. Nothing else will explain why about 12,000 years ago parts of the planet became hotter and parts became colder.
I won't continue here as this would become too long but the 3 days of darkness, connected to a global flood, earthquakes etc. in myths are also found in prophecies. And this is, in my view, a very interesting thing. You want to know what is going to happen soon to our planet? Read the legends and myths and forget the scientists.
First, as Mr. Hancock says, archeologists believe people arrived in the Americas around 12.000 B.C. Archeologist Niede Guidon (now 89 y.o.) in the northeast of Brazil was managing a park in Serra da Capivara (without money to manage it, being damaged by tourists etc.) and Carbon 14 already dated human presence who lived there about 100,000 B.C. Unfortunately archeologists deny even Carbon 14 results to keep their lies around.
Another comment regards that Plato says (not sure if in Timaeus or Critias, even though I think it is Critias) that Egyptian wise people knew that in the past the civilizations had been destroyed many times by fire or water. When it is by fire, a celestial body that goes around the planet falls and only those who live near a fount of water (or in those caves with pits Mr. Hancock showed in Capadocia) survive. When the destruction is because of water, only those in the mountains survive. So if we take this as a truth there are 2 different kinds of global destruction related to nature, not only one, and in my humble view, Mr. Hancock puts both together. Ice age is just a theory. The fathers of this theory, Cuvier and Agassiz, believed that the planet had suffered a pole shift but the scientists at the time rejected the idea because they believed the planet doesn't have a inner power enough to move the planet. Satellites show the planet has this power as strong earthquakes cause a small (1 inch) pole shift. As closer to the pole is the earthquake, bigger should be the pole shift according to a mathematical study. What I want to say here is that a big earthquake close to the pole may cause a pole shift which will cause the ice to melt and vulcanoes to erupt and cover the surface with ashes and there will be no light for 3 days. Open the Bible, read the creation of the planet, when there is 7 days of flood, when the sun was created in the fourth day and you will have an idea. Or read Gilgamesh and you have a similar idea. Or read myths and legends from different peoples and tribes in different continents and you will find the same thing. You may also find (as I did) a legend with the expression "global warming" saying it happened before the past apocalypse and flood, and this legend was printed before the 1970s, when scientists began to use this expression. So what I would like to say here is that we are very close to the next natural apocalypse in my view as Mr. Hancock shows.
Years ago archeologists (I think) found a frozen Mammooth with tropical food in Siberia. This mammooth died suffocated. Nothing can explain this except a pole shift with earthquakes and carbon dioxide and other gases emitted from the interior of our planet. Ice age theory is wrong because the globe didn't freeze. If you go to Brazil you will see about 12,000 years ago in the northeast there were bears and other animals who live in cool weather and today it is much hotter there. The same happens in the deserts in north Africa. It is hotter today. But the opposite happened in Siberia, today is much colder than 12,000 years ago. The only thing that will explain this is a pole shift. Nothing else will explain why about 12,000 years ago parts of the planet became hotter and parts became colder.
I won't continue here as this would become too long but the 3 days of darkness, connected to a global flood, earthquakes etc. in myths are also found in prophecies. And this is, in my view, a very interesting thing. You want to know what is going to happen soon to our planet? Read the legends and myths and forget the scientists.