Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [ancient_waterways_society] Re: "Ancient Canals?"

Expand Messages
  • Vincent Barrows
    A set of ancient canals was built in Florida nearby Ortona Mound. These canals are identified by Archaeologists as the longest set of prehistoric canoe
    Message 1 of 23 , Nov 22, 2010
    • 0 Attachment

      A set of ancient canals was built in Florida nearby Ortona Mound. These canals are identified by Archaeologists as the longest set of "prehistoric" canoe canals. The 5-mile long Ortona Canals have been identified to have been constructed around 1200 AD.   See the following sources for more information:

      http://www.mnemotrix.com/geo/ortona/ortona.html

      http://www.mnemotrix.com/geo/ortona/ortona.pdf

      http://www.nps.gov/nhl/designations/samples/fl/Mud%20Lake%20Canal.pdf

       

      So we cannot rule out the possibilty of more ancient canals, even though more research is needed to confirm the date of construction for these features.

       

      The contribution of this information as possible ancient waterways is appreciated. A potential research path for further discussion is the construction and use of prehistoric aquaducts. 

       

      Thanks;

      Vince



      From: bigalemc2 <puppet@...>
      To: ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Mon, November 22, 2010 1:26:50 PM
      Subject: [ancient_waterways_society] Re: "Ancient Canals?"

       

      (This is being cross-posted at http://ancientcanals.blogspot.com/)

      William -

      Thanks for your information and opinion. We agree with you that - though the name of the site is "Ancient Canal Builders" - we should do everything we can to try to explain them as modern, up to the moment that explanation doesn't fit. The title does tell visitors that we have looked into this, and - to our own satisfaction - the modern explanations do not suffice. We have put many, many hours into this already and would not be continuing without having asked a lot of questions ourselves. Part of our early efforts are to explain to visitors why we have come to this conclusion. That will take some time, and in the meantime we do expect others to question our thinking.

      To begin:

      We are aware of all the things you point out. It is our opinion at this time that those 'explanations' do not suffice to explain the geographical extent of the canals, their provenance, nor their number, nor the geography of any of them. We may find some that are explainable as modern, and their similarities argue that if any are modern, then all of them are modern - and if any of them are shown to be not modern, then probably none of them are. So a good deal of our effort is going into determining what they are not.

      They are clearly not barrier bars. First of all, they are canals, not protuberances sticking up out of the water. (Did you even bother going to the site?) They are not spits. They do not appear at all like dunes; in fact, they do not appear in sandy places. Most are in mud flats or grassy areas.

      BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5542438692150511410
      Weekapaug, RI
      (Those canals are mostly less than the width of a car.)

      Some are actually submerged in the Gulf of Mexico.

      Many - perhaps most - of the canals branch out off rivers and streams hundreds of yards (some of them even miles) from the current shore line, after which they branch again and then again, several iterations, all with canal widths that are unnatural in their consistency.

      Our preliminary conclusion: These do not appear to be barrier bars, dunes or spits. They are definitely not natural. If you have been to the site and seen the satellite images you would see that immediately.  Your opening generic statement that "most of your "ancient canals" can be attributed to natural coastal features" turns out to have no substance.

      We are looking into records of man made dredging. One thing is certain: If these were done by the Army Corps of Engineers, they are not taking credit for them in our first perusal of the COE information. We do not rule that out at this time; it is too early to say.

      As to developers, there are plenty of retirement/vacation home or waterside developments to compare these to. Based on lot size, spacing of canals, width, geometry, configuration, etc., we have reason to believe this explanation falls short. It is under consideration, and if it turns out this is correct, we will readily go with that. There are two types/classes that we've seen that seem to warrant comparison with water-side developments. One has many short wide branches and one has long parallel narrow canals. Neither class appears similar in any particular ways to developed ones nearby, so if developers did all these - known developments, short wide canals, or long parallel ones, then we find it odd that the developed ones look nothing like either of the other two classes. So, for now, we believe we are justified in being open to other explanations.

      If these are from developers, they dredged what appear to be thousands of miles of canals which they never actually developed. Developers are not prone to such waste of money. But we do take this possibility seriously, nevertheless.

      One odd feature of these canals is that there are no, or next to no, developments using them or any of the same geometry. No boats, no homes, no pier facilities. If there are exceptions to this, they are rare. We are talking thousands of these smaller canals.

      As to keeping coastal real estate dry, this is a reasonable observation, one we are also aware of. This might explain a small minority of these smaller canals. However, many of the exact some types are located in areas clearly not in need of drainage. We will, however, consider this for these areas too. We do not pretend to know all the reasons people do things. This explanation of yours sounds good on the surface, but if you look at the satellite photos, you would see features and locations that support our skepticism about this explanation. Many of these are deep in the bayous of Louisiana while the same exact type is in New Hampshire. We believe that a common explanation is needed; we doubt this one is adequate to explain them all.

      Intercoastal Waterway - two of the three people involved are coastal dwellers (I am not), and they are quite familiar with these. I am reasonably informed about these, even though I don't live there. The vast majority of this type canal is in the bayous of Louisiana, criss-crossing like pick-up-sticks. Many Intercaostal waterways are not done like that. There also is no Intercoastal Waterway in that area. These canals are oriented to all sorts of skewed angles, with a high density that contributes nothing to coastal transportation. BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5542448207126046546
      SE of Golden Meadows, LA

      (This area of mud flats is all but in the Gulf of Mexico. The whiter areas on the left are developed areas. The wider canals are over 300 feet wide. The double canal extends for about 100 miles east to west, going from nowhere to nowhere. The myriad crossing canals - what could they possibly be for? Development in mud flats? Not gonna happen. Intercoastal waterway? The double canal possibly, but the others? Protecting land? Please, tell me what sort of plan they were following. The dead end canals? The ones west of Golden Meadows are 200 and 300 feet wide wider than a football field - what developer or waterway management would make such wide canals. The land between the canals west of Golden Meadows is mostly not land, but water; essentially they are canals dug into water - what purpose could those possibly serve?)

      This argues against that explanation for the majority of these. Also, if you claim they are part of the Intercoastal Waterway, can you point to a source that asserts this? If you are floating this explanation, please provide evidence, not just that an Intercoastal Waterway exists. There IS no ICW in Louisiana, where the large canals are most common. If there is one in this specific area that you know of? Who built it? Who maintains it? If you have answers, we are all in favor of hearing it. Generic hip shooting doe not answer questions. If they appear to be answers to you, they don't meet our level of questioning.

      In the middle of the large canals in Louisiana SW of Venice, near the mouth of the Mississippi River, is an elliptical canal about 2 miles in diameter with short canals extending in and out from it. Clearly not Intercoastal Waterway canals, even though they are along the coast.

      BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5542451858378181650
      SW of Venice, LA

      (The oval on the right is 2 miles across.  All over this image are narrow, wide, long, short canals that either go somehere or don't go somewhere,  There are short cross-connecting ones that are near the mouths of two canals - why have these when a few hundred yards away is open water?)

      Beaches - the large canals are certainly in areas in which there are no beaches. Off the top of my head, none of the smaller ones are, either, since their inflowing water tends to be upriver and beaches are not in areas just upstream of the mouths of rivers. A cursory look at the canals on the web site will show you this is a non-explanation.

      Even with a cursory glance at the images on the Ancientcanalbuilders.com site would show almost all of your speculations to be uninformed about the features the site talks about. So again I have to ask: Did you even visit the site? Did you even look at one image?

      I would just ask that you visit the site, look at the images, and then ask yourself if you would still toss out these speculative explanations.  We do not have answers for these.  We put out no preconceived ideas as to what they are for.  If you have speculations, join the club.  But please don't just throw out your BSJ and expect us to cower in the face of your already covered possibilities.  Tossing them out into the mix is fine, just don't do it and then walk away.  Join the conversation.  Ad hoc speculation is not science, as you would know, so if you could add substance and sources to your comments in the future it would be nice.   We would love that. 

      I will do so, too. Our single main source will continue to be the satellite images, but when necessary (and when we can find them) we will include sources. When we speculate we hope to be consistent in labeling them as speculations.  If we fail in that, please point it out.   When you speculate, can you label them as such, too? Our main point at the present time is to ask questions. We are actually trying to not speculate even on who built them, if it appears someone in the long-ago past did; but we agree with you that first we should look at possible modern explanations.

      (I am cross-posting this at the blog site at http://ancientcanals.blogspot.com/.)


      Steve



      --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, William Conner wrote:
      Okay everyone. Go to your public library and look in a book on physical geography. You will then find that most of your "ancient canals" can be attributed to natural coastal features, such as barrier bars, spits, and dunes; also many coastal areas have networks of man made dredged canals, rivers and bays so developers can sell vacation home lots for docks and boats. And, the best way to connect inland coastal docking waters, both natural and man-made, is with linear canals, which like roads, get one from one place to another mostly efficiently by being as straight as possible. Also, some canals exist simply to keep swampy coastal real estate dry.

      Shores in many places are lined with hotels, condos and private homes, and many of these front into the seashore and the boats used by shore dwellers and tourists must be docked in inlets, bays coastal rivers and lagoons. And also there is the Inter-coastal Waterway to consider. And, since a straight line gets a moving object from place to another, coastal canals are dredged that way wherever possible.

      Deepwater dredges can be found docked in coastal areas when not in use, and can be spotted out on the ocean when in use. Keeping beaches from being washed away is serious business for the tourist trade. The dredges suck up sandy ocean water and deposit it into barges or it is pipe it directly onto a beach.

      William Conner
      Columbus, Ohio
      BSJ Ohio University School of Journalism
      Retired science writer, and author of "Iron Age America"






    • William Conner
      Vince Barrows: Thanks for your detailed defense of your ancient canals theory!  It now seems to me that you have a mystery on the level of the giant Nazca
      Message 2 of 23 , Nov 23, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Vince Barrows:
         
        Thanks for your detailed defense of your ancient canals theory!  It now seems to me that you have a mystery on the level of the giant Nazca imagery of South America.   Also, you have won me as a convert after I zoomed down to the high country there and revisited the Nazca lines.  What really struck me in comparing the two is that the extremely long and straight double lines in your areas in North America closely resemble the extremely long and straight lines of Nazca!  You have a mystery!
         
        I certainly have not intended to be adversarial maliciously but to draw out from you the detailed defense.  So it may be that your prehistoric imagery was created for the same reason as my newly discovered huge animal effigy in Central Ohio and a possible and even larger snake effigy just above.  To prove I was the first to discover these images, I posted them to the web on my blog "Explorer's Bill's Science Fiction."  Doing this is one of the great wonders of the web!  You find something new and stake a dated claim to it by posting the imagery on a web site or on a blog.
         
        William Conner
         

         


        From: Vincent Barrows <v_barrows@...>
        To: ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Mon, November 22, 2010 5:20:50 PM
        Subject: Re: [ancient_waterways_society] Re: "Ancient Canals?"

         

        A set of ancient canals was built in Florida nearby Ortona Mound. These canals are identified by Archaeologists as the longest set of "prehistoric" canoe canals. The 5-mile long Ortona Canals have been identified to have been constructed around 1200 AD.   See the following sources for more information:

        http://www.mnemotrix.com/geo/ortona/ortona.html

        http://www.mnemotrix.com/geo/ortona/ortona.pdf

        http://www.nps.gov/nhl/designations/samples/fl/Mud%20Lake%20Canal.pdf

         

        So we cannot rule out the possibilty of more ancient canals, even though more research is needed to confirm the date of construction for these features.

         

        The contribution of this information as possible ancient waterways is appreciated. A potential research path for further discussion is the construction and use of prehistoric aquaducts. 

         

        Thanks;

        Vince



        From: bigalemc2 <puppet@...>
        To: ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Mon, November 22, 2010 1:26:50 PM
        Subject: [ancient_waterways_society] Re: "Ancient Canals?"

         

        (This is being cross-posted at http://ancientcanals.blogspot.com/)

        William -

        Thanks for your information and opinion. We agree with you that - though the name of the site is "Ancient Canal Builders" - we should do everything we can to try to explain them as modern, up to the moment that explanation doesn't fit. The title does tell visitors that we have looked into this, and - to our own satisfaction - the modern explanations do not suffice. We have put many, many hours into this already and would not be continuing without having asked a lot of questions ourselves. Part of our early efforts are to explain to visitors why we have come to this conclusion. That will take some time, and in the meantime we do expect others to question our thinking.

        To begin:

        We are aware of all the things you point out. It is our opinion at this time that those 'explanations' do not suffice to explain the geographical extent of the canals, their provenance, nor their number, nor the geography of any of them. We may find some that are explainable as modern, and their similarities argue that if any are modern, then all of them are modern - and if any of them are shown to be not modern, then probably none of them are. So a good deal of our effort is going into determining what they are not.

        They are clearly not barrier bars. First of all, they are canals, not protuberances sticking up out of the water. (Did you even bother going to the site?) They are not spits. They do not appear at all like dunes; in fact, they do not appear in sandy places. Most are in mud flats or grassy areas.

        <SPANBLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5542438692150511410 width=779 height=607>
        Weekapaug, RI
        (Those canals are mostly less than the width of a car.)

        Some are actually submerged in the Gulf of Mexico.

        Many - perhaps most - of the canals branch out off rivers and streams hundreds of yards (some of them even miles) from the current shore line, after which they branch again and then again, several iterations, all with canal widths that are unnatural in their consistency.

        Our preliminary conclusion: These do not appear to be barrier bars, dunes or spits. They are definitely not natural. If you have been to the site and seen the satellite images you would see that immediately.  Your opening generic statement that "most of your "ancient canals" can be attributed to natural coastal features" turns out to have no substance.

        We are looking into records of man made dredging. One thing is certain: If these were done by the Army Corps of Engineers, they are not taking credit for them in our first perusal of the COE information. We do not rule that out at this time; it is too early to say.

        As to developers, there are plenty of retirement/vacation home or waterside developments to compare these to. Based on lot size, spacing of canals, width, geometry, configuration, etc., we have reason to believe this explanation falls short. It is under consideration, and if it turns out this is correct, we will readily go with that. There are two types/classes that we've seen that seem to warrant comparison with water-side developments. One has many short wide branches and one has long parallel narrow canals. Neither class appears similar in any particular ways to developed ones nearby, so if developers did all these - known developments, short wide canals, or long parallel ones, then we find it odd that the developed ones look nothing like either of the other two classes. So, for now, we believe we are justified in being open to other explanations.

        If these are from developers, they dredged what appear to be thousands of miles of canals which they never actually developed. Developers are not prone to such waste of money. But we do take this possibility seriously, nevertheless.

        One odd feature of these canals is that there are no, or next to no, developments using them or any of the same geometry. No boats, no homes, no pier facilities. If there are exceptions to this, they are rare. We are talking thousands of these smaller canals.

        As to keeping coastal real estate dry, this is a reasonable observation, one we are also aware of. This might explain a small minority of these smaller canals. However, many of the exact some types are located in areas clearly not in need of drainage. We will, however, consider this for these areas too. We do not pretend to know all the reasons people do things. This explanation of yours sounds good on the surface, but if you look at the satellite photos, you would see features and locations that support our skepticism about this explanation. Many of these are deep in the bayous of Louisiana while the same exact type is in New Hampshire. We believe that a common explanation is needed; we doubt this one is adequate to explain them all.

        Intercoastal Waterway - two of the three people involved are coastal dwellers (I am not), and they are quite familiar with these. I am reasonably informed about these, even though I don't live there. The vast majority of this type canal is in the bayous of Louisiana, criss-crossing like pick-up-sticks. Many Intercaostal waterways are not done like that. There also is no Intercoastal Waterway in that area. These canals are oriented to all sorts of skewed angles, with a high density that contributes nothing to coastal transportation. <SPANBLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5542448207126046546 width=777 height=666>
        SE of Golden Meadows, LA

        (This area of mud flats is all but in the Gulf of Mexico. The whiter areas on the left are developed areas. The wider canals are over 300 feet wide. The double canal extends for about 100 miles east to west, going from nowhere to nowhere. The myriad crossing canals - what could they possibly be for? Development in mud flats? Not gonna happen. Intercoastal waterway? The double canal possibly, but the others? Protecting land? Please, tell me what sort of plan they were following. The dead end canals? The ones west of Golden Meadows are 200 and 300 feet wide wider than a football field - what developer or waterway management would make such wide canals. The land between the canals west of Golden Meadows is mostly not land, but water; essentially they are canals dug into water - what purpose could those possibly serve?)

        This argues against that explanation for the majority of these. Also, if you claim they are part of the Intercoastal Waterway, can you point to a source that asserts this? If you are floating this explanation, please provide evidence, not just that an Intercoastal Waterway exists. There IS no ICW in Louisiana, where the large canals are most common. If there is one in this specific area that you know of? Who built it? Who maintains it? If you have answers, we are all in favor of hearing it. Generic hip shooting doe not answer questions. If they appear to be answers to you, they don't meet our level of questioning.

        In the middle of the large canals in Louisiana SW of Venice, near the mouth of the Mississippi River, is an elliptical canal about 2 miles in diameter with short canals extending in and out from it. Clearly not Intercoastal Waterway canals, even though they are along the coast.

        <SPANBLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5542451858378181650 width=778 height=443>
        SW of Venice, LA

        (The oval on the right is 2 miles across.  All over this image are narrow, wide, long, short canals that either go somehere or don't go somewhere,  There are short cross-connecting ones that are near the mouths of two canals - why have these when a few hundred yards away is open water?)

        Beaches - the large canals are certainly in areas in which there are no beaches. Off the top of my head, none of the smaller ones are, either, since their inflowing water tends to be upriver and beaches are not in areas just upstream of the mouths of rivers. A cursory look at the canals on the web site will show you this is a non-explanation.

        Even with a cursory glance at the images on the Ancientcanalbuilders.com site would show almost all of your speculations to be uninformed about the features the site talks about. So again I have to ask: Did you even visit the site? Did you even look at one image?

        I would just ask that you visit the site, look at the images, and then ask yourself if you would still toss out these speculative explanations.  We do not have answers for these.  We put out no preconceived ideas as to what they are for.  If you have speculations, join the club.  But please don't just throw out your BSJ and expect us to cower in the face of your already covered possibilities.  Tossing them out into the mix is fine, just don't do it and then walk away.  Join the conversation.  Ad hoc speculation is not science, as you would know, so if you could add substance and sources to your comments in the future it would be nice.   We would love that. 

        I will do so, too. Our single main source will continue to be the satellite images, but when necessary (and when we can find them) we will include sources. When we speculate we hope to be consistent in labeling them as speculations.  If we fail in that, please point it out.   When you speculate, can you label them as such, too? Our main point at the present time is to ask questions. We are actually trying to not speculate even on who built them, if it appears someone in the long-ago past did; but we agree with you that first we should look at possible modern explanations.

        (I am cross-posting this at the blog site at http://ancientcanals.blogspot.com/.)


        Steve



        --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, William Conner wrote:
        Okay everyone. Go to your public library and look in a book on physical geography. You will then find that most of your "ancient canals" can be attributed to natural coastal features, such as barrier bars, spits, and dunes; also many coastal areas have networks of man made dredged canals, rivers and bays so developers can sell vacation home lots for docks and boats. And, the best way to connect inland coastal docking waters, both natural and man-made, is with linear canals, which like roads, get one from one place to another mostly efficiently by being as straight as possible. Also, some canals exist simply to keep swampy coastal real estate dry.

        Shores in many places are lined with hotels, condos and private homes, and many of these front into the seashore and the boats used by shore dwellers and tourists must be docked in inlets, bays coastal rivers and lagoons. And also there is the Inter-coastal Waterway to consider. And, since a straight line gets a moving object from place to another, coastal canals are dredged that way wherever possible.

        Deepwater dredges can be found docked in coastal areas when not in use, and can be spotted out on the ocean when in use. Keeping beaches from being washed away is serious business for the tourist trade. The dredges suck up sandy ocean water and deposit it into barges or it is pipe it directly onto a beach.

        William Conner
        Columbus, Ohio
        BSJ Ohio University School of Journalism
        Retired science writer, and author of "Iron Age America"






      • bigalemc2
        There are new posts at the Ancient Canal Builders Blog: Erosion at one site - Barnegat, NJ
        Message 3 of 23 , Nov 26, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          There are new posts at the Ancient Canal Builders Blog:

          Erosion at one site - Barnegat, NJ

          Excerpt:
          One of the issues we will be dealing with on the canal sites will be the question of age: How old ARE these things, anyway?

          One way is to look at erosion.  Not all are susceptible to erosion, but we don't have to measure every one to have an idea of erosion rates.  One site that erosion was visible is at Barnegat, NJ - actually out on the barrier sand bar at Loveladies, NJ...

          ...
          This tells us that it has been 210 years since that last bar of land began eroding through at this point along the length of the canal.  Add or subtract 40 years from that for the assumed 20% imprecision, so the date is from 170-250 years ago.   That would be 1760 to 1840.

          BTW, this assumes two things: That the erosion rate was constant, and that there was only ONE bar.  For each additional bar, add approximately 280 years.  We cannot assume additional ones, but neither can we rule them out at this time...

          ...
          Conclusions:  

          1. The 80-foot wide canals are at least 170 years old.  Reason: Recent erosion rates, extrapolated back in time.

          2. The 4-foot canals are older than the 80-foot canals - probably by several years, if not decades or centuries.  Reason: Digging the 80-foot canals did not completely remove evidence of the 4-foot canals.

          3. The purpose of the 4-foot canals was different than the purpose of the 80-foot canals.  Reason: The PATTERN of the 4-foot canals is different from the 80-foot canal pattern.

          4.  Modern developers re-utilized existing canals, which were conveniently spaced and sized for their purposes.  Reason: Measurements of similar on-water developments in FL show a range of 55-145 feet for canals and 210-300 feet for land between canals.  The 80/242 here falls well within those ranges.

          Steve

        • james m clark jr
          In what direction to the Chattahoochee from the Springs and Euchi Valley? This is exciting! Something to consider in my own project I somehow over looked. I am
          Message 4 of 23 , Dec 1, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            In what direction to the Chattahoochee from the Springs and Euchi Valley? This is exciting! Something to consider in my own project I somehow over looked.

            I am sorry to report that possible Wari marbles ((107c)of quartz, marble and clay were destroyed in house fire presumably, conditions exceeding 1200 degrees.

            be well,
            jamey



            --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, William Conner <conner6343@...> wrote:
            >
            > Vince Barrows:
            >
            > Thanks for your detailed defense of your ancient canals theory!  It now seems to
            > me that you have a mystery on the level of the giant Nazca imagery of South
            > America.   Also, you have won me as a convert after I zoomed down to the high
            > country there and revisited the Nazca lines.  What really struck me in comparing
            > the two is that the extremely long and straight double lines in your areas in
            > North America closely resemble the extremely long and straight lines of Nazca! 
            > You have a mystery!
            >
            > I certainly have not intended to be adversarial maliciously but to draw out from
            > you the detailed defense.  So it may be that your prehistoric imagery was
            > created for the same reason as my newly discovered huge animal effigy in Central
            > Ohio and a possible and even larger snake effigy just above.  To prove I was the
            > first to discover these images, I posted them to the web on my blog "Explorer's
            > Bill's Science Fiction."  Doing this is one of the great wonders of the web! 
            > You find something new and stake a dated claim to it by posting the imagery on a
            > web site or on a blog.
            >
            > William Conner
            >
            >
            >  
            >
            >
            >
            > ________________________________
            > From: Vincent Barrows <v_barrows@...>
            > To: ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com
            > Sent: Mon, November 22, 2010 5:20:50 PM
            > Subject: Re: [ancient_waterways_society] Re: "Ancient Canals?"
            >
            >  
            > A set of ancient canals was built in Florida nearby Ortona Mound. These canals
            > are identified by Archaeologists as the longest set of "prehistoric" canoe
            > canals. The 5-mile long Ortona Canals have been identified to have
            > been constructed around 1200 AD.   See the following sources for more
            > information:
            > http://www.mnemotrix.com/geo/ortona/ortona.html
            > http://www.mnemotrix.com/geo/ortona/ortona.pdf
            > http://www.nps.gov/nhl/designations/samples/fl/Mud%20Lake%20Canal.pdf
            >  
            > So we cannot rule out the possibilty of more ancient canals, even though more
            > research is needed to confirm the date of construction for these features.
            >
            >  
            > The contribution of this information as possible ancient waterways is
            > appreciated. A potential research path for further discussion is the
            > construction and use of prehistoric aquaducts. 
            >
            >  
            > Thanks;
            > Vince
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > ________________________________
            > From: bigalemc2 <puppet@...>
            > To: ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com
            > Sent: Mon, November 22, 2010 1:26:50 PM
            > Subject: [ancient_waterways_society] Re: "Ancient Canals?"
            >
            >  
            > (This is being cross-posted at http://ancientcanals.blogspot.com/)
            >
            > William -
            >
            > Thanks for your information and opinion. We agree with you that - though the
            > name of the site is "Ancient Canal Builders" - we should do everything we can to
            > try to explain them as modern, up to the moment that explanation doesn't fit.
            > The title does tell visitors that we have looked into this, and - to our own
            > satisfaction - the modern explanations do not suffice. We have put many, many
            > hours into this already and would not be continuing without having asked a lot
            > of questions ourselves. Part of our early efforts are to explain to visitors why
            > we have come to this conclusion. That will take some time, and in the meantime
            > we do expect others to question our thinking.
            >
            > To begin:
            >
            > We are aware of all the things you point out. It is our opinion at this time
            > that those 'explanations' do not suffice to explain the geographical extent of
            > the canals, their provenance, nor their number, nor the geography of any of
            > them. We may find some that are explainable as modern, and their similarities
            > argue that if any are modern, then all of them are modern - and if any of them
            > are shown to be not modern, then probably none of them are. So a good deal of
            > our effort is going into determining what they are not.
            >
            > They are clearly not barrier bars. First of all, they are canals, not
            > protuberances sticking up out of the water. (Did you even bother going to the
            > site?) They are not spits. They do not appear at all like dunes; in fact, they
            > do not appear in sandy places. Most are in mud flats or grassy areas.
            >
            > BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5542438692150511410 width=779 height=607>
            > Weekapaug, RI
            > (Those canals are mostly less than the width of a car.)
            >
            > Some are actually submerged in the Gulf of Mexico.
            >
            > Many - perhaps most - of the canals branch out off rivers and streams hundreds
            > of yards (some of them even miles) from the current shore line, after which they
            > branch again and then again, several iterations, all with canal widths that are
            > unnatural in their consistency.
            >
            > Our preliminary conclusion: These do not appear to be barrier bars, dunes or
            > spits. They are definitely not natural. If you have been to the site and seen
            > the satellite images you would see that immediately.  Your opening generic
            > statement that "most of your "ancient canals" can be attributed to natural
            > coastal features" turns out to have no substance.
            >
            > We are looking into records of man made dredging. One thing is certain: If these
            > were done by the Army Corps of Engineers, they are not taking credit for them in
            > our first perusal of the COE information. We do not rule that out at this time;
            > it is too early to say.
            >
            > As to developers, there are plenty of retirement/vacation home or waterside
            > developments to compare these to. Based on lot size, spacing of canals, width,
            > geometry, configuration, etc., we have reason to believe this explanation falls
            > short. It is under consideration, and if it turns out this is correct, we will
            > readily go with that. There are two types/classes that we've seen that seem to
            > warrant comparison with water-side developments. One has many short wide
            > branches and one has long parallel narrow canals. Neither class appears similar
            > in any particular ways to developed ones nearby, so if developers did all these
            > - known developments, short wide canals, or long parallel ones, then we find it
            > odd that the developed ones look nothing like either of the other two classes.
            > So, for now, we believe we are justified in being open to other explanations.
            >
            > If these are from developers, they dredged what appear to be thousands of miles
            > of canals which they never actually developed. Developers are not prone to such
            > waste of money. But we do take this possibility seriously, nevertheless.
            >
            > One odd feature of these canals is that there are no, or next to no,
            > developments using them or any of the same geometry. No boats, no homes, no pier
            > facilities. If there are exceptions to this, they are rare. We are talking
            > thousands of these smaller canals.
            >
            > As to keeping coastal real estate dry, this is a reasonable observation, one we
            > are also aware of. This might explain a small minority of these smaller canals.
            > However, many of the exact some types are located in areas clearly not in need
            > of drainage. We will, however, consider this for these areas too. We do not
            > pretend to know all the reasons people do things. This explanation of yours
            > sounds good on the surface, but if you look at the satellite photos, you would
            > see features and locations that support our skepticism about this explanation.
            > Many of these are deep in the bayous of Louisiana while the same exact type is
            > in New Hampshire. We believe that a common explanation is needed; we doubt this
            > one is adequate to explain them all.
            >
            > Intercoastal Waterway - two of the three people involved are coastal dwellers (I
            > am not), and they are quite familiar with these. I am reasonably informed about
            > these, even though I don't live there. The vast majority of this type canal is
            > in the bayous of Louisiana, criss-crossing like pick-up-sticks. Many
            > Intercaostal waterways are not done like that. There also is no Intercoastal
            > Waterway in that area. These canals are oriented to all sorts of skewed angles,
            > with a high density that contributes nothing to coastal transportation.
            > BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5542448207126046546 width=777 height=666>
            > SE of Golden Meadows, LA
            >
            > (This area of mud flats is all but in the Gulf of Mexico. The whiter areas on
            > the left are developed areas. The wider canals are over 300 feet wide. The
            > double canal extends for about 100 miles east to west, going from nowhere to
            > nowhere. The myriad crossing canals - what could they possibly be for?
            > Development in mud flats? Not gonna happen. Intercoastal waterway? The double
            > canal possibly, but the others? Protecting land? Please, tell me what sort of
            > plan they were following. The dead end canals? The ones west of Golden Meadows
            > are 200 and 300 feet wide wider than a football field - what developer or
            > waterway management would make such wide canals. The land between the canals
            > west of Golden Meadows is mostly not land, but water; essentially they are
            > canals dug into water - what purpose could those possibly serve?)
            >
            > This argues against that explanation for the majority of these. Also, if you
            > claim they are part of the Intercoastal Waterway, can you point to a source that
            > asserts this? If you are floating this explanation, please provide evidence, not
            > just that an Intercoastal Waterway exists. There IS no ICW in Louisiana, where
            > the large canals are most common. If there is one in this specific area that you
            > know of? Who built it? Who maintains it? If you have answers, we are all in
            > favor of hearing it. Generic hip shooting doe not answer questions. If they
            > appear to be answers to you, they don't meet our level of questioning.
            >
            > In the middle of the large canals in Louisiana SW of Venice, near the mouth of
            > the Mississippi River, is an elliptical canal about 2 miles in diameter with
            > short canals extending in and out from it. Clearly not Intercoastal Waterway
            > canals, even though they are along the coast.
            >
            > BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5542451858378181650 width=778 height=443>
            > SW of Venice, LA
            >
            > (The oval on the right is 2 miles across.  All over this image are narrow, wide,
            > long, short canals that either go somehere or don't go somewhere,  There are
            > short cross-connecting ones that are near the mouths of two canals - why have
            > these when a few hundred yards away is open water?)
            >
            > Beaches - the large canals are certainly in areas in which there are no beaches.
            > Off the top of my head, none of the smaller ones are, either, since their
            > inflowing water tends to be upriver and beaches are not in areas just upstream
            > of the mouths of rivers. A cursory look at the canals on the web site will show
            > you this is a non-explanation.
            >
            > Even with a cursory glance at the images on the Ancientcanalbuilders.com site
            > would show almost all of your speculations to be uninformed about the features
            > the site talks about. So again I have to ask: Did you even visit the site? Did
            > you even look at one image?
            >
            > I would just ask that you visit the site, look at the images, and then ask
            > yourself if you would still toss out these speculative explanations.  We do not
            > have answers for these.  We put out no preconceived ideas as to what they are
            > for.  If you have speculations, join the club.  But please don't just throw out
            > your BSJ and expect us to cower in the face of your already covered
            > possibilities.  Tossing them out into the mix is fine, just don't do it and then
            > walk away.  Join the conversation.  Ad hoc speculation is not science, as you
            > would know, so if you could add substance and sources to your comments in the
            > future it would be nice.   We would love that. 
            >
            >
            > I will do so, too. Our single main source will continue to be the satellite
            > images, but when necessary (and when we can find them) we will include sources.
            > When we speculate we hope to be consistent in labeling them as speculations.  If
            > we fail in that, please point it out.   When you speculate, can you label them
            > as such, too? Our main point at the present time is to ask questions. We are
            > actually trying to not speculate even on who built them, if it appears someone
            > in the long-ago past did; but we agree with you that first we should look at
            > possible modern explanations.
            >
            > (I am cross-posting this at the blog site at
            > http://ancientcanals.blogspot.com/.)
            >
            >
            > Steve
            >
            >
            >
            > --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, William Conner wrote:
            >
            > Okay everyone. Go to your public library and look in a book on physical
            > geography. You will then find that most of your "ancient canals" can be
            > attributed to natural coastal features, such as barrier bars, spits, and dunes;
            > also many coastal areas have networks of man made dredged canals, rivers and
            > bays so developers can sell vacation home lots for docks and boats. And, the
            > best way to connect inland coastal docking waters, both natural and man-made, is
            > with linear canals, which like roads, get one from one place to another mostly
            > efficiently by being as straight as possible. Also, some canals exist simply to
            > keep swampy coastal real estate dry.
            > >
            > >Shores in many places are lined with hotels, condos and private homes, and many
            > >of these front into the seashore and the boats used by shore dwellers and
            > >tourists must be docked in inlets, bays coastal rivers and lagoons. And also
            > >there is the Inter-coastal Waterway to consider. And, since a straight line gets
            > >a moving object from place to another, coastal canals are dredged that way
            > >wherever possible.
            > >
            > >Deepwater dredges can be found docked in coastal areas when not in use, and can
            > >be spotted out on the ocean when in use. Keeping beaches from being washed away
            > >is serious business for the tourist trade. The dredges suck up sandy ocean water
            > >and deposit it into barges or it is pipe it directly onto a beach.
            > >
            > >William Conner
            > >Columbus, Ohio
            > >BSJ Ohio University School of Journalism
            > >Retired science writer, and author of "Iron Age America"
            > >
            >
          • charles bruns
            what the hey?  i learned something and it even touched my physical space/location.  that spot the water meets the land, often called shore, has attracted
            Message 5 of 23 , Dec 1, 2010
            • 0 Attachment
              what the hey?  i learned something and it even touched my physical space/location.  that spot the water meets the land, often called shore, has attracted folks for a long time.  when you throw in the changing levels and climates, doesn't that make the bowl spin.  great interaction on a fast paced forum that cetainly allows diversity and a super data delivery.  Am real thankful to get this stuff. 

              --- On Wed, 12/1/10, james m clark jr <jameyboy@...> wrote:

              From: james m clark jr <jameyboy@...>
              Subject: [ancient_waterways_society] Re: "Ancient Canals?"
              To: ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com
              Date: Wednesday, December 1, 2010, 12:38 PM

               
              In what direction to the Chattahoochee from the Springs and Euchi Valley? This is exciting! Something to consider in my own project I somehow over looked.

              I am sorry to report that possible Wari marbles ((107c)of quartz, marble and clay were destroyed in house fire presumably, conditions exceeding 1200 degrees.

              be well,
              jamey

              --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, William Conner <conner6343@...> wrote:
              >
              > Vince Barrows:
              >
              > Thanks for your detailed defense of your ancient canals theory!  It now seems to
              > me that you have a mystery on the level of the giant Nazca imagery of South
              > America.   Also, you have won me as a convert after I zoomed down to the high
              > country there and revisited the Nazca lines.  What really struck me in comparing
              > the two is that the extremely long and straight double lines in your areas in
              > North America closely resemble the extremely long and straight lines of Nazca! 
              > You have a mystery!
              >
              > I certainly have not intended to be adversarial maliciously but to draw out from
              > you the detailed defense.  So it may be that your prehistoric imagery was
              > created for the same reason as my newly discovered huge animal effigy in Central
              > Ohio and a possible and even larger snake effigy just above.  To prove I was the
              > first to discover these images, I posted them to the web on my blog "Explorer's
              > Bill's Science Fiction."  Doing this is one of the great wonders of the web! 
              > You find something new and stake a dated claim to it by posting the imagery on a
              > web site or on a blog.
              >
              > William Conner
              >
              >
              >  
              >
              >
              >
              > ________________________________
              > From: Vincent Barrows <v_barrows@...>
              > To: ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com
              > Sent: Mon, November 22, 2010 5:20:50 PM
              > Subject: Re: [ancient_waterways_society] Re: "Ancient Canals?"
              >
              >  
              > A set of ancient canals was built in Florida nearby Ortona Mound. These canals
              > are identified by Archaeologists as the longest set of "prehistoric" canoe
              > canals. The 5-mile long Ortona Canals have been identified to have
              > been constructed around 1200 AD.   See the following sources for more
              > information:
              > http://www.mnemotrix.com/geo/ortona/ortona.html
              > http://www.mnemotrix.com/geo/ortona/ortona.pdf
              > http://www.nps.gov/nhl/designations/samples/fl/Mud%20Lake%20Canal.pdf
              >  
              > So we cannot rule out the possibilty of more ancient canals, even though more
              > research is needed to confirm the date of construction for these features.
              >
              >  
              > The contribution of this information as possible ancient waterways is
              > appreciated. A potential research path for further discussion is the
              > construction and use of prehistoric aquaducts. 
              >
              >  
              > Thanks;
              > Vince
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > ________________________________
              > From: bigalemc2 <puppet@...>
              > To: ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com
              > Sent: Mon, November 22, 2010 1:26:50 PM
              > Subject: [ancient_waterways_society] Re: "Ancient Canals?"
              >
              >  
              > (This is being cross-posted at http://ancientcanals.blogspot.com/)
              >
              > William -
              >
              > Thanks for your information and opinion. We agree with you that - though the
              > name of the site is "Ancient Canal Builders" - we should do everything we can to
              > try to explain them as modern, up to the moment that explanation doesn't fit.
              > The title does tell visitors that we have looked into this, and - to our own
              > satisfaction - the modern explanations do not suffice. We have put many, many
              > hours into this already and would not be continuing without having asked a lot
              > of questions ourselves. Part of our early efforts are to explain to visitors why
              > we have come to this conclusion. That will take some time, and in the meantime
              > we do expect others to question our thinking.
              >
              > To begin:
              >
              > We are aware of all the things you point out. It is our opinion at this time
              > that those 'explanations' do not suffice to explain the geographical extent of
              > the canals, their provenance, nor their number, nor the geography of any of
              > them. We may find some that are explainable as modern, and their similarities
              > argue that if any are modern, then all of them are modern - and if any of them
              > are shown to be not modern, then probably none of them are. So a good deal of
              > our effort is going into determining what they are not.
              >
              > They are clearly not barrier bars. First of all, they are canals, not
              > protuberances sticking up out of the water. (Did you even bother going to the
              > site?) They are not spits. They do not appear at all like dunes; in fact, they
              > do not appear in sandy places. Most are in mud flats or grassy areas.
              >
              > BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5542438692150511410 width=779 height=607>
              > Weekapaug, RI
              > (Those canals are mostly less than the width of a car.)
              >
              > Some are actually submerged in the Gulf of Mexico.
              >
              > Many - perhaps most - of the canals branch out off rivers and streams hundreds
              > of yards (some of them even miles) from the current shore line, after which they
              > branch again and then again, several iterations, all with canal widths that are
              > unnatural in their consistency.
              >
              > Our preliminary conclusion: These do not appear to be barrier bars, dunes or
              > spits. They are definitely not natural. If you have been to the site and seen
              > the satellite images you would see that immediately.  Your opening generic
              > statement that "most of your "ancient canals" can be attributed to natural
              > coastal features" turns out to have no substance.
              >
              > We are looking into records of man made dredging. One thing is certain: If these
              > were done by the Army Corps of Engineers, they are not taking credit for them in
              > our first perusal of the COE information. We do not rule that out at this time;
              > it is too early to say.
              >
              > As to developers, there are plenty of retirement/vacation home or waterside
              > developments to compare these to. Based on lot size, spacing of canals, width,
              > geometry, configuration, etc., we have reason to believe this explanation falls
              > short. It is under consideration, and if it turns out this is correct, we will
              > readily go with that. There are two types/classes that we've seen that seem to
              > warrant comparison with water-side developments. One has many short wide
              > branches and one has long parallel narrow canals. Neither class appears similar
              > in any particular ways to developed ones nearby, so if developers did all these
              > - known developments, short wide canals, or long parallel ones, then we find it
              > odd that the developed ones look nothing like either of the other two classes.
              > So, for now, we believe we are justified in being open to other explanations.
              >
              > If these are from developers, they dredged what appear to be thousands of miles
              > of canals which they never actually developed. Developers are not prone to such
              > waste of money. But we do take this possibility seriously, nevertheless.
              >
              > One odd feature of these canals is that there are no, or next to no,
              > developments using them or any of the same geometry. No boats, no homes, no pier
              > facilities. If there are exceptions to this, they are rare. We are talking
              > thousands of these smaller canals.
              >
              > As to keeping coastal real estate dry, this is a reasonable observation, one we
              > are also aware of. This might explain a small minority of these smaller canals.
              > However, many of the exact some types are located in areas clearly not in need
              > of drainage. We will, however, consider this for these areas too. We do not
              > pretend to know all the reasons people do things. This explanation of yours
              > sounds good on the surface, but if you look at the satellite photos, you would
              > see features and locations that support our skepticism about this explanation.
              > Many of these are deep in the bayous of Louisiana while the same exact type is
              > in New Hampshire. We believe that a common explanation is needed; we doubt this
              > one is adequate to explain them all.
              >
              > Intercoastal Waterway - two of the three people involved are coastal dwellers (I
              > am not), and they are quite familiar with these. I am reasonably informed about
              > these, even though I don't live there. The vast majority of this type canal is
              > in the bayous of Louisiana, criss-crossing like pick-up-sticks. Many
              > Intercaostal waterways are not done like that. There also is no Intercoastal
              > Waterway in that area. These canals are oriented to all sorts of skewed angles,
              > with a high density that contributes nothing to coastal transportation.
              > BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5542448207126046546 width=777 height=666>
              > SE of Golden Meadows, LA
              >
              > (This area of mud flats is all but in the Gulf of Mexico. The whiter areas on
              > the left are developed areas. The wider canals are over 300 feet wide. The
              > double canal extends for about 100 miles east to west, going from nowhere to
              > nowhere. The myriad crossing canals - what could they possibly be for?
              > Development in mud flats? Not gonna happen. Intercoastal waterway? The double
              > canal possibly, but the others? Protecting land? Please, tell me what sort of
              > plan they were following. The dead end canals? The ones west of Golden Meadows
              > are 200 and 300 feet wide wider than a football field - what developer or
              > waterway management would make such wide canals. The land between the canals
              > west of Golden Meadows is mostly not land, but water; essentially they are
              > canals dug into water - what purpose could those possibly serve?)
              >
              > This argues against that explanation for the majority of these. Also, if you
              > claim they are part of the Intercoastal Waterway, can you point to a source that
              > asserts this? If you are floating this explanation, please provide evidence, not
              > just that an Intercoastal Waterway exists. There IS no ICW in Louisiana, where
              > the large canals are most common. If there is one in this specific area that you
              > know of? Who built it? Who maintains it? If you have answers, we are all in
              > favor of hearing it. Generic hip shooting doe not answer questions. If they
              > appear to be answers to you, they don't meet our level of questioning.
              >
              > In the middle of the large canals in Louisiana SW of Venice, near the mouth of
              > the Mississippi River, is an elliptical canal about 2 miles in diameter with
              > short canals extending in and out from it. Clearly not Intercoastal Waterway
              > canals, even though they are along the coast.
              >
              > BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5542451858378181650 width=778 height=443>
              > SW of Venice, LA
              >
              > (The oval on the right is 2 miles across.  All over this image are narrow, wide,
              > long, short canals that either go somehere or don't go somewhere,  There are
              > short cross-connecting ones that are near the mouths of two canals - why have
              > these when a few hundred yards away is open water?)
              >
              > Beaches - the large canals are certainly in areas in which there are no beaches.
              > Off the top of my head, none of the smaller ones are, either, since their
              > inflowing water tends to be upriver and beaches are not in areas just upstream
              > of the mouths of rivers. A cursory look at the canals on the web site will show
              > you this is a non-explanation.
              >
              > Even with a cursory glance at the images on the Ancientcanalbuilders.com site
              > would show almost all of your speculations to be uninformed about the features
              > the site talks about. So again I have to ask: Did you even visit the site? Did
              > you even look at one image?
              >
              > I would just ask that you visit the site, look at the images, and then ask
              > yourself if you would still toss out these speculative explanations.  We do not
              > have answers for these.  We put out no preconceived ideas as to what they are
              > for.  If you have speculations, join the club.  But please don't just throw out
              > your BSJ and expect us to cower in the face of your already covered
              > possibilities.  Tossing them out into the mix is fine, just don't do it and then
              > walk away.  Join the conversation.  Ad hoc speculation is not science, as you
              > would know, so if you could add substance and sources to your comments in the
              > future it would be nice.   We would love that. 
              >
              >
              > I will do so, too. Our single main source will continue to be the satellite
              > images, but when necessary (and when we can find them) we will include sources.
              > When we speculate we hope to be consistent in labeling them as speculations.  If
              > we fail in that, please point it out.   When you speculate, can you label them
              > as such, too? Our main point at the present time is to ask questions. We are
              > actually trying to not speculate even on who built them, if it appears someone
              > in the long-ago past did; but we agree with you that first we should look at
              > possible modern explanations.
              >
              > (I am cross-posting this at the blog site at
              > http://ancientcanals.blogspot.com/.)
              >
              >
              > Steve
              >
              >
              >
              > --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, William Conner wrote:
              >
              > Okay everyone. Go to your public library and look in a book on physical
              > geography. You will then find that most of your "ancient canals" can be
              > attributed to natural coastal features, such as barrier bars, spits, and dunes;
              > also many coastal areas have networks of man made dredged canals, rivers and
              > bays so developers can sell vacation home lots for docks and boats. And, the
              > best way to connect inland coastal docking waters, both natural and man-made, is
              > with linear canals, which like roads, get one from one place to another mostly
              > efficiently by being as straight as possible. Also, some canals exist simply to
              > keep swampy coastal real estate dry.
              > >
              > >Shores in many places are lined with hotels, condos and private homes, and many
              > >of these front into the seashore and the boats used by shore dwellers and
              > >tourists must be docked in inlets, bays coastal rivers and lagoons. And also
              > >there is the Inter-coastal Waterway to consider. And, since a straight line gets
              > >a moving object from place to another, coastal canals are dredged that way
              > >wherever possible.
              > >
              > >Deepwater dredges can be found docked in coastal areas when not in use, and can
              > >be spotted out on the ocean when in use. Keeping beaches from being washed away
              > >is serious business for the tourist trade. The dredges suck up sandy ocean water
              > >and deposit it into barges or it is pipe it directly onto a beach.
              > >
              > >William Conner
              > >Columbus, Ohio
              > >BSJ Ohio University School of Journalism
              > >Retired science writer, and author of "Iron Age America"
              > >
              >


            • james m clark jr
              Sorry Charlie, According to anthropologist at FSU, the Timucua never were from what I gather a coastal people; perhaps assigned to protect inland interest of
              Message 6 of 23 , Dec 2, 2010
              • 0 Attachment
                Sorry Charlie,

                According to anthropologist at FSU, the Timucua never were from what I gather a coastal people; perhaps assigned to protect inland interest of possible invaders but more than likey the Euchee or the Yuchi were no threat either just as they were no threat to the European invaders either nor a threat to other southeastern tribes as if they were a boarder patrol for many tribal peoples. Euchee Valley may be assigned the southern most point of settlement but their interests are at strategic locations. The first Scotchman to settle in the area of the Yuchi describes the Springs (Defuniak)as pure and the area free of plague and I was born 159 years later not even a quarter mile from the only circular mound in all of North America.

                Euchee Valley if I have my geology correct is south of the Springs. I have not considered other settlements south of the the Springs besides Euchee Valley and not aware of any suggestion or implications to prove or disprove otherwise.

                In Educated political circles the idea of trading sacred objects is a profane idea. To transport such an object would have to be virtually undetected. The versatility of such bearers would have to be prepared and deliver. It is my assumption also for such canals. There are only two artifacts of basalt that I'm aware of, only one that has been been transported discovered between 2000-2002 at the mouth of the Miami River the other could have accompanied such an event. And that would be the object permitted to my care and research. These two objects in my opinion were made for a specific event possibly an ordination that accompanied some succession or grant or great defeat.

                The GNAT photo here if views upside down resembles a serpent.

                be well,
                jmcjr


                --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, charles bruns <charbruns@...> wrote:
                >
                > what the hey?  i learned something and it even touched my physical space/location.  that spot the water meets the land, often called shore, has attracted folks for a long time.  when you throw in the changing levels and climates, doesn't that make the bowl spin.  great interaction on a fast paced forum that cetainly allows diversity and a super data delivery.  Am real thankful to get this stuff. 
                >
                > --- On Wed, 12/1/10, james m clark jr <jameyboy@...> wrote:
                >
                >
                > From: james m clark jr <jameyboy@...>
                > Subject: [ancient_waterways_society] Re: "Ancient Canals?"
                > To: ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com
                > Date: Wednesday, December 1, 2010, 12:38 PM
                >
                >
                >  
                >
                >
                >
                > In what direction to the Chattahoochee from the Springs and Euchi Valley? This is exciting! Something to consider in my own project I somehow over looked.
                >
                > I am sorry to report that possible Wari marbles ((107c)of quartz, marble and clay were destroyed in house fire presumably, conditions exceeding 1200 degrees.
                >
                > be well,
                > jamey
                >
                > --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, William Conner <conner6343@> wrote:
                > >
                > > Vince Barrows:
                > >
                > > Thanks for your detailed defense of your ancient canals theory!  It now seems to
                > > me that you have a mystery on the level of the giant Nazca imagery of South
                > > America.   Also, you have won me as a convert after I zoomed down to the high
                > > country there and revisited the Nazca lines.  What really struck me in comparing
                > > the two is that the extremely long and straight double lines in your areas in
                > > North America closely resemble the extremely long and straight lines of Nazca! 
                > > You have a mystery!
                > >
                > > I certainly have not intended to be adversarial maliciously but to draw out from
                > > you the detailed defense.  So it may be that your prehistoric imagery was
                > > created for the same reason as my newly discovered huge animal effigy in Central
                > > Ohio and a possible and even larger snake effigy just above.  To prove I was the
                > > first to discover these images, I posted them to the web on my blog "Explorer's
                > > Bill's Science Fiction."  Doing this is one of the great wonders of the web! 
                > > You find something new and stake a dated claim to it by posting the imagery on a
                > > web site or on a blog.
                > >
                > > William Conner
                > >
                > >
                > >  
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > ________________________________
                > > From: Vincent Barrows <v_barrows@>
                > > To: ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com
                > > Sent: Mon, November 22, 2010 5:20:50 PM
                > > Subject: Re: [ancient_waterways_society] Re: "Ancient Canals?"
                > >
                > >  
                > > A set of ancient canals was built in Florida nearby Ortona Mound. These canals
                > > are identified by Archaeologists as the longest set of "prehistoric" canoe
                > > canals. The 5-mile long Ortona Canals have been identified to have
                > > been constructed around 1200 AD.   See the following sources for more
                > > information:
                > > http://www.mnemotrix.com/geo/ortona/ortona.html
                > > http://www.mnemotrix.com/geo/ortona/ortona.pdf
                > > http://www.nps.gov/nhl/designations/samples/fl/Mud%20Lake%20Canal.pdf
                > >  
                > > So we cannot rule out the possibilty of more ancient canals, even though more
                > > research is needed to confirm the date of construction for these features.
                > >
                > >  
                > > The contribution of this information as possible ancient waterways is
                > > appreciated. A potential research path for further discussion is the
                > > construction and use of prehistoric aquaducts. 
                > >
                > >  
                > > Thanks;
                > > Vince
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > ________________________________
                > > From: bigalemc2 <puppet@>
                > > To: ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com
                > > Sent: Mon, November 22, 2010 1:26:50 PM
                > > Subject: [ancient_waterways_society] Re: "Ancient Canals?"
                > >
                > >  
                > > (This is being cross-posted at http://ancientcanals.blogspot.com/)
                > >
                > > William -
                > >
                > > Thanks for your information and opinion. We agree with you that - though the
                > > name of the site is "Ancient Canal Builders" - we should do everything we can to
                > > try to explain them as modern, up to the moment that explanation doesn't fit.
                > > The title does tell visitors that we have looked into this, and - to our own
                > > satisfaction - the modern explanations do not suffice. We have put many, many
                > > hours into this already and would not be continuing without having asked a lot
                > > of questions ourselves. Part of our early efforts are to explain to visitors why
                > > we have come to this conclusion. That will take some time, and in the meantime
                > > we do expect others to question our thinking.
                > >
                > > To begin:
                > >
                > > We are aware of all the things you point out. It is our opinion at this time
                > > that those 'explanations' do not suffice to explain the geographical extent of
                > > the canals, their provenance, nor their number, nor the geography of any of
                > > them. We may find some that are explainable as modern, and their similarities
                > > argue that if any are modern, then all of them are modern - and if any of them
                > > are shown to be not modern, then probably none of them are. So a good deal of
                > > our effort is going into determining what they are not.
                > >
                > > They are clearly not barrier bars. First of all, they are canals, not
                > > protuberances sticking up out of the water. (Did you even bother going to the
                > > site?) They are not spits. They do not appear at all like dunes; in fact, they
                > > do not appear in sandy places. Most are in mud flats or grassy areas.
                > >
                > > BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5542438692150511410 width=779 height=607>
                > > Weekapaug, RI
                > > (Those canals are mostly less than the width of a car.)
                > >
                > > Some are actually submerged in the Gulf of Mexico.
                > >
                > > Many - perhaps most - of the canals branch out off rivers and streams hundreds
                > > of yards (some of them even miles) from the current shore line, after which they
                > > branch again and then again, several iterations, all with canal widths that are
                > > unnatural in their consistency.
                > >
                > > Our preliminary conclusion: These do not appear to be barrier bars, dunes or
                > > spits. They are definitely not natural. If you have been to the site and seen
                > > the satellite images you would see that immediately.  Your opening generic
                > > statement that "most of your "ancient canals" can be attributed to natural
                > > coastal features" turns out to have no substance.
                > >
                > > We are looking into records of man made dredging. One thing is certain: If these
                > > were done by the Army Corps of Engineers, they are not taking credit for them in
                > > our first perusal of the COE information. We do not rule that out at this time;
                > > it is too early to say.
                > >
                > > As to developers, there are plenty of retirement/vacation home or waterside
                > > developments to compare these to. Based on lot size, spacing of canals, width,
                > > geometry, configuration, etc., we have reason to believe this explanation falls
                > > short. It is under consideration, and if it turns out this is correct, we will
                > > readily go with that. There are two types/classes that we've seen that seem to
                > > warrant comparison with water-side developments. One has many short wide
                > > branches and one has long parallel narrow canals. Neither class appears similar
                > > in any particular ways to developed ones nearby, so if developers did all these
                > > - known developments, short wide canals, or long parallel ones, then we find it
                > > odd that the developed ones look nothing like either of the other two classes.
                > > So, for now, we believe we are justified in being open to other explanations.
                > >
                > > If these are from developers, they dredged what appear to be thousands of miles
                > > of canals which they never actually developed. Developers are not prone to such
                > > waste of money. But we do take this possibility seriously, nevertheless.
                > >
                > > One odd feature of these canals is that there are no, or next to no,
                > > developments using them or any of the same geometry. No boats, no homes, no pier
                > > facilities. If there are exceptions to this, they are rare. We are talking
                > > thousands of these smaller canals.
                > >
                > > As to keeping coastal real estate dry, this is a reasonable observation, one we
                > > are also aware of. This might explain a small minority of these smaller canals.
                > > However, many of the exact some types are located in areas clearly not in need
                > > of drainage. We will, however, consider this for these areas too. We do not
                > > pretend to know all the reasons people do things. This explanation of yours
                > > sounds good on the surface, but if you look at the satellite photos, you would
                > > see features and locations that support our skepticism about this explanation.
                > > Many of these are deep in the bayous of Louisiana while the same exact type is
                > > in New Hampshire. We believe that a common explanation is needed; we doubt this
                > > one is adequate to explain them all.
                > >
                > > Intercoastal Waterway - two of the three people involved are coastal dwellers (I
                > > am not), and they are quite familiar with these. I am reasonably informed about
                > > these, even though I don't live there. The vast majority of this type canal is
                > > in the bayous of Louisiana, criss-crossing like pick-up-sticks. Many
                > > Intercaostal waterways are not done like that. There also is no Intercoastal
                > > Waterway in that area. These canals are oriented to all sorts of skewed angles,
                > > with a high density that contributes nothing to coastal transportation.
                > > BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5542448207126046546 width=777 height=666>
                > > SE of Golden Meadows, LA
                > >
                > > (This area of mud flats is all but in the Gulf of Mexico. The whiter areas on
                > > the left are developed areas. The wider canals are over 300 feet wide. The
                > > double canal extends for about 100 miles east to west, going from nowhere to
                > > nowhere. The myriad crossing canals - what could they possibly be for?
                > > Development in mud flats? Not gonna happen. Intercoastal waterway? The double
                > > canal possibly, but the others? Protecting land? Please, tell me what sort of
                > > plan they were following. The dead end canals? The ones west of Golden Meadows
                > > are 200 and 300 feet wide wider than a football field - what developer or
                > > waterway management would make such wide canals. The land between the canals
                > > west of Golden Meadows is mostly not land, but water; essentially they are
                > > canals dug into water - what purpose could those possibly serve?)
                > >
                > > This argues against that explanation for the majority of these. Also, if you
                > > claim they are part of the Intercoastal Waterway, can you point to a source that
                > > asserts this? If you are floating this explanation, please provide evidence, not
                > > just that an Intercoastal Waterway exists. There IS no ICW in Louisiana, where
                > > the large canals are most common. If there is one in this specific area that you
                > > know of? Who built it? Who maintains it? If you have answers, we are all in
                > > favor of hearing it. Generic hip shooting doe not answer questions. If they
                > > appear to be answers to you, they don't meet our level of questioning.
                > >
                > > In the middle of the large canals in Louisiana SW of Venice, near the mouth of
                > > the Mississippi River, is an elliptical canal about 2 miles in diameter with
                > > short canals extending in and out from it. Clearly not Intercoastal Waterway
                > > canals, even though they are along the coast.
                > >
                > > BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5542451858378181650 width=778 height=443>
                > > SW of Venice, LA
                > >
                > > (The oval on the right is 2 miles across.  All over this image are narrow, wide,
                > > long, short canals that either go somehere or don't go somewhere,  There are
                > > short cross-connecting ones that are near the mouths of two canals - why have
                > > these when a few hundred yards away is open water?)
                > >
                > > Beaches - the large canals are certainly in areas in which there are no beaches.
                > > Off the top of my head, none of the smaller ones are, either, since their
                > > inflowing water tends to be upriver and beaches are not in areas just upstream
                > > of the mouths of rivers. A cursory look at the canals on the web site will show
                > > you this is a non-explanation.
                > >
                > > Even with a cursory glance at the images on the Ancientcanalbuilders.com site
                > > would show almost all of your speculations to be uninformed about the features
                > > the site talks about. So again I have to ask: Did you even visit the site? Did
                > > you even look at one image?
                > >
                > > I would just ask that you visit the site, look at the images, and then ask
                > > yourself if you would still toss out these speculative explanations.  We do not
                > > have answers for these.  We put out no preconceived ideas as to what they are
                > > for.  If you have speculations, join the club.  But please don't just throw out
                > > your BSJ and expect us to cower in the face of your already covered
                > > possibilities.  Tossing them out into the mix is fine, just don't do it and then
                > > walk away.  Join the conversation.  Ad hoc speculation is not science, as you
                > > would know, so if you could add substance and sources to your comments in the
                > > future it would be nice.   We would love that. 
                > >
                > >
                > > I will do so, too. Our single main source will continue to be the satellite
                > > images, but when necessary (and when we can find them) we will include sources.
                > > When we speculate we hope to be consistent in labeling them as speculations.  If
                > > we fail in that, please point it out.   When you speculate, can you label them
                > > as such, too? Our main point at the present time is to ask questions. We are
                > > actually trying to not speculate even on who built them, if it appears someone
                > > in the long-ago past did; but we agree with you that first we should look at
                > > possible modern explanations.
                > >
                > > (I am cross-posting this at the blog site at
                > > http://ancientcanals.blogspot.com/.)
                > >
                > >
                > > Steve
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, William Conner wrote:
                > >
                > > Okay everyone. Go to your public library and look in a book on physical
                > > geography. You will then find that most of your "ancient canals" can be
                > > attributed to natural coastal features, such as barrier bars, spits, and dunes;
                > > also many coastal areas have networks of man made dredged canals, rivers and
                > > bays so developers can sell vacation home lots for docks and boats. And, the
                > > best way to connect inland coastal docking waters, both natural and man-made, is
                > > with linear canals, which like roads, get one from one place to another mostly
                > > efficiently by being as straight as possible. Also, some canals exist simply to
                > > keep swampy coastal real estate dry.
                > > >
                > > >Shores in many places are lined with hotels, condos and private homes, and many
                > > >of these front into the seashore and the boats used by shore dwellers and
                > > >tourists must be docked in inlets, bays coastal rivers and lagoons. And also
                > > >there is the Inter-coastal Waterway to consider. And, since a straight line gets
                > > >a moving object from place to another, coastal canals are dredged that way
                > > >wherever possible.
                > > >
                > > >Deepwater dredges can be found docked in coastal areas when not in use, and can
                > > >be spotted out on the ocean when in use. Keeping beaches from being washed away
                > > >is serious business for the tourist trade. The dredges suck up sandy ocean water
                > > >and deposit it into barges or it is pipe it directly onto a beach.
                > > >
                > > >William Conner
                > > >Columbus, Ohio
                > > >BSJ Ohio University School of Journalism
                > > >Retired science writer, and author of "Iron Age America"
                > > >
                > >
                >
              • Susan
                Welcome back, Jamey. I have always enjoyed your postings here. Your fieldwork a few years ago working with a family (and, coincidently, another neighbor
                Message 7 of 23 , Dec 2, 2010
                • 0 Attachment
                  Welcome back, Jamey. I have always enjoyed your postings here. Your
                  fieldwork a few years ago working with a family (and, coincidently,
                  another neighbor who had found the same type of objects) in sink holes
                  and caves on their properties along the Tennessee Highland Rim that were
                  filled with what seemed to be very ancient stone birds of various sizes
                  and shapes, and giant animal or reptile bones, etc. This was and is a
                  subject that still stirs my blood and I hope to learn more about it.
                  You were sharing this at the PreColumbian Inscriptions YahooGroup but
                  also a bit with us at Ancient Waterways. If anything has progressed
                  since that time (2008?) that you are able to share, please let us know.
                  I know there was a confidelity agreement you had at that time. This
                  group has probably tripled since you had written here last, so if you
                  are able to discuss that area of your work with this group, please give
                  a background on it.

                  The Ancient Canal Builders in America web site and blog that Steve
                  Garcia has been sharing with this group and has helped found is
                  something that will be ongoing in my own personal investigations and PR
                  work...very very much at the roots of why I even wanted and needed to
                  help start an ancient waterways group. That group and its members are
                  following scientific and engineering channels that seem to me to be
                  causing a stir even beyond the Americas. Google "Ancient Canal
                  Builders in America" and I see dozens of web groups, sites discussing
                  their work.

                  Out of time at the lbirary. more later. Susan


                  --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, "james m clark jr"
                  <jameyboy@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > In what direction to the Chattahoochee from the Springs and Euchi
                  Valley? This is exciting! Something to consider in my own project I
                  somehow over looked.
                  >
                  > I am sorry to report that possible Wari marbles ((107c)of quartz,
                  marble and clay were destroyed in house fire presumably, conditions
                  exceeding 1200 degrees.
                  >
                  > be well,
                  > jamey
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, William Conner
                  conner6343@ wrote:
                  > >
                  > > Vince Barrows:
                  > >
                  > > Thanks for your detailed defense of your ancient canals theory!Â
                  It now seems to
                  > > me that you have a mystery on the level of the giant Nazca imagery
                  of South
                  > > America.   Also, you have won me as a convert after I
                  zoomed down to the high
                  > > country there and revisited the Nazca lines. What really struck
                  me in comparing
                  > > the two is that the extremely long and straight double lines in your
                  areas in
                  > > North America closely resemble the extremely long and straight lines
                  of Nazca!Â
                  > > You have a mystery!
                  > >
                  > > I certainly have not intended to be adversarial maliciously but to
                  draw out from
                  > > you the detailed defense. So it may be that your
                  prehistoric imagery was
                  > > created for the same reason as my newly discovered huge animal
                  effigy in Central
                  > > Ohio and a possible and even larger snake effigy just above.Â
                  To prove I was the
                  > > first to discover these images, I posted them to the web on my blog
                  "Explorer's
                  > > Bill's Science Fiction."Â Doing this is one of the great wonders
                  of the web!Â
                  > > You find something new and stake a dated claim to it by posting the
                  imagery on a
                  > > web site or on a blog.
                  > >
                  > > William Conner
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > Â
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > ________________________________
                  > > From: Vincent Barrows v_barrows@
                  > > To: ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com
                  > > Sent: Mon, November 22, 2010 5:20:50 PM
                  > > Subject: Re: [ancient_waterways_society] Re: "Ancient Canals?"
                  > >
                  > > Â
                  > > A set of ancient canals was built in Florida nearby Ortona
                  Mound. These canals
                  > > are identified by Archaeologists as the longest set of
                  "prehistoric" canoe
                  > > canals. The 5-mile long Ortona Canals have been
                  identified to have
                  > > been constructed around 1200 AD.   See the
                  following sources for more
                  > > information:
                  > > http://www.mnemotrix.com/geo/ortona/ortona.html
                  > > http://www.mnemotrix.com/geo/ortona/ortona.pdf
                  > >
                  http://www.nps.gov/nhl/designations/samples/fl/Mud%20Lake%20Canal.pdf
                  > > Â
                  > > So we cannot rule out the possibilty of more ancient canals,
                  even though more
                  > > research is needed to confirm the date of construction for these
                  features.
                  > >
                  > > Â
                  > > The contribution of this information as possible ancient
                  waterways is
                  > > appreciated. A potential research path for further
                  discussion is the
                  > > construction and use of prehistoric aquaducts.Â
                  > >
                  > > Â
                  > > Thanks;
                  > > Vince
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > ________________________________
                  > > From: bigalemc2 puppet@
                  > > To: ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com
                  > > Sent: Mon, November 22, 2010 1:26:50 PM
                  > > Subject: [ancient_waterways_society] Re: "Ancient Canals?"
                  > >
                  > > Â
                  > > (This is being cross-posted at http://ancientcanals.blogspot.com/)
                  > >
                  > > William -
                  > >
                  > > Thanks for your information and opinion. We agree with you that -
                  though the
                  > > name of the site is "Ancient Canal Builders" - we should do
                  everything we can to
                  > > try to explain them as modern, up to the moment that explanation
                  doesn't fit.
                  > > The title does tell visitors that we have looked into this, and - to
                  our own
                  > > satisfaction - the modern explanations do not suffice. We have put
                  many, many
                  > > hours into this already and would not be continuing without having
                  asked a lot
                  > > of questions ourselves. Part of our early efforts are to explain to
                  visitors why
                  > > we have come to this conclusion. That will take some time, and in
                  the meantime
                  > > we do expect others to question our thinking.
                  > >
                  > > To begin:
                  > >
                  > > We are aware of all the things you point out. It is our opinion at
                  this time
                  > > that those 'explanations' do not suffice to explain the geographical
                  extent of
                  > > the canals, their provenance, nor their number, nor the geography of
                  any of
                  > > them. We may find some that are explainable as modern, and their
                  similarities
                  > > argue that if any are modern, then all of them are modern - and if
                  any of them
                  > > are shown to be not modern, then probably none of them are. So a
                  good deal of
                  > > our effort is going into determining what they are not.
                  > >
                  > > They are clearly not barrier bars. First of all, they are canals,
                  not
                  > > protuberances sticking up out of the water. (Did you even bother
                  going to the
                  > > site?) They are not spits. They do not appear at all like dunes; in
                  fact, they
                  > > do not appear in sandy places. Most are in mud flats or grassy
                  areas.
                  > >
                  > > BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5542438692150511410 width=779 height=607>
                  > > Weekapaug, RI
                  > > (Those canals are mostly less than the width of a car.)
                  > >
                  > > Some are actually submerged in the Gulf of Mexico.
                  > >
                  > > Many - perhaps most - of the canals branch out off rivers and
                  streams hundreds
                  > > of yards (some of them even miles) from the current shore line,
                  after which they
                  > > branch again and then again, several iterations, all with canal
                  widths that are
                  > > unnatural in their consistency.
                  > >
                  > > Our preliminary conclusion: These do not appear to be barrier bars,
                  dunes or
                  > > spits. They are definitely not natural. If you have been to the site
                  and seen
                  > > the satellite images you would see that immediately. Your
                  opening generic
                  > > statement that "most of your "ancient canals" can be attributed to
                  natural
                  > > coastal features" turns out to have no substance.
                  > >
                  > > We are looking into records of man made dredging. One thing is
                  certain: If these
                  > > were done by the Army Corps of Engineers, they are not taking credit
                  for them in
                  > > our first perusal of the COE information. We do not rule that out at
                  this time;
                  > > it is too early to say.
                  > >
                  > > As to developers, there are plenty of retirement/vacation home or
                  waterside
                  > > developments to compare these to. Based on lot size, spacing of
                  canals, width,
                  > > geometry, configuration, etc., we have reason to believe this
                  explanation falls
                  > > short. It is under consideration, and if it turns out this is
                  correct, we will
                  > > readily go with that. There are two types/classes that we've seen
                  that seem to
                  > > warrant comparison with water-side developments. One has many short
                  wide
                  > > branches and one has long parallel narrow canals. Neither class
                  appears similar
                  > > in any particular ways to developed ones nearby, so if developers
                  did all these
                  > > - known developments, short wide canals, or long parallel ones, then
                  we find it
                  > > odd that the developed ones look nothing like either of the other
                  two classes.
                  > > So, for now, we believe we are justified in being open to other
                  explanations.
                  > >
                  > > If these are from developers, they dredged what appear to be
                  thousands of miles
                  > > of canals which they never actually developed. Developers are not
                  prone to such
                  > > waste of money. But we do take this possibility seriously,
                  nevertheless.
                  > >
                  > > One odd feature of these canals is that there are no, or next to no,
                  > > developments using them or any of the same geometry. No boats, no
                  homes, no pier
                  > > facilities. If there are exceptions to this, they are rare. We are
                  talking
                  > > thousands of these smaller canals.
                  > >
                  > > As to keeping coastal real estate dry, this is a reasonable
                  observation, one we
                  > > are also aware of. This might explain a small minority of these
                  smaller canals.
                  > > However, many of the exact some types are located in areas clearly
                  not in need
                  > > of drainage. We will, however, consider this for these areas too. We
                  do not
                  > > pretend to know all the reasons people do things. This explanation
                  of yours
                  > > sounds good on the surface, but if you look at the satellite photos,
                  you would
                  > > see features and locations that support our skepticism about this
                  explanation.
                  > > Many of these are deep in the bayous of Louisiana while the same
                  exact type is
                  > > in New Hampshire. We believe that a common explanation is needed; we
                  doubt this
                  > > one is adequate to explain them all.
                  > >
                  > > Intercoastal Waterway - two of the three people involved are coastal
                  dwellers (I
                  > > am not), and they are quite familiar with these. I am reasonably
                  informed about
                  > > these, even though I don't live there. The vast majority of this
                  type canal is
                  > > in the bayous of Louisiana, criss-crossing like pick-up-sticks. Many
                  > > Intercaostal waterways are not done like that. There also is no
                  Intercoastal
                  > > Waterway in that area. These canals are oriented to all sorts of
                  skewed angles,
                  > > with a high density that contributes nothing to coastal
                  transportation.
                  > > BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5542448207126046546 width=777 height=666>
                  > > SE of Golden Meadows, LA
                  > >
                  > > (This area of mud flats is all but in the Gulf of Mexico. The whiter
                  areas on
                  > > the left are developed areas. The wider canals are over 300 feet
                  wide. The
                  > > double canal extends for about 100 miles east to west, going from
                  nowhere to
                  > > nowhere. The myriad crossing canals - what could they possibly be
                  for?
                  > > Development in mud flats? Not gonna happen. Intercoastal waterway?
                  The double
                  > > canal possibly, but the others? Protecting land? Please, tell me
                  what sort of
                  > > plan they were following. The dead end canals? The ones west of
                  Golden Meadows
                  > > are 200 and 300 feet wide wider than a football field - what
                  developer or
                  > > waterway management would make such wide canals. The land between
                  the canals
                  > > west of Golden Meadows is mostly not land, but water; essentially
                  they are
                  > > canals dug into water - what purpose could those possibly serve?)
                  > >
                  > > This argues against that explanation for the majority of these.
                  Also, if you
                  > > claim they are part of the Intercoastal Waterway, can you point to a
                  source that
                  > > asserts this? If you are floating this explanation, please provide
                  evidence, not
                  > > just that an Intercoastal Waterway exists. There IS no ICW in
                  Louisiana, where
                  > > the large canals are most common. If there is one in this specific
                  area that you
                  > > know of? Who built it? Who maintains it? If you have answers, we are
                  all in
                  > > favor of hearing it. Generic hip shooting doe not answer questions.
                  If they
                  > > appear to be answers to you, they don't meet our level of
                  questioning.
                  > >
                  > > In the middle of the large canals in Louisiana SW of Venice, near
                  the mouth of
                  > > the Mississippi River, is an elliptical canal about 2 miles in
                  diameter with
                  > > short canals extending in and out from it. Clearly not Intercoastal
                  Waterway
                  > > canals, even though they are along the coast.
                  > >
                  > > BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5542451858378181650 width=778 height=443>
                  > > SW of Venice, LA
                  > >
                  > > (The oval on the right is 2 miles across. All over this image
                  are narrow, wide,
                  > > long, short canals that either go somehere or don't go
                  somewhere, There are
                  > > short cross-connecting ones that are near the mouths of two canals -
                  why have
                  > > these when a few hundred yards away is open water?)
                  > >
                  > > Beaches - the large canals are certainly in areas in which there are
                  no beaches.
                  > > Off the top of my head, none of the smaller ones are, either, since
                  their
                  > > inflowing water tends to be upriver and beaches are not in areas
                  just upstream
                  > > of the mouths of rivers. A cursory look at the canals on the web
                  site will show
                  > > you this is a non-explanation.
                  > >
                  > > Even with a cursory glance at the images on the
                  Ancientcanalbuilders.com site
                  > > would show almost all of your speculations to be uninformed about
                  the features
                  > > the site talks about. So again I have to ask: Did you even visit the
                  site? Did
                  > > you even look at one image?
                  > >
                  > > I would just ask that you visit the site, look at the images, and
                  then ask
                  > > yourself if you would still toss out these speculative
                  explanations. We do not
                  > > have answers for these. We put out no preconceived ideas as to
                  what they are
                  > > for. If you have speculations, join the club. But please
                  don't just throw out
                  > > your BSJ and expect us to cower in the face of your already covered
                  > > possibilities. Tossing them out into the mix is fine, just
                  don't do it and then
                  > > walk away. Join the conversation. Ad hoc speculation is
                  not science, as you
                  > > would know, so if you could add substance and sources to your
                  comments in the
                  > > future it would be nice.  We would love that.Â
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > I will do so, too. Our single main source will continue to be the
                  satellite
                  > > images, but when necessary (and when we can find them) we will
                  include sources.
                  > > When we speculate we hope to be consistent in labeling them as
                  speculations. If
                  > > we fail in that, please point it out.  When you speculate,
                  can you label them
                  > > as such, too? Our main point at the present time is to ask
                  questions. We are
                  > > actually trying to not speculate even on who built them, if it
                  appears someone
                  > > in the long-ago past did; but we agree with you that first we should
                  look at
                  > > possible modern explanations.
                  > >
                  > > (I am cross-posting this at the blog site at
                  > > http://ancientcanals.blogspot.com/.)
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > Steve
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, William Conner
                  wrote:
                  > >
                  > > Okay everyone. Go to your public library and look in a book on
                  physical
                  > > geography. You will then find that most of your "ancient canals" can
                  be
                  > > attributed to natural coastal features, such as barrier bars, spits,
                  and dunes;
                  > > also many coastal areas have networks of man made dredged canals,
                  rivers and
                  > > bays so developers can sell vacation home lots for docks and boats.
                  And, the
                  > > best way to connect inland coastal docking waters, both natural and
                  man-made, is
                  > > with linear canals, which like roads, get one from one place to
                  another mostly
                  > > efficiently by being as straight as possible. Also, some canals
                  exist simply to
                  > > keep swampy coastal real estate dry.
                  > > >
                  > > >Shores in many places are lined with hotels, condos and private
                  homes, and many
                  > > >of these front into the seashore and the boats used by shore
                  dwellers and
                  > > >tourists must be docked in inlets, bays coastal rivers and lagoons.
                  And also
                  > > >there is the Inter-coastal Waterway to consider. And, since a
                  straight line gets
                  > > >a moving object from place to another, coastal canals are dredged
                  that way
                  > > >wherever possible.
                  > > >
                  > > >Deepwater dredges can be found docked in coastal areas when not in
                  use, and can
                  > > >be spotted out on the ocean when in use. Keeping beaches from being
                  washed away
                  > > >is serious business for the tourist trade. The dredges suck up
                  sandy ocean water
                  > > >and deposit it into barges or it is pipe it directly onto a beach.
                  > > >
                  > > >William Conner
                  > > >Columbus, Ohio
                  > > >BSJ Ohio University School of Journalism
                  > > >Retired science writer, and author of "Iron Age America"
                  > > >
                  > >
                  >
                • james m clark jr
                  Happy Hanukkah those of you who celobrate it Jew, Christian or otherwise. I was never a visitor Doc just unfourtnate at times. Luckly MU carries JSTOR
                  Message 8 of 23 , Dec 2, 2010
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Happy Hanukkah those of you who celobrate it Jew, Christian or otherwise.

                    I was never a visitor Doc just unfourtnate at times. Luckly MU carries JSTOR publictions and a fairly large goodwill here.
                    Just 3 months ago I stumbled across Pivot of Asia used valued at 103.00 so basicaly I got it 99% off... it to was beyond repair. My total Library came to over 3000 for 140 books many I didn't include in the inssurence settlement so I have to basically start from scratch. One of my fist books was Popuh Vuh it took 4 years to find that book way back when.

                    Not much progress Susan. I hope TASC Inc. (Tennessee Ancient Sites & Conserancy) has gotten out of their slump since their Cherokee State Naturalist represinitive is nolonger with them in the physical world. He was considered a main contact for the Highland Rim investigation if it was to materalize. I managed to contact Mark (TASC president) a bit worried informing him of my predicument... there was no mistaking him for an enthusist more of a rabble rouser. Richard was a stright to the point kind of guy my only Native American hope at that time... so I'm considering the long term method hoping to reestablish some sort feedback eventally. By then hopefully I'll have a dependable contact in Tennessee or at least trust someone enough to establish the Native American cause to encourge more Native Americans to be more involved as they have been since TASC Inc. and Native American Earthworks both established in 2003.

                    be well,
                    jamey


                    --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" <beldingenglish@...> wrote:
                    >
                    >
                    > Welcome back, Jamey. I have always enjoyed your postings here. Your
                    > fieldwork a few years ago working with a family (and, coincidently,
                    > another neighbor who had found the same type of objects) in sink holes
                    > and caves on their properties along the Tennessee Highland Rim that were
                    > filled with what seemed to be very ancient stone birds of various sizes
                    > and shapes, and giant animal or reptile bones, etc. This was and is a
                    > subject that still stirs my blood and I hope to learn more about it.
                    > You were sharing this at the PreColumbian Inscriptions YahooGroup but
                    > also a bit with us at Ancient Waterways. If anything has progressed
                    > since that time (2008?) that you are able to share, please let us know.
                    > I know there was a confidelity agreement you had at that time. This
                    > group has probably tripled since you had written here last, so if you
                    > are able to discuss that area of your work with this group, please give
                    > a background on it.
                    >
                    > The Ancient Canal Builders in America web site and blog that Steve
                    > Garcia has been sharing with this group and has helped found is
                    > something that will be ongoing in my own personal investigations and PR
                    > work...very very much at the roots of why I even wanted and needed to
                    > help start an ancient waterways group. That group and its members are
                    > following scientific and engineering channels that seem to me to be
                    > causing a stir even beyond the Americas. Google "Ancient Canal
                    > Builders in America" and I see dozens of web groups, sites discussing
                    > their work.
                    >
                    > Out of time at the lbirary. more later. Susan
                    >
                    >
                    > --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, "james m clark jr"
                    > <jameyboy@> wrote:
                    > >
                    > > In what direction to the Chattahoochee from the Springs and Euchi
                    > Valley? This is exciting! Something to consider in my own project I
                    > somehow over looked.
                    > >
                    > > I am sorry to report that possible Wari marbles ((107c)of quartz,
                    > marble and clay were destroyed in house fire presumably, conditions
                    > exceeding 1200 degrees.
                    > >
                    > > be well,
                    > > jamey
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, William Conner
                    > conner6343@ wrote:
                    > > >
                    > > > Vince Barrows:
                    > > >
                    > > > Thanks for your detailed defense of your ancient canals theory!Â
                    > It now seems to
                    > > > me that you have a mystery on the level of the giant Nazca imagery
                    > of South
                    > > > America.   Also, you have won me as a convert after I
                    > zoomed down to the high
                    > > > country there and revisited the Nazca lines. What really struck
                    > me in comparing
                    > > > the two is that the extremely long and straight double lines in your
                    > areas in
                    > > > North America closely resemble the extremely long and straight lines
                    > of Nazca!Â
                    > > > You have a mystery!
                    > > >
                    > > > I certainly have not intended to be adversarial maliciously but to
                    > draw out from
                    > > > you the detailed defense. So it may be that your
                    > prehistoric imagery was
                    > > > created for the same reason as my newly discovered huge animal
                    > effigy in Central
                    > > > Ohio and a possible and even larger snake effigy just above.Â
                    > To prove I was the
                    > > > first to discover these images, I posted them to the web on my blog
                    > "Explorer's
                    > > > Bill's Science Fiction."Â Doing this is one of the great wonders
                    > of the web!Â
                    > > > You find something new and stake a dated claim to it by posting the
                    > imagery on a
                    > > > web site or on a blog.
                    > > >
                    > > > William Conner
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > > Â
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > > ________________________________
                    > > > From: Vincent Barrows v_barrows@
                    > > > To: ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com
                    > > > Sent: Mon, November 22, 2010 5:20:50 PM
                    > > > Subject: Re: [ancient_waterways_society] Re: "Ancient Canals?"
                    > > >
                    > > > Â
                    > > > A set of ancient canals was built in Florida nearby Ortona
                    > Mound. These canals
                    > > > are identified by Archaeologists as the longest set of
                    > "prehistoric" canoe
                    > > > canals. The 5-mile long Ortona Canals have been
                    > identified to have
                    > > > been constructed around 1200 AD.   See the
                    > following sources for more
                    > > > information:
                    > > > http://www.mnemotrix.com/geo/ortona/ortona.html
                    > > > http://www.mnemotrix.com/geo/ortona/ortona.pdf
                    > > >
                    > http://www.nps.gov/nhl/designations/samples/fl/Mud%20Lake%20Canal.pdf
                    > > > Â
                    > > > So we cannot rule out the possibilty of more ancient canals,
                    > even though more
                    > > > research is needed to confirm the date of construction for these
                    > features.
                    > > >
                    > > > Â
                    > > > The contribution of this information as possible ancient
                    > waterways is
                    > > > appreciated. A potential research path for further
                    > discussion is the
                    > > > construction and use of prehistoric aquaducts.Â
                    > > >
                    > > > Â
                    > > > Thanks;
                    > > > Vince
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > > ________________________________
                    > > > From: bigalemc2 puppet@
                    > > > To: ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com
                    > > > Sent: Mon, November 22, 2010 1:26:50 PM
                    > > > Subject: [ancient_waterways_society] Re: "Ancient Canals?"
                    > > >
                    > > > Â
                    > > > (This is being cross-posted at http://ancientcanals.blogspot.com/)
                    > > >
                    > > > William -
                    > > >
                    > > > Thanks for your information and opinion. We agree with you that -
                    > though the
                    > > > name of the site is "Ancient Canal Builders" - we should do
                    > everything we can to
                    > > > try to explain them as modern, up to the moment that explanation
                    > doesn't fit.
                    > > > The title does tell visitors that we have looked into this, and - to
                    > our own
                    > > > satisfaction - the modern explanations do not suffice. We have put
                    > many, many
                    > > > hours into this already and would not be continuing without having
                    > asked a lot
                    > > > of questions ourselves. Part of our early efforts are to explain to
                    > visitors why
                    > > > we have come to this conclusion. That will take some time, and in
                    > the meantime
                    > > > we do expect others to question our thinking.
                    > > >
                    > > > To begin:
                    > > >
                    > > > We are aware of all the things you point out. It is our opinion at
                    > this time
                    > > > that those 'explanations' do not suffice to explain the geographical
                    > extent of
                    > > > the canals, their provenance, nor their number, nor the geography of
                    > any of
                    > > > them. We may find some that are explainable as modern, and their
                    > similarities
                    > > > argue that if any are modern, then all of them are modern - and if
                    > any of them
                    > > > are shown to be not modern, then probably none of them are. So a
                    > good deal of
                    > > > our effort is going into determining what they are not.
                    > > >
                    > > > They are clearly not barrier bars. First of all, they are canals,
                    > not
                    > > > protuberances sticking up out of the water. (Did you even bother
                    > going to the
                    > > > site?) They are not spits. They do not appear at all like dunes; in
                    > fact, they
                    > > > do not appear in sandy places. Most are in mud flats or grassy
                    > areas.
                    > > >
                    > > > BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5542438692150511410 width=779 height=607>
                    > > > Weekapaug, RI
                    > > > (Those canals are mostly less than the width of a car.)
                    > > >
                    > > > Some are actually submerged in the Gulf of Mexico.
                    > > >
                    > > > Many - perhaps most - of the canals branch out off rivers and
                    > streams hundreds
                    > > > of yards (some of them even miles) from the current shore line,
                    > after which they
                    > > > branch again and then again, several iterations, all with canal
                    > widths that are
                    > > > unnatural in their consistency.
                    > > >
                    > > > Our preliminary conclusion: These do not appear to be barrier bars,
                    > dunes or
                    > > > spits. They are definitely not natural. If you have been to the site
                    > and seen
                    > > > the satellite images you would see that immediately. Your
                    > opening generic
                    > > > statement that "most of your "ancient canals" can be attributed to
                    > natural
                    > > > coastal features" turns out to have no substance.
                    > > >
                    > > > We are looking into records of man made dredging. One thing is
                    > certain: If these
                    > > > were done by the Army Corps of Engineers, they are not taking credit
                    > for them in
                    > > > our first perusal of the COE information. We do not rule that out at
                    > this time;
                    > > > it is too early to say.
                    > > >
                    > > > As to developers, there are plenty of retirement/vacation home or
                    > waterside
                    > > > developments to compare these to. Based on lot size, spacing of
                    > canals, width,
                    > > > geometry, configuration, etc., we have reason to believe this
                    > explanation falls
                    > > > short. It is under consideration, and if it turns out this is
                    > correct, we will
                    > > > readily go with that. There are two types/classes that we've seen
                    > that seem to
                    > > > warrant comparison with water-side developments. One has many short
                    > wide
                    > > > branches and one has long parallel narrow canals. Neither class
                    > appears similar
                    > > > in any particular ways to developed ones nearby, so if developers
                    > did all these
                    > > > - known developments, short wide canals, or long parallel ones, then
                    > we find it
                    > > > odd that the developed ones look nothing like either of the other
                    > two classes.
                    > > > So, for now, we believe we are justified in being open to other
                    > explanations.
                    > > >
                    > > > If these are from developers, they dredged what appear to be
                    > thousands of miles
                    > > > of canals which they never actually developed. Developers are not
                    > prone to such
                    > > > waste of money. But we do take this possibility seriously,
                    > nevertheless.
                    > > >
                    > > > One odd feature of these canals is that there are no, or next to no,
                    > > > developments using them or any of the same geometry. No boats, no
                    > homes, no pier
                    > > > facilities. If there are exceptions to this, they are rare. We are
                    > talking
                    > > > thousands of these smaller canals.
                    > > >
                    > > > As to keeping coastal real estate dry, this is a reasonable
                    > observation, one we
                    > > > are also aware of. This might explain a small minority of these
                    > smaller canals.
                    > > > However, many of the exact some types are located in areas clearly
                    > not in need
                    > > > of drainage. We will, however, consider this for these areas too. We
                    > do not
                    > > > pretend to know all the reasons people do things. This explanation
                    > of yours
                    > > > sounds good on the surface, but if you look at the satellite photos,
                    > you would
                    > > > see features and locations that support our skepticism about this
                    > explanation.
                    > > > Many of these are deep in the bayous of Louisiana while the same
                    > exact type is
                    > > > in New Hampshire. We believe that a common explanation is needed; we
                    > doubt this
                    > > > one is adequate to explain them all.
                    > > >
                    > > > Intercoastal Waterway - two of the three people involved are coastal
                    > dwellers (I
                    > > > am not), and they are quite familiar with these. I am reasonably
                    > informed about
                    > > > these, even though I don't live there. The vast majority of this
                    > type canal is
                    > > > in the bayous of Louisiana, criss-crossing like pick-up-sticks. Many
                    > > > Intercaostal waterways are not done like that. There also is no
                    > Intercoastal
                    > > > Waterway in that area. These canals are oriented to all sorts of
                    > skewed angles,
                    > > > with a high density that contributes nothing to coastal
                    > transportation.
                    > > > BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5542448207126046546 width=777 height=666>
                    > > > SE of Golden Meadows, LA
                    > > >
                    > > > (This area of mud flats is all but in the Gulf of Mexico. The whiter
                    > areas on
                    > > > the left are developed areas. The wider canals are over 300 feet
                    > wide. The
                    > > > double canal extends for about 100 miles east to west, going from
                    > nowhere to
                    > > > nowhere. The myriad crossing canals - what could they possibly be
                    > for?
                    > > > Development in mud flats? Not gonna happen. Intercoastal waterway?
                    > The double
                    > > > canal possibly, but the others? Protecting land? Please, tell me
                    > what sort of
                    > > > plan they were following. The dead end canals? The ones west of
                    > Golden Meadows
                    > > > are 200 and 300 feet wide wider than a football field - what
                    > developer or
                    > > > waterway management would make such wide canals. The land between
                    > the canals
                    > > > west of Golden Meadows is mostly not land, but water; essentially
                    > they are
                    > > > canals dug into water - what purpose could those possibly serve?)
                    > > >
                    > > > This argues against that explanation for the majority of these.
                    > Also, if you
                    > > > claim they are part of the Intercoastal Waterway, can you point to a
                    > source that
                    > > > asserts this? If you are floating this explanation, please provide
                    > evidence, not
                    > > > just that an Intercoastal Waterway exists. There IS no ICW in
                    > Louisiana, where
                    > > > the large canals are most common. If there is one in this specific
                    > area that you
                    > > > know of? Who built it? Who maintains it? If you have answers, we are
                    > all in
                    > > > favor of hearing it. Generic hip shooting doe not answer questions.
                    > If they
                    > > > appear to be answers to you, they don't meet our level of
                    > questioning.
                    > > >
                    > > > In the middle of the large canals in Louisiana SW of Venice, near
                    > the mouth of
                    > > > the Mississippi River, is an elliptical canal about 2 miles in
                    > diameter with
                    > > > short canals extending in and out from it. Clearly not Intercoastal
                    > Waterway
                    > > > canals, even though they are along the coast.
                    > > >
                    > > > BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5542451858378181650 width=778 height=443>
                    > > > SW of Venice, LA
                    > > >
                    > > > (The oval on the right is 2 miles across. All over this image
                    > are narrow, wide,
                    > > > long, short canals that either go somehere or don't go
                    > somewhere, There are
                    > > > short cross-connecting ones that are near the mouths of two canals -
                    > why have
                    > > > these when a few hundred yards away is open water?)
                    > > >
                    > > > Beaches - the large canals are certainly in areas in which there are
                    > no beaches.
                    > > > Off the top of my head, none of the smaller ones are, either, since
                    > their
                    > > > inflowing water tends to be upriver and beaches are not in areas
                    > just upstream
                    > > > of the mouths of rivers. A cursory look at the canals on the web
                    > site will show
                    > > > you this is a non-explanation.
                    > > >
                    > > > Even with a cursory glance at the images on the
                    > Ancientcanalbuilders.com site
                    > > > would show almost all of your speculations to be uninformed about
                    > the features
                    > > > the site talks about. So again I have to ask: Did you even visit the
                    > site? Did
                    > > > you even look at one image?
                    > > >
                    > > > I would just ask that you visit the site, look at the images, and
                    > then ask
                    > > > yourself if you would still toss out these speculative
                    > explanations. We do not
                    > > > have answers for these. We put out no preconceived ideas as to
                    > what they are
                    > > > for. If you have speculations, join the club. But please
                    > don't just throw out
                    > > > your BSJ and expect us to cower in the face of your already covered
                    > > > possibilities. Tossing them out into the mix is fine, just
                    > don't do it and then
                    > > > walk away. Join the conversation. Ad hoc speculation is
                    > not science, as you
                    > > > would know, so if you could add substance and sources to your
                    > comments in the
                    > > > future it would be nice.  We would love that.Â
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > > I will do so, too. Our single main source will continue to be the
                    > satellite
                    > > > images, but when necessary (and when we can find them) we will
                    > include sources.
                    > > > When we speculate we hope to be consistent in labeling them as
                    > speculations. If
                    > > > we fail in that, please point it out.  When you speculate,
                    > can you label them
                    > > > as such, too? Our main point at the present time is to ask
                    > questions. We are
                    > > > actually trying to not speculate even on who built them, if it
                    > appears someone
                    > > > in the long-ago past did; but we agree with you that first we should
                    > look at
                    > > > possible modern explanations.
                    > > >
                    > > > (I am cross-posting this at the blog site at
                    > > > http://ancientcanals.blogspot.com/.)
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > > Steve
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > > --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, William Conner
                    > wrote:
                    > > >
                    > > > Okay everyone. Go to your public library and look in a book on
                    > physical
                    > > > geography. You will then find that most of your "ancient canals" can
                    > be
                    > > > attributed to natural coastal features, such as barrier bars, spits,
                    > and dunes;
                    > > > also many coastal areas have networks of man made dredged canals,
                    > rivers and
                    > > > bays so developers can sell vacation home lots for docks and boats.
                    > And, the
                    > > > best way to connect inland coastal docking waters, both natural and
                    > man-made, is
                    > > > with linear canals, which like roads, get one from one place to
                    > another mostly
                    > > > efficiently by being as straight as possible. Also, some canals
                    > exist simply to
                    > > > keep swampy coastal real estate dry.
                    > > > >
                    > > > >Shores in many places are lined with hotels, condos and private
                    > homes, and many
                    > > > >of these front into the seashore and the boats used by shore
                    > dwellers and
                    > > > >tourists must be docked in inlets, bays coastal rivers and lagoons.
                    > And also
                    > > > >there is the Inter-coastal Waterway to consider. And, since a
                    > straight line gets
                    > > > >a moving object from place to another, coastal canals are dredged
                    > that way
                    > > > >wherever possible.
                    > > > >
                    > > > >Deepwater dredges can be found docked in coastal areas when not in
                    > use, and can
                    > > > >be spotted out on the ocean when in use. Keeping beaches from being
                    > washed away
                    > > > >is serious business for the tourist trade. The dredges suck up
                    > sandy ocean water
                    > > > >and deposit it into barges or it is pipe it directly onto a beach.
                    > > > >
                    > > > >William Conner
                    > > > >Columbus, Ohio
                    > > > >BSJ Ohio University School of Journalism
                    > > > >Retired science writer, and author of "Iron Age America"
                    > > > >
                    > > >
                    > >
                    >
                  • bigalemc2
                    Well, folks, the ancient canals aren t ancient, after all. We finally were able to find explanations for them and are satisfied that we were wrong. We found
                    Message 9 of 23 , Dec 3, 2010
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Well, folks, the ancient canals aren't ancient, after all.

                      We finally were able to find explanations for them and are satisfied that we were wrong.

                      We found out that the long parallel canals were created in the 1915-1960 period as ways of combating mosquitos. Beginning with New Jersey, the coastal states found that literally "draining the swamps" worked quite well as the backbone of efforts to make the coast more congenial for humans.

                      Why did we think they were not mosquito abatement measures? We saw on many sites that the canals did not reach to the seashore. The canals were most often dead-headed short of the shore. If the bottom end is not open, drainage doesn't happen. These dead-end canals thus looked like irrigation canals.

                      What we didn't know was that in the 1960s they found out they'd changed the ecosystem and had lost the fauna that had formerly used the marshlands for habitat. By then they had other ways of combating the mosquitos, so the decision was made to close the drains by filling in the lower ends of the canals.

                      By the time we came along drainage ditches had long since been turned into what looked like irrigation - in a place where irrigation didn't make sense, at least on our modern world.

                      The symbol features? A good look at them tells us they are more recent even than the drainage ditches, since they all are tucked nicely between the ditches. Had they been older, the more or less random spacing of the ditches would have broken into the symbols.

                      So, what did they end up being? Our best guess is muskrat lodges. Muskrats are kin to beavers and are very industrious in terraforming things to suit themselves. They make lodges in marshy areas(but not dams), and have the entrances under water as often as not. If they need to, they dig their own ditches around their lodges. They also dig ditches so that they can swim as much as possible. All in all, it is a pretty certain thing that the muskrats did them.

                      Google Earth and Bing both flatten out features, so the lodges appear as flat islands.

                      We need to take this all as an object lesson: We cannot trust that what we see on GE is a true representation.

                      As to the big canals in the Gulf, we are now aware of how much damage has been done to the bayou areas, how much land has been lost due to human activity. That is one reason Katrina did so much damage - there just wasn't enough barrier land anymore. So the submerged ones seem to have an explanation as to why they are submerged: The wave action obliterated the crests of the canal berms.

                      But what ARE they?

                      After finding mundane explanations for the other two, John and I are beaten up enough to admit there is probably a mundane explanation for them, too. So, John is closing down his site shortly, and I will be closing down the blog, too. I posted there about the "mosquito ditches," and expect that traffic will cease even if we kept the sites open.

                      So, this is a mea culpa. We were wrong.

                      Sorry to get everyone's hopes up.

                      Take care. I will still be around...

                      Steve
                    • bigalemc2
                      Jamey - The marble and clay might have been affected by 1200 temps, but quartz is not. Quartz has amazing properties. One of them is that it is very
                      Message 10 of 23 , Dec 3, 2010
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Jamey -

                        The marble and clay might have been affected by 1200 temps, but quartz is not.

                        Quartz has amazing properties. One of them is that it is very impervious to heat. It's "coefficient of thermal expansion" is 0.000, meaning that it does not expand or contract when it heats up or cools down. Whatever gives it that property, it also makes it able to withstand very high temps.

                        It is used in quartz infrared heating bulbs, some in industry. I've worked with bulbs that operate at 4,000F. That is the temp at the heating element. The quartz is the "glass" around the heating element. The quartz is only about 1/8"-3/16" away from the heating element and the bulb in those is sealed, so there is nowhere for the heat to go but out through the quartz. (There is also a non-sealed version that only gets to 2,000F.)

                        There used to be a show on TV that challenged claims of products. I saw the episode where they tested the claim of Corning that their quartz pans could actually be used to MELT aluminum pans. Now THAT is one hell of a claim! But they tested it, and sure enough! The aluminum pan melted INSIDE the quartz pan. Aluminum's melting temp is right around the 1200F temp mark.

                        Quartz's melting temp? Right around 1700C, which is about 3,000F. That tells me that the temp at the quartz was substantially less than the 4,000F claimed by the quartz bulb manufacturers, and which clearly was the heating element temp only.

                        BTW, that zero coefficient of expansion is an amazing thing. REALLY amazing. No joke. We were told that we could throw ice water on a white hot bulb and - other than the water instantly boiling very violently - nothing would happen to the bulb. THAT was a challenge too good to pass up, so we did exactly that. We took the best precautions we could to protect ourselves, and then flung the ice water onto the bulb. The water just EXPLODED on impact. But when it was all over, the bulb just sat there, still glowing.

                        Sometimes you run across things that defy common sense. But the universe has many surprises like that.

                        Anyway, I really don't think the 1200 temp affected the quartz. Perhaps something fell on the quartz?


                        Steve


                        --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, "james m clark jr" <jameyboy@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > In what direction to the Chattahoochee from the Springs and Euchi Valley? This is exciting! Something to consider in my own project I somehow over looked.
                        >
                        > I am sorry to report that possible Wari marbles ((107c)of quartz, marble and clay were destroyed in house fire presumably, conditions exceeding 1200 degrees.
                        >
                        > be well,
                        > jamey
                        >
                      • Ted Sojka
                        Thank you for writing this letter with the additional information. There are many unexplained things on this earth and hope you look into more of them. One
                        Message 11 of 23 , Dec 3, 2010
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Thank you for writing this letter with the additional information.   There are many unexplained things on this earth and hope you look into more of them.  One fellow who has done a lot with photos both from the ground and satellites is.      http://jqjacobs.net/
                          He is a very competent archeologist and astronomer.  I hope you take a look at his web page and find some new things to research.   He has found a lot of evidence of villages and raised farm fields in the Amazon using Google Earth images.   

                          The draining of the big swamps in the center of Wisconsin turned out to be blunders for the environment and never made very good fields for agriculture.  Many of the drainage ditches has been reworked to allow cranberries to grow in areas that drain into the Wisconsin River.  Before our efforts in the 1920 to reduce the size of the grand marsh the native Americans had been harvesting wild cranberries for thousands of years.  Too bad we did not ask them what that land was good for, as we bulldozed our way into the continent, with ideas not based on Nature, but rather harvest of timber, mining for minerals, and as the famous artist Charles M. Russell said, "plowing the prairie wrong side up".  He is the only artist that is featured among the statues in the Statuary Hall in the Capitol building.   He got to the "West" at fourteen, tried his hand at many things, but succeeded in "stopping time with his paint brush".  He gave us a window into a life that was passing before his eyes, and the passing of cultures never to return.  

                          I did enjoy your efforts while you posted on the AWS site.  Good luck to you.

                          Ted Sojka
                          Native Earthworks Preservation / Iowa


                          On Dec 3, 2010, at 6:38 PM, bigalemc2 wrote:

                          Well, folks, the ancient canals aren't ancient, after all.

                          We finally were able to find explanations for them and are satisfied that we were wrong.

                          We found out that the long parallel canals were created in the 1915-1960 period as ways of combating mosquitos. Beginning with New Jersey, the coastal states found that literally "draining the swamps" worked quite well as the backbone of efforts to make the coast more congenial for humans.

                          Why did we think they were not mosquito abatement measures? We saw on many sites that the canals did not reach to the seashore. The canals were most often dead-headed short of the shore. If the bottom end is not open, drainage doesn't happen. These dead-end canals thus looked like irrigation canals.

                          What we didn't know was that in the 1960s they found out they'd changed the ecosystem and had lost the fauna that had formerly used the marshlands for habitat. By then they had other ways of combating the mosquitos, so the decision was made to close the drains by filling in the lower ends of the canals.

                          By the time we came along drainage ditches had long since been turned into what looked like irrigation - in a place where irrigation didn't make sense, at least on our modern world.

                          The symbol features? A good look at them tells us they are more recent even than the drainage ditches, since they all are tucked nicely between the ditches. Had they been older, the more or less random spacing of the ditches would have broken into the symbols.

                          So, what did they end up being? Our best guess is muskrat lodges. Muskrats are kin to beavers and are very industrious in terraforming things to suit themselves. They make lodges in marshy areas(but not dams), and have the entrances under water as often as not. If they need to, they dig their own ditches around their lodges. They also dig ditches so that they can swim as much as possible. All in all, it is a pretty certain thing that the muskrats did them.

                          Google Earth and Bing both flatten out features, so the lodges appear as flat islands.

                          We need to take this all as an object lesson: We cannot trust that what we see on GE is a true representation.

                          As to the big canals in the Gulf, we are now aware of how much damage has been done to the bayou areas, how much land has been lost due to human activity. That is one reason Katrina did so much damage - there just wasn't enough barrier land anymore. So the submerged ones seem to have an explanation as to why they are submerged: The wave action obliterated the crests of the canal berms.

                          But what ARE they?

                          After finding mundane explanations for the other two, John and I are beaten up enough to admit there is probably a mundane explanation for them, too. So, John is closing down his site shortly, and I will be closing down the blog, too. I posted there about the "mosquito ditches," and expect that traffic will cease even if we kept the sites open.

                          So, this is a mea culpa. We were wrong.

                          Sorry to get everyone's hopes up.

                          Take care. I will still be around...

                          Steve


                        • Susan
                          Steve and All, The public admissions and closing down of the Ancient Canal Builders in America project and web sites when holes were found in the research
                          Message 12 of 23 , Dec 3, 2010
                          • 0 Attachment

                            Steve and All,

                            The public admissions and closing down of the Ancient Canal Builders in America project and web sites when holes were found in the research demonstrates to me sound scientific practices as well as high integrity and humility.   Considerable obvious effort has been made by your research team and I've no doubt members of the team are burnt out.  I doubt that any of you are denying that substantial numbers of canals, perhaps canal networks, were in existence hundreds, perhaps thousands of years ago with remnants of scientifically provable evidence yet to be discovered and tested by underwater archaeologists, geoligists and others such as Jensen , you and those willing to lay your time and credibility on the line to consider and explore such possibilities.

                            I continue to believe America was riddled with ancient, humanly-constructed canals,  some very likely leaving traces and scientifically provable evidence for underwater archaeologists, geoligists and others like Jensen, Garcia willing to explore such possibilities.  Riverways, intra- and intercontinental waterways, humanly constructed/altered canals are at the very roots of diffusionist exploration and to me, advanced socio-cultural research.

                            I think a parallel here:  as is well known and voiced by avocational, academic researchers,  old texts and many of the populace around the Lake Superior Copper Country.....most, if not all historic copper mines originated from ancient copper pits and mines.   I'd be very surprised if that did not hold true to a certain extent with contemporary canals where water routes have not been totally altered from centuries, millinnea ago.  Unlike the copper mining parallel where tbe physical evidence of discarded hammerstones was present until a few decades ago,  imperical evidence for ancient canals is far more difficult.   If such canals existed and evidence no longer remains, it will be another case where ignorance will continue to prevail,  knowledge of ancient human genius is lost to time, population expansion, and the increasingly total technological dominance of the natural world continues.

                            I commend the efforts of the Ancient Canal Builders team and look forward to Steve and any of you here at AWS continuing into the roots and scientifically-based intent of some of the fine research the courageous team began not very long ago.

                            Thanks to so many of you here for the interesting Posts, subjects, and responses to each others' letters here the past couple of weeks.  It is a pleasure to be a member and a co-host of this site.

                            Susan


                            --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, "bigalemc2" <puppet@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > Well, folks, the ancient canals aren't ancient, after all.
                            >
                            > We finally were able to find explanations for them and are satisfied that we were wrong.
                            >
                            > We found out that the long parallel canals were created in the 1915-1960 period as ways of combating mosquitos. Beginning with New Jersey, the coastal states found that literally "draining the swamps" worked quite well as the backbone of efforts to make the coast more congenial for humans.
                            >
                            > Why did we think they were not mosquito abatement measures? We saw on many sites that the canals did not reach to the seashore. The canals were most often dead-headed short of the shore. If the bottom end is not open, drainage doesn't happen. These dead-end canals thus looked like irrigation canals.
                            >
                            > What we didn't know was that in the 1960s they found out they'd changed the ecosystem and had lost the fauna that had formerly used the marshlands for habitat. By then they had other ways of combating the mosquitos, so the decision was made to close the drains by filling in the lower ends of the canals.
                            >
                            > By the time we came along drainage ditches had long since been turned into what looked like irrigation - in a place where irrigation didn't make sense, at least on our modern world.
                            >
                            > The symbol features? A good look at them tells us they are more recent even than the drainage ditches, since they all are tucked nicely between the ditches. Had they been older, the more or less random spacing of the ditches would have broken into the symbols.
                            >
                            > So, what did they end up being? Our best guess is muskrat lodges. Muskrats are kin to beavers and are very industrious in terraforming things to suit themselves. They make lodges in marshy areas(but not dams), and have the entrances under water as often as not. If they need to, they dig their own ditches around their lodges. They also dig ditches so that they can swim as much as possible. All in all, it is a pretty certain thing that the muskrats did them.
                            >
                            > Google Earth and Bing both flatten out features, so the lodges appear as flat islands.
                            >
                            > We need to take this all as an object lesson: We cannot trust that what we see on GE is a true representation.
                            >
                            > As to the big canals in the Gulf, we are now aware of how much damage has been done to the bayou areas, how much land has been lost due to human activity. That is one reason Katrina did so much damage - there just wasn't enough barrier land anymore. So the submerged ones seem to have an explanation as to why they are submerged: The wave action obliterated the crests of the canal berms.
                            >
                            > But what ARE they?
                            >
                            > After finding mundane explanations for the other two, John and I are beaten up enough to admit there is probably a mundane explanation for them, too. So, John is closing down his site shortly, and I will be closing down the blog, too. I posted there about the "mosquito ditches," and expect that traffic will cease even if we kept the sites open.
                            >
                            > So, this is a mea culpa. We were wrong.
                            >
                            > Sorry to get everyone's hopes up.
                            >
                            > Take care. I will still be around...
                            >
                            > Steve
                            >

                          • Vincent Barrows
                            Steve and all; It is correct that we moderns have constructed canals for purposes of draining swamps, building pipelines, roadways, right of ways, property
                            Message 13 of 23 , Dec 3, 2010
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Steve and all;
                              It is correct that we moderns have constructed canals for purposes of draining swamps, building pipelines, roadways, right of ways, property boundaries.  The following link includes some information about modern canal building.  This shows that the majority of mosquito drainage canals were built in the early 1900s.

                              http://www.coastalguide.com/IntraCoastalWaterway/SouthCarolinaCanals.shtml

                              Rafinesque in 1838 wrote "But our monuments do not merely consist in such mounds or tumuli, since we find besides in North America, ruins of cities, some of which were walled with earth or even stones, real forts or citadels, temples and altars of all shapes, but chiefly circular, square or polygonal, some elliptical, hexagonal, octagonal, &c., quite regularly pointing to the cardinal points. We have also traces of buildings, foundations, roads, avenues, causeways, canals, bridges, dromes, or racecourses, pillars and pyramids, wells, pits, arenas, &c. And of these not a few, but hundreds of them, many of which are unsurveyed and undescribed as yet. "

                              Some prehistoric humans constructed canals for architectural and irrigation purposes.  Gladwin discusses an archaeological site report from Arizona that discusses Hohokam irrigation canals. These canals were built and rebuilt in prehistoric times to irrigate arid desert farmland.   William Morgan also has published Prehistoric Architecture in the Eastern United States and shows examples of canals and moats.  His book uses survey data from 1830's (Squier and Davis) to illustrate examples of mound sites with evidence of manmade canals and waterscapes. 

                              Respectfully;
                              Vince


                              From: Susan <beldingenglish@...>
                              To: ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com
                              Sent: Fri, December 3, 2010 8:35:11 PM
                              Subject: [ancient_waterways_society] Re: "Ancient Canals?"

                               

                              Steve and All,

                              The public admissions and closing down of the Ancient Canal Builders in America project and web sites when holes were found in the research demonstrates to me sound scientific practices as well as high integrity and humility.   Considerable obvious effort has been made by your research team and I've no doubt members of the team are burnt out.  I doubt that any of you are denying that substantial numbers of canals, perhaps canal networks, were in existence hundreds, perhaps thousands of years ago with remnants of scientifically provable evidence yet to be discovered and tested by underwater archaeologists, geoligists and others such as Jensen , you and those willing to lay your time and credibility on the line to consider and explore such possibilities.

                              I continue to believe America was riddled with ancient, humanly-constructed canals,  some very likely leaving traces and scientifically provable evidence for underwater archaeologists, geoligists and others like Jensen, Garcia willing to explore such possibilities.  Riverways, intra- and intercontinental waterways, humanly constructed/altered canals are at the very roots of diffusionist exploration and to me, advanced socio-cultural research.

                              I think a parallel here:  as is well known and voiced by avocational, academic researchers,  old texts and many of the populace around the Lake Superior Copper Country.....most, if not all historic copper mines originated from ancient copper pits and mines.   I'd be very surprised if that did not hold true to a certain extent with contemporary canals where water routes have not been totally altered from centuries, millinnea ago.  Unlike the copper mining parallel where tbe physical evidence of discarded hammerstones was present until a few decades ago,  imperical evidence for ancient canals is far more difficult.   If such canals existed and evidence no longer remains, it will be another case where ignorance will continue to prevail,  knowledge of ancient human genius is lost to time, population expansion, and the increasingly total technological dominance of the natural world continues.

                              I commend the efforts of the Ancient Canal Builders team and look forward to Steve and any of you here at AWS continuing into the roots and scientifically-based intent of some of the fine research the courageous team began not very long ago.

                              Thanks to so many of you here for the interesting Posts, subjects, and responses to each others' letters here the past couple of weeks.  It is a pleasure to be a member and a co-host of this site.

                              Susan


                              --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, "bigalemc2" <puppet@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > Well, folks, the ancient canals aren't ancient, after all.
                              >
                              > We finally were able to find explanations for them and are satisfied that we were wrong.
                              >
                              > We found out that the long parallel canals were created in the 1915-1960 period as ways of combating mosquitos. Beginning with New Jersey, the coastal states found that literally "draining the swamps" worked quite well as the backbone of efforts to make the coast more congenial for humans.
                              >
                              > Why did we think they were not mosquito abatement measures? We saw on many sites that the canals did not reach to the seashore. The canals were most often dead-headed short of the shore. If the bottom end is not open, drainage doesn't happen. These dead-end canals thus looked like irrigation canals.
                              >
                              > What we didn't know was that in the 1960s they found out they'd changed the ecosystem and had lost the fauna that had formerly used the marshlands for habitat. By then they had other ways of combating the mosquitos, so the decision was made to close the drains by filling in the lower ends of the canals.
                              >
                              > By the time we came along drainage ditches had long since been turned into what looked like irrigation - in a place where irrigation didn't make sense, at least on our modern world.
                              >
                              > The symbol features? A good look at them tells us they are more recent even than the drainage ditches, since they all are tucked nicely between the ditches. Had they been older, the more or less random spacing of the ditches would have broken into the symbols.
                              >
                              > So, what did they end up being? Our best guess is muskrat lodges. Muskrats are kin to beavers and are very industrious in terraforming things to suit themselves. They make lodges in marshy areas(but not dams), and have the entrances under water as often as not. If they need to, they dig their own ditches around their lodges. They also dig ditches so that they can swim as much as possible. All in all, it is a pretty certain thing that the muskrats did them.
                              >
                              > Google Earth and Bing both flatten out features, so the lodges appear as flat islands.
                              >
                              > We need to take this all as an object lesson: We cannot trust that what we see on GE is a true representation.
                              >
                              > As to the big canals in the Gulf, we are now aware of how much damage has been done to the bayou areas, how much land has been lost due to human activity. That is one reason Katrina did so much damage - there just wasn't enough barrier land anymore. So the submerged ones seem to have an explanation as to why they are submerged: The wave action obliterated the crests of the canal berms.
                              >
                              > But what ARE they?
                              >
                              > After finding mundane explanations for the other two, John and I are beaten up enough to admit there is probably a mundane explanation for them, too. So, John is closing down his site shortly, and I will be closing down the blog, too. I posted there about the "mosquito ditches," and expect that traffic will cease even if we kept the sites open.
                              >
                              > So, this is a mea culpa. We were wrong.
                              >
                              > Sorry to get everyone's hopes up.
                              >
                              > Take care. I will still be around...
                              >
                              > Steve
                              >


                            • james m clark jr
                              Really, Well it looks like I ll just have to go and find my marbles and make use of the frontyard fire pit once again. I m not one who burns plastic in a pit
                              Message 14 of 23 , Dec 4, 2010
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Really,

                                Well it looks like I'll just have to go and find my marbles and make use of the frontyard fire pit once again. I'm not one who burns plastic in a pit especially when so much good food came from that pit.
                                Charcoal just doesn't do it for me espically for smoked red beans and rice, baked corn, grilled carrots and a nice pepper steak glazed with vidalla onion steak sause.

                                I surely would have thought they would have shattered like
                                granite. Most of them are quartz. I only had about 7 clay ones,
                                and about 10 to 12 of marble.

                                Thanks again Steve

                                be well,
                                jamey




                                --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, "bigalemc2" <puppet@...> wrote:
                                >
                                > Jamey -
                                >
                                > The marble and clay might have been affected by 1200 temps, but quartz is not.
                                >
                                > Quartz has amazing properties. One of them is that it is very impervious to heat. It's "coefficient of thermal expansion" is 0.000, meaning that it does not expand or contract when it heats up or cools down. Whatever gives it that property, it also makes it able to withstand very high temps.
                                >
                                > It is used in quartz infrared heating bulbs, some in industry. I've worked with bulbs that operate at 4,000F. That is the temp at the heating element. The quartz is the "glass" around the heating element. The quartz is only about 1/8"-3/16" away from the heating element and the bulb in those is sealed, so there is nowhere for the heat to go but out through the quartz. (There is also a non-sealed version that only gets to 2,000F.)
                                >
                                > There used to be a show on TV that challenged claims of products. I saw the episode where they tested the claim of Corning that their quartz pans could actually be used to MELT aluminum pans. Now THAT is one hell of a claim! But they tested it, and sure enough! The aluminum pan melted INSIDE the quartz pan. Aluminum's melting temp is right around the 1200F temp mark.
                                >
                                > Quartz's melting temp? Right around 1700C, which is about 3,000F. That tells me that the temp at the quartz was substantially less than the 4,000F claimed by the quartz bulb manufacturers, and which clearly was the heating element temp only.
                                >
                                > BTW, that zero coefficient of expansion is an amazing thing. REALLY amazing. No joke. We were told that we could throw ice water on a white hot bulb and - other than the water instantly boiling very violently - nothing would happen to the bulb. THAT was a challenge too good to pass up, so we did exactly that. We took the best precautions we could to protect ourselves, and then flung the ice water onto the bulb. The water just EXPLODED on impact. But when it was all over, the bulb just sat there, still glowing.
                                >
                                > Sometimes you run across things that defy common sense. But the universe has many surprises like that.
                                >
                                > Anyway, I really don't think the 1200 temp affected the quartz. Perhaps something fell on the quartz?
                                >
                                >
                                > Steve
                                >
                                >
                                > --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, "james m clark jr" <jameyboy@> wrote:
                                > >
                                > > In what direction to the Chattahoochee from the Springs and Euchi Valley? This is exciting! Something to consider in my own project I somehow over looked.
                                > >
                                > > I am sorry to report that possible Wari marbles ((107c)of quartz, marble and clay were destroyed in house fire presumably, conditions exceeding 1200 degrees.
                                > >
                                > > be well,
                                > > jamey
                                > >
                                >
                              • bigalemc2
                                Thanks, Ted. Speaking about all this, I thought folks here might be interested in something else ancient American. I got an email this morning from Paul
                                Message 15 of 23 , Dec 4, 2010
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Thanks, Ted.

                                  Speaking about all this, I thought folks here might be interested in something else ancient American.  I got an email this morning from Paul Chiasson, the author of "The Island of Seven Cities".  He wrote:
                                  The documentary, titled "Mysterious Ruins - Cape Breton", will air in Canada on History Television on Saturday, December 11, at 7:00pm.  For more information you can check their website, history.ca. 
                                  He also sent a link for the trailer:
                                  http://www.myspace.com/video/496952816/mysterious-ruins-cape-breton-trailer/105485432 
                                  I will check it out and find a way to watch it as soon as I can.


                                  ...I have my hand in several other things, so much that it gets in the way of making a living sometimes...

                                  I will check out the site your recommended.  It sounds familiar.

                                  And I am fairly familiar with the bits about the Amazon.  The book 1491 covers that nicely, and opens up wide vistas for inquiry.

                                  I think perhaps some of us lived former lives in some of the indigenous western hemisphere cultures and know intrinsically that the histories are simply untrue - and we want the truth to be known.

                                  But not everything we delve into is going to pan out.  Some will, and some won't.  Perhaps our memories are not 100% and we latch onto some ideas that ring a bell but aren't quite 100%.

                                  Also, I may have spoken a bit hastily about the canals.  We do still have one type we haven't figured out yet - the big wide long ones in Louisiana.  While it is possible they have a mundane explanation, that is not a done deal yet.  We are retrenching as I write this.

                                  Steve

                                  --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, Ted Sojka <tedsojka@...> wrote:
                                  >
                                  > Thank you for writing this letter with the additional information.
                                  > There are many unexplained things on this earth and hope you look into
                                  > more of them. One fellow who has done a lot with photos both from the
                                  > ground and satellites is. http://jqjacobs.net/
                                  > He is a very competent archeologist and astronomer. I hope you take a
                                  > look at his web page and find some new things to research. He has
                                  > found a lot of evidence of villages and raised farm fields in the
                                  > Amazon using Google Earth images.
                                  >
                                  > The draining of the big swamps in the center of Wisconsin turned out
                                  > to be blunders for the environment and never made very good fields for
                                  > agriculture. Many of the drainage ditches has been reworked to allow
                                  > cranberries to grow in areas that drain into the Wisconsin River.
                                  > Before our efforts in the 1920 to reduce the size of the grand marsh
                                  > the native Americans had been harvesting wild cranberries for
                                  > thousands of years. Too bad we did not ask them what that land was
                                  > good for, as we bulldozed our way into the continent, with ideas not
                                  > based on Nature, but rather harvest of timber, mining for minerals,
                                  > and as the famous artist Charles M. Russell said, "plowing the prairie
                                  > wrong side up". He is the only artist that is featured among the
                                  > statues in the Statuary Hall in the Capitol building. He got to the
                                  > "West" at fourteen, tried his hand at many things, but succeeded in
                                  > "stopping time with his paint brush". He gave us a window into a life
                                  > that was passing before his eyes, and the passing of cultures never to
                                  > return.
                                  >
                                  > I did enjoy your efforts while you posted on the AWS site. Good luck
                                  > to you.
                                  >
                                  > Ted Sojka
                                  > Native Earthworks Preservation / Iowa

                                • Susan
                                  Before their posts get buried farther under the flood of recent posts, I want to thank co-host Vince Barrows (New Orleans), Ted Sojka (Iowa) , Jamey (Georgia?)
                                  Message 16 of 23 , Dec 5, 2010
                                  • 0 Attachment

                                    Before their posts get buried farther under the flood of recent posts, I want to thank co-host Vince Barrows (New Orleans), Ted Sojka (Iowa) , Jamey (Georgia?) and others here for the excellent comments/links and encouraging responses after the closing of the Ancient Canalbuilders web sites (which hopefully is temporary).  It is from my personal interest of global intent to hope the cooperative diffusionist research continues into ancient intra-continental canals, and also intercontinental canals and channels between the Americas and beyond.   I need to find time to explore some of the older data on ancient canals in the areas of S. Carolina, Arizona, Louisiana, etc. that Vince sent.  Vince's work as an engineer, and having not long ago relocated from the Cahokia area of Illinoios-Missouri to New Orleans, is a good candicate to do ground (swamp/bayou) work in liason with higher tech imagery on natural or man-made water routes in lieu of varying human and climate changes, weather disasters.  Thanks too, Vince for adding the Chapter VI article by Emil W. Haury under the Ancient Canal section of our Links page that you titled:  Snaketown - central Arizona prehistoric irrigation canals:    http://www.scribd.com/doc/44631409/Snaketown-Canal

                                    In my last Post re: Beothuks in Iceland, I sent an incorrect link to Paper No. The Last Expedition: The Kensington Runestone I mentioned w/photos of Icelandic boundary holestones, maps, etc, and links to more articles below some might dig for clues to more on the far regions of N. America..  The correct one: http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_3.3propertyboundarylines.htm   (bottom of the page articles)

                                    CONTENTS

                                    Susan


                                    --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, Vincent Barrows <v_barrows@...> wrote:
                                    >
                                    > Steve and all;
                                    > It is correct that we moderns have constructed canals for purposes of draining
                                    > swamps, building pipelines, roadways, right of ways, property boundaries. The
                                    > following link includes some information about modern canal building. This
                                    > shows that the majority of mosquito drainage canals were built in the early
                                    > 1900s.
                                    >
                                    > http://www.coastalguide.com/IntraCoastalWaterway/SouthCarolinaCanals.shtml
                                    >
                                    > Rafinesque in 1838 wrote "But our monuments do not merely consist in such mounds
                                    > or tumuli, since we find besides in North America, ruins of cities, some of
                                    > which were walled with earth or even stones, real forts or citadels, temples and
                                    > altars of all shapes, but chiefly circular, square or polygonal, some
                                    > elliptical, hexagonal, octagonal, &c., quite regularly pointing to the cardinal
                                    > points. We have also traces of buildings, foundations, roads, avenues,
                                    > causeways, canals, bridges, dromes, or racecourses, pillars and pyramids, wells,
                                    > pits, arenas, &c. And of these not a few, but hundreds of them, many of which
                                    > are unsurveyed and undescribed as yet. "
                                    >
                                    > Some prehistoric humans constructed canals for architectural and
                                    > irrigation purposes. Gladwin discusses an archaeological site report from
                                    > Arizona that discusses Hohokam irrigation canals. These canals were built and
                                    > rebuilt in prehistoric times to irrigate arid desert farmland. William Morgan
                                    > also has published Prehistoric Architecture in the Eastern United States and
                                    > shows examples of canals and moats. His book uses survey data from 1830's
                                    > (Squier and Davis) to illustrate examples of mound sites with evidence of
                                    > manmade canals and waterscapes.
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > Respectfully;
                                    > Vince
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > ________________________________
                                    > From: Susan beldingenglish@...
                                    > To: ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com
                                    > Sent: Fri, December 3, 2010 8:35:11 PM
                                    > Subject: [ancient_waterways_society] Re: "Ancient Canals?"
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > Steve and All,
                                    > The public admissions and closing down of the Ancient Canal Builders in America
                                    > project and web sites when holes were found in the research demonstrates to me
                                    > sound scientific practices as well as high integrity and humility.
                                    > Considerable obvious effort has been made by your research team and I've no
                                    > doubt members of the team are burnt out. I doubt that any of you are denying
                                    > that substantial numbers of canals, perhaps canal networks, were in existence
                                    > hundreds, perhaps thousands of years ago with remnants of scientifically
                                    > provable evidence yet to be discovered and tested by underwater archaeologists,
                                    > geoligists and others such as Jensen , you and those willing to lay your time
                                    > and credibility on the line to consider and explore such possibilities.
                                    > I continue to believe America was riddled with ancient,
                                    > humanly-constructed canals, some very likely leaving traces and scientifically
                                    > provable evidence for underwater archaeologists, geoligists and others
                                    > like Jensen, Garcia willing to explore such possibilities. Riverways, intra-
                                    > and intercontinental waterways, humanly constructed/altered canals are at the
                                    > very roots of diffusionist exploration and to me, advanced socio-cultural
                                    > research.
                                    > I think a parallel here: as is well known and voiced by avocational, academic
                                    > researchers, old texts and many of the populace around the Lake Superior Copper
                                    > Country.....most, if not all historic copper mines originated from ancient
                                    > copper pits and mines. I'd be very surprised if that did not hold true to a
                                    > certain extent with contemporary canals where water routes have not been totally
                                    > altered from centuries, millinnea ago. Unlike the copper mining parallel
                                    > where tbe physical evidence of discarded hammerstones was present until a few
                                    > decades ago, imperical evidence for ancient canals is far more difficult. If
                                    > such canals existed and evidence no longer remains, it will be another case
                                    > where ignorance will continue to prevail, knowledge of ancient human genius is
                                    > lost to time, population expansion, and the increasingly total technological
                                    > dominance of the natural world continues.
                                    > I commend the efforts of the Ancient Canal Builders team and look forward to
                                    > Steve and any of you here at AWS continuing into the roots and
                                    > scientifically-based intent of some of the fine research the courageous team
                                    > began not very long ago.
                                    > Thanks to so many of you here for the interesting Posts, subjects, and responses
                                    > to each others' letters here the past couple of weeks. It is a pleasure to be a
                                    > member and a co-host of this site.
                                    > Susan
                                    >
                                    > --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, "bigalemc2" puppet@
                                    > wrote:
                                    > >
                                    > > Well, folks, the ancient canals aren't ancient, after all.
                                    > >
                                    > > We finally were able to find explanations for them and are satisfied that we
                                    > >were wrong.
                                    > >
                                    > > We found out that the long parallel canals were created in the 1915-1960 period
                                    > >as ways of combating mosquitos. Beginning with New Jersey, the coastal states
                                    > >found that literally "draining the swamps" worked quite well as the backbone of
                                    > >efforts to make the coast more congenial for humans.
                                    > >
                                    > > Why did we think they were not mosquito abatement measures? We saw on many
                                    > >sites that the canals did not reach to the seashore. The canals were most often
                                    > >dead-headed short of the shore. If the bottom end is not open, drainage doesn't
                                    > >happen. These dead-end canals thus looked like irrigation canals.
                                    > >
                                    > > What we didn't know was that in the 1960s they found out they'd changed the
                                    > >ecosystem and had lost the fauna that had formerly used the marshlands for
                                    > >habitat. By then they had other ways of combating the mosquitos, so the decision
                                    > >was made to close the drains by filling in the lower ends of the canals.
                                    > >
                                    > > By the time we came along drainage ditches had long since been turned into what
                                    > >looked like irrigation - in a place where irrigation didn't make sense, at least
                                    > >on our modern world.
                                    > >
                                    > > The symbol features? A good look at them tells us they are more recent even
                                    > >than the drainage ditches, since they all are tucked nicely between the ditches.
                                    > >Had they been older, the more or less random spacing of the ditches would have
                                    > >broken into the symbols.
                                    > >
                                    > > So, what did they end up being? Our best guess is muskrat lodges. Muskrats are
                                    > >kin to beavers and are very industrious in terraforming things to suit
                                    > >themselves. They make lodges in marshy areas(but not dams), and have the
                                    > >entrances under water as often as not. If they need to, they dig their own
                                    > >ditches around their lodges. They also dig ditches so that they can swim as much
                                    > >as possible. All in all, it is a pretty certain thing that the muskrats did
                                    > >them.
                                    > >
                                    > > Google Earth and Bing both flatten out features, so the lodges appear as flat
                                    > >islands.
                                    > >
                                    > > We need to take this all as an object lesson: We cannot trust that what we see
                                    > >on GE is a true representation.
                                    > >
                                    > > As to the big canals in the Gulf, we are now aware of how much damage has been
                                    > >done to the bayou areas, how much land has been lost due to human activity. That
                                    > >is one reason Katrina did so much damage - there just wasn't enough barrier land
                                    > >anymore. So the submerged ones seem to have an explanation as to why they are
                                    > >submerged: The wave action obliterated the crests of the canal berms.
                                    > >
                                    > > But what ARE they?
                                    > >
                                    > > After finding mundane explanations for the other two, John and I are beaten up
                                    > >enough to admit there is probably a mundane explanation for them, too. So, John
                                    > >is closing down his site shortly, and I will be closing down the blog, too. I
                                    > >posted there about the "mosquito ditches," and expect that traffic will cease
                                    > >even if we kept the sites open.
                                    > >
                                    > > So, this is a mea culpa. We were wrong.
                                    > >
                                    > > Sorry to get everyone's hopes up.
                                    > >
                                    > > Take care. I will still be around...
                                    > >
                                    > > Steve
                                    > >
                                    >

                                  • Rick O
                                    This is going to be a bit of a hodge podge, but time simply refuses to let me be thorough or organized today. 1. If I ve accomplished nothing else with the
                                    Message 17 of 23 , Dec 7, 2010
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      This is going to be a bit of a hodge podge, but time simply refuses to
                                      let me be thorough or organized today.

                                      1. If I've accomplished nothing else with the Oopa Loopa Cafe, I'm proud
                                      to help guide folks like Lonni to this group. I'm working on Fritz
                                      Zimmerman.

                                      2. The cumulative evidence is leaning towards a very sophisticated water
                                      management knowledge and technology among ancient Americans, possibly to
                                      even include water wheels to do work (e.g., Puma Punto, Palenque, Machu
                                      Pichu). So canals / irrigation / drainage are far from eliminated as
                                      possible ancient works.

                                      3. Valdimar, glad you finally got here. We need your bird's eye view.

                                      4. An announcement: Mary Sutherland has discovered what may be a
                                      previously undocumented "snake" effigy near Burlington, WI. More as I
                                      get more, but this is pretty close to the site where the Vorhees plates
                                      were found and there was a thunderbird effigy nearby in historic times
                                      (still kind of sorta almost maybe a little visible in Google Earth).

                                      5. I seem to recall a specific mention of "grapes" in Leiffet Saga,
                                      someone please correct me if I'm wrong. Even during the Maunder Maximum,
                                      that would put Vinland no further north than about Nova Scotia and far
                                      more likely somewhere between Naragansett and Chesapeake (the latter
                                      being my own latitude).

                                      Enjoy. Keep the thinking caps spining

                                      Oz
                                      --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, "Susan"
                                      <beldingenglish@...> wrote:
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > Before their posts get buried farther under the flood of recent posts,
                                      I
                                      > want to thank co-host Vince Barrows (New Orleans), Ted Sojka (Iowa) ,
                                      > Jamey (Georgia?) and others here for the excellent comments/links and
                                      > encouraging responses after the closing of the Ancient Canalbuilders
                                      web
                                      > sites (which hopefully is temporary). It is from my personal interest
                                      > of global intent to hope the cooperative diffusionist research
                                      continues
                                      > into ancient intra-continental canals, and also intercontinental
                                      canals
                                      > and channels between the Americas and beyond. I need to find time to
                                      > explore some of the older data on ancient canals in the areas of S.
                                      > Carolina, Arizona, Louisiana, etc. that Vince sent. Vince's work as
                                      an
                                      > engineer, and having not long ago relocated from the Cahokia area of
                                      > Illinoios-Missouri to New Orleans, is a good candicate to do ground
                                      > (swamp/bayou) work in liason with higher tech imagery on natural or
                                      > man-made water routes in lieu of varying human and climate changes,
                                      > weather disasters. Thanks too, Vince for adding the Chapter VI
                                      article
                                      > by Emil W. Haury under the Ancient Canal
                                      > <http://www.scribd.com/doc/44631409/Snaketown-Canal> section of our
                                      > Links
                                      > <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/ancient_waterways_society/links>
                                      > page that you titled: Snaketown - central Arizona prehistoric
                                      > irrigation canals:
                                      http://www.scribd.com/doc/44631409/Snaketown-Canal
                                      > <http://www.scribd.com/doc/44631409/Snaketown-Canal>
                                      >
                                      > In my last Post re: Beothuks in Iceland, I sent an incorrect link to
                                      > Paper No. The Last Expedition: The Kensington Runestone I mentioned
                                      > w/photos of Icelandic boundary holestones, maps, etc, and links to
                                      more
                                      > articles below some might dig for clues to more on the far regions of
                                      N.
                                      > America.. The correct one:
                                      > http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_3.3propertyboundarylines.htm
                                      > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_3.3propertyboundarylines.htm>
                                      > (bottom of the page articles)
                                      >
                                      > CONTENTS
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > 1. Introduction <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_1.introduction.htm>
                                      >
                                      > 2. Norse settlement on the east coast of North America
                                      >
                                      > 2.1 Labrador place names and Ari of Holum
                                      > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_2.1labradorplacenames.htm>
                                      >
                                      > 2.2 L'anse aux Meadows
                                      > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_2.2lanseauxmeadows.htm>
                                      >
                                      > 2.3 Norse in the St. Lawrence Valley
                                      > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_2.3norseinthest.lawrencevalley.htm>
                                      >
                                      > 2.4 The Bishop's voyage
                                      > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_2.4thebishopsvoyage.htm>
                                      >
                                      > 3. Evidence for Norse settlement in the mid continent
                                      >
                                      > 3.1 Holestones and the Kensington runestone
                                      > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_3.1holestones.htm>
                                      >
                                      > 3.2 The Whetstone River holestones
                                      > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_3.2thewhetstoneriverholestones.htm>
                                      >
                                      > 3.3 Property boundary lines and the Graenaveldi
                                      > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_3.3propertyboundarylines.htm>
                                      >
                                      > 3.4 Knutson's search for the Graenaveldi
                                      > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_3.4knutsonssearch.htm>
                                      >
                                      > 3.5 Appendix: The Kensington inscription: word-by-word
                                      translation
                                      > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_3.5appendix.htm>
                                      >
                                      > 4. End Notes <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_4.endnotes.htm>
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > Susan
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, Vincent Barrows
                                      > v_barrows@ wrote:
                                      > >
                                      > > Steve and all;
                                      > > It is correct that we moderns have constructed canals for purposes
                                      of
                                      > draining
                                      > > swamps, building pipelines, roadways, right of ways, property
                                      > boundaries. The
                                      > > following link includes some information about modern canal
                                      building.
                                      > This
                                      > > shows that the majority of mosquito drainage canals were built in
                                      the
                                      > early
                                      > > 1900s.
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      >
                                      http://www.coastalguide.com/IntraCoastalWaterway/SouthCarolinaCanals.sht\
                                      \
                                      > ml
                                      > >
                                      > > Rafinesque in 1838 wrote "But our monuments do not merely consist in
                                      > such mounds
                                      > > or tumuli, since we find besides in North America, ruins of cities,
                                      > some of
                                      > > which were walled with earth or even stones, real forts or citadels,
                                      > temples and
                                      > > altars of all shapes, but chiefly circular, square or polygonal,
                                      some
                                      > > elliptical, hexagonal, octagonal, &c., quite regularly pointing to
                                      the
                                      > cardinal
                                      > > points. We have also traces of buildings, foundations, roads,
                                      avenues,
                                      > > causeways, canals, bridges, dromes, or racecourses, pillars and
                                      > pyramids, wells,
                                      > > pits, arenas, &c. And of these not a few, but hundreds of them, many
                                      > of which
                                      > > are unsurveyed and undescribed as yet. "
                                      > >
                                      > > Some prehistoric humans constructed canals for architectural and
                                      > > irrigation purposes. Gladwin discusses an archaeological site report
                                      > from
                                      > > Arizona that discusses Hohokam irrigation canals. These canals were
                                      > built and
                                      > > rebuilt in prehistoric times to irrigate arid desert farmland.
                                      William
                                      > Morgan
                                      > > also has published Prehistoric Architecture in the Eastern United
                                      > States and
                                      > > shows examples of canals and moats. His book uses survey data from
                                      > 1830's
                                      > > (Squier and Davis) to illustrate examples of mound sites with
                                      evidence
                                      > of
                                      > > manmade canals and waterscapes.
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > > Respectfully;
                                      > > Vince
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > > ________________________________
                                      > > From: Susan beldingenglish@
                                      > > To: ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com
                                      > > Sent: Fri, December 3, 2010 8:35:11 PM
                                      > > Subject: [ancient_waterways_society] Re: "Ancient Canals?"
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > > Steve and All,
                                      > > The public admissions and closing down of the Ancient Canal Builders
                                      > in America
                                      > > project and web sites when holes were found in the research
                                      > demonstrates to me
                                      > > sound scientific practices as well as high integrity and humility.
                                      > > Considerable obvious effort has been made by your research team and
                                      > I've no
                                      > > doubt members of the team are burnt out. I doubt that any of you are
                                      > denying
                                      > > that substantial numbers of canals, perhaps canal networks, were in
                                      > existence
                                      > > hundreds, perhaps thousands of years ago with remnants of
                                      > scientifically
                                      > > provable evidence yet to be discovered and tested by underwater
                                      > archaeologists,
                                      > > geoligists and others such as Jensen , you and those willing to lay
                                      > your time
                                      > > and credibility on the line to consider and explore such
                                      > possibilities.
                                      > > I continue to believe America was riddled with ancient,
                                      > > humanly-constructed canals, some very likely leaving traces and
                                      > scientifically
                                      > > provable evidence for underwater archaeologists, geoligists and
                                      others
                                      > > like Jensen, Garcia willing to explore such possibilities.
                                      Riverways,
                                      > intra-
                                      > > and intercontinental waterways, humanly constructed/altered canals
                                      are
                                      > at the
                                      > > very roots of diffusionist exploration and to me, advanced
                                      > socio-cultural
                                      > > research.
                                      > > I think a parallel here: as is well known and voiced by avocational,
                                      > academic
                                      > > researchers, old texts and many of the populace around the Lake
                                      > Superior Copper
                                      > > Country.....most, if not all historic copper mines originated from
                                      > ancient
                                      > > copper pits and mines. I'd be very surprised if that did not hold
                                      true
                                      > to a
                                      > > certain extent with contemporary canals where water routes have not
                                      > been totally
                                      > > altered from centuries, millinnea ago. Unlike the copper mining
                                      > parallel
                                      > > where tbe physical evidence of discarded hammerstones was present
                                      > until a few
                                      > > decades ago, imperical evidence for ancient canals is far more
                                      > difficult. If
                                      > > such canals existed and evidence no longer remains, it will be
                                      another
                                      > case
                                      > > where ignorance will continue to prevail, knowledge of ancient human
                                      > genius is
                                      > > lost to time, population expansion, and the increasingly total
                                      > technological
                                      > > dominance of the natural world continues.
                                      > > I commend the efforts of the Ancient Canal Builders team and look
                                      > forward to
                                      > > Steve and any of you here at AWS continuing into the roots and
                                      > > scientifically-based intent of some of the fine research the
                                      > courageous team
                                      > > began not very long ago.
                                      > > Thanks to so many of you here for the interesting Posts, subjects,
                                      and
                                      > responses
                                      > > to each others' letters here the past couple of weeks. It is a
                                      > pleasure to be a
                                      > > member and a co-host of this site.
                                      > > Susan
                                      > >
                                      > > --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, "bigalemc2"
                                      puppet@
                                      > > wrote:
                                      > > >
                                      > > > Well, folks, the ancient canals aren't ancient, after all.
                                      > > >
                                      > > > We finally were able to find explanations for them and are
                                      satisfied
                                      > that we
                                      > > >were wrong.
                                      > > >
                                      > > > We found out that the long parallel canals were created in the
                                      > 1915-1960 period
                                      > > >as ways of combating mosquitos. Beginning with New Jersey, the
                                      > coastal states
                                      > > >found that literally "draining the swamps" worked quite well as the
                                      > backbone of
                                      > > >efforts to make the coast more congenial for humans.
                                      > > >
                                      > > > Why did we think they were not mosquito abatement measures? We saw
                                      > on many
                                      > > >sites that the canals did not reach to the seashore. The canals
                                      were
                                      > most often
                                      > > >dead-headed short of the shore. If the bottom end is not open,
                                      > drainage doesn't
                                      > > >happen. These dead-end canals thus looked like irrigation canals.
                                      > > >
                                      > > > What we didn't know was that in the 1960s they found out they'd
                                      > changed the
                                      > > >ecosystem and had lost the fauna that had formerly used the
                                      > marshlands for
                                      > > >habitat. By then they had other ways of combating the mosquitos, so
                                      > the decision
                                      > > >was made to close the drains by filling in the lower ends of the
                                      > canals.
                                      > > >
                                      > > > By the time we came along drainage ditches had long since been
                                      > turned into what
                                      > > >looked like irrigation - in a place where irrigation didn't make
                                      > sense, at least
                                      > > >on our modern world.
                                      > > >
                                      > > > The symbol features? A good look at them tells us they are more
                                      > recent even
                                      > > >than the drainage ditches, since they all are tucked nicely between
                                      > the ditches.
                                      > > >Had they been older, the more or less random spacing of the ditches
                                      > would have
                                      > > >broken into the symbols.
                                      > > >
                                      > > > So, what did they end up being? Our best guess is muskrat lodges.
                                      > Muskrats are
                                      > > >kin to beavers and are very industrious in terraforming things to
                                      > suit
                                      > > >themselves. They make lodges in marshy areas(but not dams), and
                                      have
                                      > the
                                      > > >entrances under water as often as not. If they need to, they dig
                                      > their own
                                      > > >ditches around their lodges. They also dig ditches so that they can
                                      > swim as much
                                      > > >as possible. All in all, it is a pretty certain thing that the
                                      > muskrats did
                                      > > >them.
                                      > > >
                                      > > > Google Earth and Bing both flatten out features, so the lodges
                                      > appear as flat
                                      > > >islands.
                                      > > >
                                      > > > We need to take this all as an object lesson: We cannot trust that
                                      > what we see
                                      > > >on GE is a true representation.
                                      > > >
                                      > > > As to the big canals in the Gulf, we are now aware of how much
                                      > damage has been
                                      > > >done to the bayou areas, how much land has been lost due to human
                                      > activity. That
                                      > > >is one reason Katrina did so much damage - there just wasn't enough
                                      > barrier land
                                      > > >anymore. So the submerged ones seem to have an explanation as to
                                      why
                                      > they are
                                      > > >submerged: The wave action obliterated the crests of the canal
                                      berms.
                                      > > >
                                      > > > But what ARE they?
                                      > > >
                                      > > > After finding mundane explanations for the other two, John and I
                                      are
                                      > beaten up
                                      > > >enough to admit there is probably a mundane explanation for them,
                                      > too. So, John
                                      > > >is closing down his site shortly, and I will be closing down the
                                      > blog, too. I
                                      > > >posted there about the "mosquito ditches," and expect that traffic
                                      > will cease
                                      > > >even if we kept the sites open.
                                      > > >
                                      > > > So, this is a mea culpa. We were wrong.
                                      > > >
                                      > > > Sorry to get everyone's hopes up.
                                      > > >
                                      > > > Take care. I will still be around...
                                      > > >
                                      > > > Steve
                                      > > >
                                      > >
                                      >
                                    • Ted Sojka
                                      The water irrigation canals at Machu Pichu are grand in design as are the ones that allowed raised bed gardening at tihuanaco. The peach trees the Hopi had
                                      Message 18 of 23 , Dec 7, 2010
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        The water irrigation canals at Machu Pichu are grand in design as are the ones that allowed raised bed gardening at tihuanaco.   The peach trees the Hopi had along the river were irrigated with canals until Kit Carson cut them down to force them out of their home area.  There is lots of canal work done in the Americas, just not those Jersey canals dug by dredge in the steam era and beyond.   

                                        TS
                                        On Dec 7, 2010, at 11:16 AM, Rick O wrote:

                                        This is going to be a bit of a hodge podge, but time simply refuses to
                                        let me be thorough or organized today.

                                        1. If I've accomplished nothing else with the Oopa Loopa Cafe, I'm proud
                                        to help guide folks like Lonni to this group. I'm working on Fritz
                                        Zimmerman.

                                        2. The cumulative evidence is leaning towards a very sophisticated water
                                        management knowledge and technology among ancient Americans, possibly to
                                        even include water wheels to do work (e.g., Puma Punto, Palenque, Machu
                                        Pichu). So canals / irrigation / drainage are far from eliminated as
                                        possible ancient works.

                                        3. Valdimar, glad you finally got here. We need your bird's eye view.

                                        4. An announcement: Mary Sutherland has discovered what may be a
                                        previously undocumented "snake" effigy near Burlington, WI. More as I
                                        get more, but this is pretty close to the site where the Vorhees plates
                                        were found and there was a thunderbird effigy nearby in historic times
                                        (still kind of sorta almost maybe a little visible in Google Earth).

                                        5. I seem to recall a specific mention of "grapes" in Leiffet Saga,
                                        someone please correct me if I'm wrong. Even during the Maunder Maximum,
                                        that would put Vinland no further north than about Nova Scotia and far
                                        more likely somewhere between Naragansett and Chesapeake (the latter
                                        being my own latitude).

                                        Enjoy. Keep the thinking caps spining

                                        Oz
                                        --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, "Susan"
                                        <beldingenglish@...> wrote:
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > Before their posts get buried farther under the flood of recent posts,
                                        I
                                        > want to thank co-host Vince Barrows (New Orleans), Ted Sojka (Iowa) ,
                                        > Jamey (Georgia?) and others here for the excellent comments/links and
                                        > encouraging responses after the closing of the Ancient Canalbuilders
                                        web
                                        > sites (which hopefully is temporary). It is from my personal interest
                                        > of global intent to hope the cooperative diffusionist research
                                        continues
                                        > into ancient intra-continental canals, and also intercontinental
                                        canals
                                        > and channels between the Americas and beyond. I need to find time to
                                        > explore some of the older data on ancient canals in the areas of S.
                                        > Carolina, Arizona, Louisiana, etc. that Vince sent. Vince's work as
                                        an
                                        > engineer, and having not long ago relocated from the Cahokia area of
                                        > Illinoios-Missouri to New Orleans, is a good candicate to do ground
                                        > (swamp/bayou) work in liason with higher tech imagery on natural or
                                        > man-made water routes in lieu of varying human and climate changes,
                                        > weather disasters. Thanks too, Vince for adding the Chapter VI
                                        article
                                        > by Emil W. Haury under the Ancient Canal
                                        > <http://www.scribd.com/doc/44631409/Snaketown-Canal> section of our
                                        > Links
                                        > <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/ancient_waterways_society/links>
                                        > page that you titled: Snaketown - central Arizona prehistoric
                                        > irrigation canals: 
                                        http://www.scribd.com/doc/44631409/Snaketown-Canal
                                        > <http://www.scribd.com/doc/44631409/Snaketown-Canal>
                                        >
                                        > In my last Post re: Beothuks in Iceland, I sent an incorrect link to
                                        > Paper No. The Last Expedition: The Kensington Runestone I mentioned
                                        > w/photos of Icelandic boundary holestones, maps, etc, and links to
                                        more
                                        > articles below some might dig for clues to more on the far regions of
                                        N.
                                        > America.. The correct one:
                                        > http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_3.3propertyboundarylines.htm
                                        > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_3.3propertyboundarylines.htm>
                                        > (bottom of the page articles)
                                        >
                                        > CONTENTS
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > 1. Introduction <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_1.introduction.htm>
                                        >
                                        > 2. Norse settlement on the east coast of North America
                                        >
                                        > 2.1 Labrador place names and Ari of Holum
                                        > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_2.1labradorplacenames.htm>
                                        >
                                        > 2.2 L'anse aux Meadows
                                        > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_2.2lanseauxmeadows.htm>
                                        >
                                        > 2.3 Norse in the St. Lawrence Valley
                                        > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_2.3norseinthest.lawrencevalley.htm>
                                        >
                                        > 2.4 The Bishop's voyage
                                        > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_2.4thebishopsvoyage.htm>
                                        >
                                        > 3. Evidence for Norse settlement in the mid continent
                                        >
                                        > 3.1 Holestones and the Kensington runestone
                                        > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_3.1holestones.htm>
                                        >
                                        > 3.2 The Whetstone River holestones
                                        > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_3.2thewhetstoneriverholestones.htm>
                                        >
                                        > 3.3 Property boundary lines and the Graenaveldi
                                        > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_3.3propertyboundarylines.htm>
                                        >
                                        > 3.4 Knutson's search for the Graenaveldi
                                        > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_3.4knutsonssearch.htm>
                                        >
                                        > 3.5 Appendix: The Kensington inscription: word-by-word
                                        translation
                                        > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_3.5appendix.htm>
                                        >
                                        > 4. End Notes <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_4.endnotes.htm>
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > Susan
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, Vincent Barrows
                                        > v_barrows@ wrote:
                                        > >
                                        > > Steve and all;
                                        > > It is correct that we moderns have constructed canals for purposes
                                        of
                                        > draining
                                        > > swamps, building pipelines, roadways, right of ways, property
                                        > boundaries. The
                                        > > following link includes some information about modern canal
                                        building.
                                        > This
                                        > > shows that the majority of mosquito drainage canals were built in
                                        the
                                        > early
                                        > > 1900s.
                                        > >
                                        > >
                                        >
                                        http://www.coastalguide.com/IntraCoastalWaterway/SouthCarolinaCanals.sht\
                                        \
                                        > ml
                                        > >
                                        > > Rafinesque in 1838 wrote "But our monuments do not merely consist in
                                        > such mounds
                                        > > or tumuli, since we find besides in North America, ruins of cities,
                                        > some of
                                        > > which were walled with earth or even stones, real forts or citadels,
                                        > temples and
                                        > > altars of all shapes, but chiefly circular, square or polygonal,
                                        some
                                        > > elliptical, hexagonal, octagonal, &c., quite regularly pointing to
                                        the
                                        > cardinal
                                        > > points. We have also traces of buildings, foundations, roads,
                                        avenues,
                                        > > causeways, canals, bridges, dromes, or racecourses, pillars and
                                        > pyramids, wells,
                                        > > pits, arenas, &c. And of these not a few, but hundreds of them, many
                                        > of which
                                        > > are unsurveyed and undescribed as yet. "
                                        > >
                                        > > Some prehistoric humans constructed canals for architectural and
                                        > > irrigation purposes. Gladwin discusses an archaeological site report
                                        > from
                                        > > Arizona that discusses Hohokam irrigation canals. These canals were
                                        > built and
                                        > > rebuilt in prehistoric times to irrigate arid desert farmland.
                                        William
                                        > Morgan
                                        > > also has published Prehistoric Architecture in the Eastern United
                                        > States and
                                        > > shows examples of canals and moats. His book uses survey data from
                                        > 1830's
                                        > > (Squier and Davis) to illustrate examples of mound sites with
                                        evidence
                                        > of
                                        > > manmade canals and waterscapes.
                                        > >
                                        > >
                                        > > Respectfully;
                                        > > Vince
                                        > >
                                        > >
                                        > >
                                        > > ________________________________
                                        > > From: Susan beldingenglish@
                                        > > To: ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com
                                        > > Sent: Fri, December 3, 2010 8:35:11 PM
                                        > > Subject: [ancient_waterways_society] Re: "Ancient Canals?"
                                        > >
                                        > >
                                        > > Steve and All,
                                        > > The public admissions and closing down of the Ancient Canal Builders
                                        > in America
                                        > > project and web sites when holes were found in the research
                                        > demonstrates to me
                                        > > sound scientific practices as well as high integrity and humility.
                                        > > Considerable obvious effort has been made by your research team and
                                        > I've no
                                        > > doubt members of the team are burnt out. I doubt that any of you are
                                        > denying
                                        > > that substantial numbers of canals, perhaps canal networks, were in
                                        > existence
                                        > > hundreds, perhaps thousands of years ago with remnants of
                                        > scientifically
                                        > > provable evidence yet to be discovered and tested by underwater
                                        > archaeologists,
                                        > > geoligists and others such as Jensen , you and those willing to lay
                                        > your time
                                        > > and credibility on the line to consider and explore such
                                        > possibilities.
                                        > > I continue to believe America was riddled with ancient,
                                        > > humanly-constructed canals, some very likely leaving traces and
                                        > scientifically
                                        > > provable evidence for underwater archaeologists, geoligists and
                                        others
                                        > > like Jensen, Garcia willing to explore such possibilities.
                                        Riverways,
                                        > intra-
                                        > > and intercontinental waterways, humanly constructed/altered canals
                                        are
                                        > at the
                                        > > very roots of diffusionist exploration and to me, advanced
                                        > socio-cultural
                                        > > research.
                                        > > I think a parallel here: as is well known and voiced by avocational,
                                        > academic
                                        > > researchers, old texts and many of the populace around the Lake
                                        > Superior Copper
                                        > > Country.....most, if not all historic copper mines originated from
                                        > ancient
                                        > > copper pits and mines. I'd be very surprised if that did not hold
                                        true
                                        > to a
                                        > > certain extent with contemporary canals where water routes have not
                                        > been totally
                                        > > altered from centuries, millinnea ago. Unlike the copper mining
                                        > parallel
                                        > > where tbe physical evidence of discarded hammerstones was present
                                        > until a few
                                        > > decades ago, imperical evidence for ancient canals is far more
                                        > difficult. If
                                        > > such canals existed and evidence no longer remains, it will be
                                        another
                                        > case
                                        > > where ignorance will continue to prevail, knowledge of ancient human
                                        > genius is
                                        > > lost to time, population expansion, and the increasingly total
                                        > technological
                                        > > dominance of the natural world continues.
                                        > > I commend the efforts of the Ancient Canal Builders team and look
                                        > forward to
                                        > > Steve and any of you here at AWS continuing into the roots and
                                        > > scientifically-based intent of some of the fine research the
                                        > courageous team
                                        > > began not very long ago.
                                        > > Thanks to so many of you here for the interesting Posts, subjects,
                                        and
                                        > responses
                                        > > to each others' letters here the past couple of weeks. It is a
                                        > pleasure to be a
                                        > > member and a co-host of this site.
                                        > > Susan
                                        > >
                                        > > --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, "bigalemc2"
                                        puppet@
                                        > > wrote:
                                        > > >
                                        > > > Well, folks, the ancient canals aren't ancient, after all.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > We finally were able to find explanations for them and are
                                        satisfied
                                        > that we
                                        > > >were wrong.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > We found out that the long parallel canals were created in the
                                        > 1915-1960 period
                                        > > >as ways of combating mosquitos. Beginning with New Jersey, the
                                        > coastal states
                                        > > >found that literally "draining the swamps" worked quite well as the
                                        > backbone of
                                        > > >efforts to make the coast more congenial for humans.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > Why did we think they were not mosquito abatement measures? We saw
                                        > on many
                                        > > >sites that the canals did not reach to the seashore. The canals
                                        were
                                        > most often
                                        > > >dead-headed short of the shore. If the bottom end is not open,
                                        > drainage doesn't
                                        > > >happen. These dead-end canals thus looked like irrigation canals.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > What we didn't know was that in the 1960s they found out they'd
                                        > changed the
                                        > > >ecosystem and had lost the fauna that had formerly used the
                                        > marshlands for
                                        > > >habitat. By then they had other ways of combating the mosquitos, so
                                        > the decision
                                        > > >was made to close the drains by filling in the lower ends of the
                                        > canals.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > By the time we came along drainage ditches had long since been
                                        > turned into what
                                        > > >looked like irrigation - in a place where irrigation didn't make
                                        > sense, at least
                                        > > >on our modern world.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > The symbol features? A good look at them tells us they are more
                                        > recent even
                                        > > >than the drainage ditches, since they all are tucked nicely between
                                        > the ditches.
                                        > > >Had they been older, the more or less random spacing of the ditches
                                        > would have
                                        > > >broken into the symbols.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > So, what did they end up being? Our best guess is muskrat lodges.
                                        > Muskrats are
                                        > > >kin to beavers and are very industrious in terraforming things to
                                        > suit
                                        > > >themselves. They make lodges in marshy areas(but not dams), and
                                        have
                                        > the
                                        > > >entrances under water as often as not. If they need to, they dig
                                        > their own
                                        > > >ditches around their lodges. They also dig ditches so that they can
                                        > swim as much
                                        > > >as possible. All in all, it is a pretty certain thing that the
                                        > muskrats did
                                        > > >them.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > Google Earth and Bing both flatten out features, so the lodges
                                        > appear as flat
                                        > > >islands.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > We need to take this all as an object lesson: We cannot trust that
                                        > what we see
                                        > > >on GE is a true representation.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > As to the big canals in the Gulf, we are now aware of how much
                                        > damage has been
                                        > > >done to the bayou areas, how much land has been lost due to human
                                        > activity. That
                                        > > >is one reason Katrina did so much damage - there just wasn't enough
                                        > barrier land
                                        > > >anymore. So the submerged ones seem to have an explanation as to
                                        why
                                        > they are
                                        > > >submerged: The wave action obliterated the crests of the canal
                                        berms.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > But what ARE they?
                                        > > >
                                        > > > After finding mundane explanations for the other two, John and I
                                        are
                                        > beaten up
                                        > > >enough to admit there is probably a mundane explanation for them,
                                        > too. So, John
                                        > > >is closing down his site shortly, and I will be closing down the
                                        > blog, too. I
                                        > > >posted there about the "mosquito ditches," and expect that traffic
                                        > will cease
                                        > > >even if we kept the sites open.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > So, this is a mea culpa. We were wrong.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > Sorry to get everyone's hopes up.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > Take care. I will still be around...
                                        > > >
                                        > > > Steve
                                        > > >
                                        > >
                                        >


                                      • Richard Murray
                                        On 12/7/2010 1:20 PM, Ted Sojka wrote: Don t forget the elaborate water canals throughout the Phoenix, Arizona area. Richard
                                        Message 19 of 23 , Dec 7, 2010
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          On 12/7/2010 1:20 PM, Ted Sojka wrote:
                                          Don't forget the elaborate water canals throughout the Phoenix, Arizona area.
                                          Richard

                                           

                                          The water irrigation canals at Machu Pichu are grand in design as are the ones that allowed raised bed gardening at tihuanaco.   The peach trees the Hopi had along the river were irrigated with canals until Kit Carson cut them down to force them out of their home area.  There is lots of canal work done in the Americas, just not those Jersey canals dug by dredge in the steam era and beyond.   


                                          TS
                                          On Dec 7, 2010, at 11:16 AM, Rick O wrote:

                                          This is going to be a bit of a hodge podge, but time simply refuses to
                                          let me be thorough or organized today.

                                          1. If I've accomplished nothing else with the Oopa Loopa Cafe, I'm proud
                                          to help guide folks like Lonni to this group. I'm working on Fritz
                                          Zimmerman.

                                          2. The cumulative evidence is leaning towards a very sophisticated water
                                          management knowledge and technology among ancient Americans, possibly to
                                          even include water wheels to do work (e.g., Puma Punto, Palenque, Machu
                                          Pichu). So canals / irrigation / drainage are far from eliminated as
                                          possible ancient works.

                                          3. Valdimar, glad you finally got here. We need your bird's eye view.

                                          4. An announcement: Mary Sutherland has discovered what may be a
                                          previously undocumented "snake" effigy near Burlington, WI. More as I
                                          get more, but this is pretty close to the site where the Vorhees plates
                                          were found and there was a thunderbird effigy nearby in historic times
                                          (still kind of sorta almost maybe a little visible in Google Earth).

                                          5. I seem to recall a specific mention of "grapes" in Leiffet Saga,
                                          someone please correct me if I'm wrong. Even during the Maunder Maximum,
                                          that would put Vinland no further north than about Nova Scotia and far
                                          more likely somewhere between Naragansett and Chesapeake (the latter
                                          being my own latitude).

                                          Enjoy. Keep the thinking caps spining

                                          Oz
                                          --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, "Susan"
                                          <beldingenglish@...> wrote:
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > Before their posts get buried farther under the flood of recent posts,
                                          I
                                          > want to thank co-host Vince Barrows (New Orleans), Ted Sojka (Iowa) ,
                                          > Jamey (Georgia?) and others here for the excellent comments/links and
                                          > encouraging responses after the closing of the Ancient Canalbuilders
                                          web
                                          > sites (which hopefully is temporary). It is from my personal interest
                                          > of global intent to hope the cooperative diffusionist research
                                          continues
                                          > into ancient intra-continental canals, and also intercontinental
                                          canals
                                          > and channels between the Americas and beyond. I need to find time to
                                          > explore some of the older data on ancient canals in the areas of S.
                                          > Carolina, Arizona, Louisiana, etc. that Vince sent. Vince's work as
                                          an
                                          > engineer, and having not long ago relocated from the Cahokia area of
                                          > Illinoios-Missouri to New Orleans, is a good candicate to do ground
                                          > (swamp/bayou) work in liason with higher tech imagery on natural or
                                          > man-made water routes in lieu of varying human and climate changes,
                                          > weather disasters. Thanks too, Vince for adding the Chapter VI
                                          article
                                          > by Emil W. Haury under the Ancient Canal
                                          > <http://www.scribd.com/doc/44631409/Snaketown-Canal> section of our
                                          > Links
                                          > <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/ancient_waterways_society/links>
                                          > page that you titled: Snaketown - central Arizona prehistoric
                                          > irrigation canals: 
                                          http://www.scribd.com/doc/44631409/Snaketown-Canal
                                          > <http://www.scribd.com/doc/44631409/Snaketown-Canal>
                                          >
                                          > In my last Post re: Beothuks in Iceland, I sent an incorrect link to
                                          > Paper No. The Last Expedition: The Kensington Runestone I mentioned
                                          > w/photos of Icelandic boundary holestones, maps, etc, and links to
                                          more
                                          > articles below some might dig for clues to more on the far regions of
                                          N.
                                          > America.. The correct one:
                                          > http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_3.3propertyboundarylines.htm
                                          > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_3.3propertyboundarylines.htm>
                                          > (bottom of the page articles)
                                          >
                                          > CONTENTS
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > 1. Introduction <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_1.introduction.htm>
                                          >
                                          > 2. Norse settlement on the east coast of North America
                                          >
                                          > 2.1 Labrador place names and Ari of Holum
                                          > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_2.1labradorplacenames.htm>
                                          >
                                          > 2.2 L'anse aux Meadows
                                          > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_2.2lanseauxmeadows.htm>
                                          >
                                          > 2.3 Norse in the St. Lawrence Valley
                                          > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_2.3norseinthest.lawrencevalley.htm>
                                          >
                                          > 2.4 The Bishop's voyage
                                          > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_2.4thebishopsvoyage.htm>
                                          >
                                          > 3. Evidence for Norse settlement in the mid continent
                                          >
                                          > 3.1 Holestones and the Kensington runestone
                                          > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_3.1holestones.htm>
                                          >
                                          > 3.2 The Whetstone River holestones
                                          > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_3.2thewhetstoneriverholestones.htm>
                                          >
                                          > 3.3 Property boundary lines and the Graenaveldi
                                          > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_3.3propertyboundarylines.htm>
                                          >
                                          > 3.4 Knutson's search for the Graenaveldi
                                          > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_3.4knutsonssearch.htm>
                                          >
                                          > 3.5 Appendix: The Kensington inscription: word-by-word
                                          translation
                                          > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_3.5appendix.htm>
                                          >
                                          > 4. End Notes <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_4.endnotes.htm>
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > Susan
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, Vincent Barrows
                                          > v_barrows@ wrote:
                                          > >
                                          > > Steve and all;
                                          > > It is correct that we moderns have constructed canals for purposes
                                          of
                                          > draining
                                          > > swamps, building pipelines, roadways, right of ways, property
                                          > boundaries. The
                                          > > following link includes some information about modern canal
                                          building.
                                          > This
                                          > > shows that the majority of mosquito drainage canals were built in
                                          the
                                          > early
                                          > > 1900s.
                                          > >
                                          > >
                                          >
                                          http://www.coastalguide.com/IntraCoastalWaterway/SouthCarolinaCanals.sht\
                                          \
                                          > ml
                                          > >
                                          > > Rafinesque in 1838 wrote "But our monuments do not merely consist in
                                          > such mounds
                                          > > or tumuli, since we find besides in North America, ruins of cities,
                                          > some of
                                          > > which were walled with earth or even stones, real forts or citadels,
                                          > temples and
                                          > > altars of all shapes, but chiefly circular, square or polygonal,
                                          some
                                          > > elliptical, hexagonal, octagonal, &c., quite regularly pointing to
                                          the
                                          > cardinal
                                          > > points. We have also traces of buildings, foundations, roads,
                                          avenues,
                                          > > causeways, canals, bridges, dromes, or racecourses, pillars and
                                          > pyramids, wells,
                                          > > pits, arenas, &c. And of these not a few, but hundreds of them, many
                                          > of which
                                          > > are unsurveyed and undescribed as yet. "
                                          > >
                                          > > Some prehistoric humans constructed canals for architectural and
                                          > > irrigation purposes. Gladwin discusses an archaeological site report
                                          > from
                                          > > Arizona that discusses Hohokam irrigation canals. These canals were
                                          > built and
                                          > > rebuilt in prehistoric times to irrigate arid desert farmland.
                                          William
                                          > Morgan
                                          > > also has published Prehistoric Architecture in the Eastern United
                                          > States and
                                          > > shows examples of canals and moats. His book uses survey data from
                                          > 1830's
                                          > > (Squier and Davis) to illustrate examples of mound sites with
                                          evidence
                                          > of
                                          > > manmade canals and waterscapes.
                                          > >
                                          > >
                                          > > Respectfully;
                                          > > Vince
                                          > >
                                          > >
                                          > >
                                          > > ________________________________
                                          > > From: Susan beldingenglish@
                                          > > To: ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com
                                          > > Sent: Fri, December 3, 2010 8:35:11 PM
                                          > > Subject: [ancient_waterways_society] Re: "Ancient Canals?"
                                          > >
                                          > >
                                          > > Steve and All,
                                          > > The public admissions and closing down of the Ancient Canal Builders
                                          > in America
                                          > > project and web sites when holes were found in the research
                                          > demonstrates to me
                                          > > sound scientific practices as well as high integrity and humility.
                                          > > Considerable obvious effort has been made by your research team and
                                          > I've no
                                          > > doubt members of the team are burnt out. I doubt that any of you are
                                          > denying
                                          > > that substantial numbers of canals, perhaps canal networks, were in
                                          > existence
                                          > > hundreds, perhaps thousands of years ago with remnants of
                                          > scientifically
                                          > > provable evidence yet to be discovered and tested by underwater
                                          > archaeologists,
                                          > > geoligists and others such as Jensen , you and those willing to lay
                                          > your time
                                          > > and credibility on the line to consider and explore such
                                          > possibilities.
                                          > > I continue to believe America was riddled with ancient,
                                          > > humanly-constructed canals, some very likely leaving traces and
                                          > scientifically
                                          > > provable evidence for underwater archaeologists, geoligists and
                                          others
                                          > > like Jensen, Garcia willing to explore such possibilities.
                                          Riverways,
                                          > intra-
                                          > > and intercontinental waterways, humanly constructed/altered canals
                                          are
                                          > at the
                                          > > very roots of diffusionist exploration and to me, advanced
                                          > socio-cultural
                                          > > research.
                                          > > I think a parallel here: as is well known and voiced by avocational,
                                          > academic
                                          > > researchers, old texts and many of the populace around the Lake
                                          > Superior Copper
                                          > > Country.....most, if not all historic copper mines originated from
                                          > ancient
                                          > > copper pits and mines. I'd be very surprised if that did not hold
                                          true
                                          > to a
                                          > > certain extent with contemporary canals where water routes have not
                                          > been totally
                                          > > altered from centuries, millinnea ago. Unlike the copper mining
                                          > parallel
                                          > > where tbe physical evidence of discarded hammerstones was present
                                          > until a few
                                          > > decades ago, imperical evidence for ancient canals is far more
                                          > difficult. If
                                          > > such canals existed and evidence no longer remains, it will be
                                          another
                                          > case
                                          > > where ignorance will continue to prevail, knowledge of ancient human
                                          > genius is
                                          > > lost to time, population expansion, and the increasingly total
                                          > technological
                                          > > dominance of the natural world continues.
                                          > > I commend the efforts of the Ancient Canal Builders team and look
                                          > forward to
                                          > > Steve and any of you here at AWS continuing into the roots and
                                          > > scientifically-based intent of some of the fine research the
                                          > courageous team
                                          > > began not very long ago.
                                          > > Thanks to so many of you here for the interesting Posts, subjects,
                                          and
                                          > responses
                                          > > to each others' letters here the past couple of weeks. It is a
                                          > pleasure to be a
                                          > > member and a co-host of this site.
                                          > > Susan
                                          > >
                                          > > --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, "bigalemc2"
                                          puppet@
                                          > > wrote:
                                          > > >
                                          > > > Well, folks, the ancient canals aren't ancient, after all.
                                          > > >
                                          > > > We finally were able to find explanations for them and are
                                          satisfied
                                          > that we
                                          > > >were wrong.
                                          > > >
                                          > > > We found out that the long parallel canals were created in the
                                          > 1915-1960 period
                                          > > >as ways of combating mosquitos. Beginning with New Jersey, the
                                          > coastal states
                                          > > >found that literally "draining the swamps" worked quite well as the
                                          > backbone of
                                          > > >efforts to make the coast more congenial for humans.
                                          > > >
                                          > > > Why did we think they were not mosquito abatement measures? We saw
                                          > on many
                                          > > >sites that the canals did not reach to the seashore. The canals
                                          were
                                          > most often
                                          > > >dead-headed short of the shore. If the bottom end is not open,
                                          > drainage doesn't
                                          > > >happen. These dead-end canals thus looked like irrigation canals.
                                          > > >
                                          > > > What we didn't know was that in the 1960s they found out they'd
                                          > changed the
                                          > > >ecosystem and had lost the fauna that had formerly used the
                                          > marshlands for
                                          > > >habitat. By then they had other ways of combating the mosquitos, so
                                          > the decision
                                          > > >was made to close the drains by filling in the lower ends of the
                                          > canals.
                                          > > >
                                          > > > By the time we came along drainage ditches had long since been
                                          > turned into what
                                          > > >looked like irrigation - in a place where irrigation didn't make
                                          > sense, at least
                                          > > >on our modern world.
                                          > > >
                                          > > > The symbol features? A good look at them tells us they are more
                                          > recent even
                                          > > >than the drainage ditches, since they all are tucked nicely between
                                          > the ditches.
                                          > > >Had they been older, the more or less random spacing of the ditches
                                          > would have
                                          > > >broken into the symbols.
                                          > > >
                                          > > > So, what did they end up being? Our best guess is muskrat lodges.
                                          > Muskrats are
                                          > > >kin to beavers and are very industrious in terraforming things to
                                          > suit
                                          > > >themselves. They make lodges in marshy areas(but not dams), and
                                          have
                                          > the
                                          > > >entrances under water as often as not. If they need to, they dig
                                          > their own
                                          > > >ditches around their lodges. They also dig ditches so that they can
                                          > swim as much
                                          > > >as possible. All in all, it is a pretty certain thing that the
                                          > muskrats did
                                          > > >them.
                                          > > >
                                          > > > Google Earth and Bing both flatten out features, so the lodges
                                          > appear as flat
                                          > > >islands.
                                          > > >
                                          > > > We need to take this all as an object lesson: We cannot trust that
                                          > what we see
                                          > > >on GE is a true representation.
                                          > > >
                                          > > > As to the big canals in the Gulf, we are now aware of how much
                                          > damage has been
                                          > > >done to the bayou areas, how much land has been lost due to human
                                          > activity. That
                                          > > >is one reason Katrina did so much damage - there just wasn't enough
                                          > barrier land
                                          > > >anymore. So the submerged ones seem to have an explanation as to
                                          why
                                          > they are
                                          > > >submerged: The wave action obliterated the crests of the canal
                                          berms.
                                          > > >
                                          > > > But what ARE they?
                                          > > >
                                          > > > After finding mundane explanations for the other two, John and I
                                          are
                                          > beaten up
                                          > > >enough to admit there is probably a mundane explanation for them,
                                          > too. So, John
                                          > > >is closing down his site shortly, and I will be closing down the
                                          > blog, too. I
                                          > > >posted there about the "mosquito ditches," and expect that traffic
                                          > will cease
                                          > > >even if we kept the sites open.
                                          > > >
                                          > > > So, this is a mea culpa. We were wrong.
                                          > > >
                                          > > > Sorry to get everyone's hopes up.
                                          > > >
                                          > > > Take care. I will still be around...
                                          > > >
                                          > > > Steve
                                          > > >
                                          > >
                                          >



                                        • Susan
                                          --A hearty greeting to two more new members the last couple of days---Valdimar Samuelsson from Iceland, and R. Taylor (jenmaxryan
                                          Message 20 of 23 , Dec 7, 2010
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            --A hearty greeting to two more new members the last couple of days---Valdimar Samuelsson from Iceland, and R. Taylor (jenmaxryan) from Nova Scotia! We hope you will enjoy our group.
                                             
                                            --I'd joined NSExplore a few weeks prior to flying to the 2008 Atlantic Conference in Halifax, Nova Scotia, which several other AWS members attended.  Following the conference, Ancient Waterways member Terry Deveau led a five day tour to intriguing ancient sites along beautiful, rugged Nova Scotian mountains and shorelines.  Terry is an overseer of the excellent 300 member group.  Some here might recall...Terry, Vince, and I each had corresponded with Dr. Gordon Freeman (Alberta) just before the 2009 release of  Canada's Stonehenge-Astounding Archaeological Discoveries in Canada, England : http://www.google.com/search?q=canada%27s+stonehenge&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-Address&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1 I7RNWN_en
                                            Freeman had relayed comments to our group a bit about their work
                                            at the possible 5000 year old site that he and his wife have been protecting on-site for decades from an old trailer while
                                            doing scientific research.  Has anyone heard of any recent developments there?
                                             
                                            Good hearing from you again, Steve Steigerwald (Aztalan Mounds webmaster)...and Richard Murray (Massachuetts).
                                            So many Posts have been submitted lately it has been difficult keeping track, but I think Vince sent a post mentioning the Hohokum Canals of Arizona. I found this interactive map site for the ancient (Phoenix area) Valley of the Sun : http://www.gemland.com/hohokam.htm
                                             
                                            --Thanks, Rick Osmon for 'plugging' this group.  Never having Thursday evenings off, two eye surgeries, and a malfunctioning computer, I'd not tuned into the Oopa Loopa Cafe radioblog for some time.  This group has not received a Post from you about program changes, the Oopa Loopa link I had no longer seemed active. Earlier today found your new live streaming video Oopa Loopa Cafe.  Is this the main link, Rick? This one hour interview from the end of August is with author  Robert J. Miller from the Lewis & Clark Law School in Portland, Oregon on "Manifest Destiny": http://www.livestream.com/oopaloopacafe  Keep us posted,  Rick, on times, dates (still Thursdays?), etc., especially pertaining to ancient navigation, waterways, etc.
                                             
                                            --Steve Garcia, great to see the Ancient Canal Builders in America web site back up:  http://www.ancientcanalbuilders.com/  Perhaps you will also re-establish the accompanying ACB commentary site you'd set up at Charles Bruns' suggestion.
                                            Maybe it could be put on the main Ancient Canal Builder site. 
                                             
                                            Especially for the Canadian members here, with this Saturday coming up fast, I am including here a reminder about the documentary Steve Garcia told us about last week (Post #1951); he'd received an email w/link to video trailer from author, Paul Chiasson.   "Mysterious Ruins-Cape Breton" airs in Canada on the History Channel Saturday,  December 11th: http://www.myspace.com/video/496952816/mysterious-ruins-cape-breton-trailer/105485432 
                                             
                                            With over forty incoming posts the past week, if any of you are feeling overwhelmed at the number coming in, you may make changes in how you receive (or do not receive) Posts to your mailbox.... ...by clicking Members , then Edit Membership to:
                                            "Daily Digest"---all messages for the day go to your emailbox in a single email rather than "Individual Emails".  Or, come of you may prefer "No Emails" or "Special Notices Only". Using the latter two options, members will need to click into the site regularly to read Posts.  Please, too,  make corrections to your membership if your email address changes.
                                             
                                            Susan, a co-host

                                            --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, Richard Murray <murph3333@...> wrote:
                                            >
                                            > On 12/7/2010 1:20 PM, Ted Sojka wrote:
                                            > Don't forget the elaborate water canals throughout the Phoenix, Arizona
                                            > area.
                                            > Richard
                                            >
                                            > > The water irrigation canals at Machu Pichu are grand in design as are
                                            > > the ones that allowed raised bed gardening at tihuanaco. The peach
                                            > > trees the Hopi had along the river were irrigated with canals until
                                            > > Kit Carson cut them down to force them out of their home area. There
                                            > > is lots of canal work done in the Americas, just not those Jersey
                                            > > canals dug by dredge in the steam era and beyond.
                                            > >
                                            > >
                                            > > TS
                                            > > On Dec 7, 2010, at 11:16 AM, Rick O wrote:
                                            > >
                                            > >> This is going to be a bit of a hodge podge, but time simply refuses to
                                            > >> let me be thorough or organized today.
                                            > >>
                                            > >> 1. If I've accomplished nothing else with the Oopa Loopa Cafe, I'm proud
                                            > >> to help guide folks like Lonni to this group. I'm working on Fritz
                                            > >> Zimmerman.
                                            > >>
                                            > >> 2. The cumulative evidence is leaning towards a very sophisticated water
                                            > >> management knowledge and technology among ancient Americans, possibly to
                                            > >> even include water wheels to do work (e.g., Puma Punto, Palenque, Machu
                                            > >> Pichu). So canals / irrigation / drainage are far from eliminated as
                                            > >> possible ancient works.
                                            > >>
                                            > >> 3. Valdimar, glad you finally got here. We need your bird's eye view.
                                            > >>
                                            > >> 4. An announcement: Mary Sutherland has discovered what may be a
                                            > >> previously undocumented "snake" effigy near Burlington, WI. More as I
                                            > >> get more, but this is pretty close to the site where the Vorhees plates
                                            > >> were found and there was a thunderbird effigy nearby in historic times
                                            > >> (still kind of sorta almost maybe a little visible in Google Earth).
                                            > >>
                                            > >> 5. I seem to recall a specific mention of "grapes" in Leiffet Saga,
                                            > >> someone please correct me if I'm wrong. Even during the Maunder Maximum,
                                            > >> that would put Vinland no further north than about Nova Scotia and far
                                            > >> more likely somewhere between Naragansett and Chesapeake (the latter
                                            > >> being my own latitude).
                                            > >>
                                            > >> Enjoy. Keep the thinking caps spining
                                            > >>
                                            > >> Oz
                                            > >> --- Inancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com
                                            > >> <mailto:ancient_waterways_society%40yahoogroups.com>, "Susan"
                                            > >> beldingenglish@ wrote:
                                            > >> >
                                            > >> >
                                            > >> > Before their posts get buried farther under the flood of recent posts,
                                            > >> I
                                            > >> > want to thank co-host Vince Barrows (New Orleans), Ted Sojka (Iowa) ,
                                            > >> > Jamey (Georgia?) and others here for the excellent comments/links and
                                            > >> > encouraging responses after the closing of the Ancient Canalbuilders
                                            > >> web
                                            > >> > sites (which hopefully is temporary). It is from my personal interest
                                            > >> > of global intent to hope the cooperative diffusionist research
                                            > >> continues
                                            > >> > into ancient intra-continental canals, and also intercontinental
                                            > >> canals
                                            > >> > and channels between the Americas and beyond. I need to find time to
                                            > >> > explore some of the older data on ancient canals in the areas of S.
                                            > >> > Carolina, Arizona, Louisiana, etc. that Vince sent. Vince's work as
                                            > >> an
                                            > >> > engineer, and having not long ago relocated from the Cahokia area of
                                            > >> > Illinoios-Missouri to New Orleans, is a good candicate to do ground
                                            > >> > (swamp/bayou) work in liason with higher tech imagery on natural or
                                            > >> > man-made water routes in lieu of varying human and climate changes,
                                            > >> > weather disasters. Thanks too, Vince for adding the Chapter VI
                                            > >> article
                                            > >> > by Emil W. Haury under the Ancient Canal
                                            > >> > <http://www.scribd.com/doc/44631409/Snaketown-Canal> section of our
                                            > >> > Links
                                            > >> > <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/ancient_waterways_society/links>
                                            > >> > page that you titled: Snaketown - central Arizona prehistoric
                                            > >> > irrigation canals:
                                            > >> http://www.scribd.com/doc/44631409/Snaketown-Canal
                                            > >> > <http://www.scribd.com/doc/44631409/Snaketown-Canal>
                                            > >> >
                                            > >> > In my last Post re: Beothuks in Iceland, I sent an incorrect link to
                                            > >> > Paper No. The Last Expedition: The Kensington Runestone I mentioned
                                            > >> > w/photos of Icelandic boundary holestones, maps, etc, and links to
                                            > >> more
                                            > >> > articles below some might dig for clues to more on the far regions of
                                            > >> N.
                                            > >> > America.. The correct one:
                                            > >> >http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_3.3propertyboundarylines.htm
                                            > >> > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_3.3propertyboundarylines.htm>
                                            > >> > (bottom of the page articles)
                                            > >> >
                                            > >> > CONTENTS
                                            > >> >
                                            > >> >
                                            > >> >
                                            > >> > 1. Introduction <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_1.introduction.htm>
                                            > >> >
                                            > >> > 2. Norse settlement on the east coast of North America
                                            > >> >
                                            > >> > 2.1 Labrador place names and Ari of Holum
                                            > >> > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_2.1labradorplacenames.htm>
                                            > >> >
                                            > >> > 2.2 L'anse aux Meadows
                                            > >> > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_2.2lanseauxmeadows.htm>
                                            > >> >
                                            > >> > 2.3 Norse in the St. Lawrence Valley
                                            > >> > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_2.3norseinthest.lawrencevalley.htm>
                                            > >> >
                                            > >> > 2.4 The Bishop's voyage
                                            > >> > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_2.4thebishopsvoyage.htm>
                                            > >> >
                                            > >> > 3. Evidence for Norse settlement in the mid continent
                                            > >> >
                                            > >> > 3.1 Holestones and the Kensington runestone
                                            > >> > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_3.1holestones.htm>
                                            > >> >
                                            > >> > 3.2 The Whetstone River holestones
                                            > >> > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_3.2thewhetstoneriverholestones.htm>
                                            > >> >
                                            > >> > 3.3 Property boundary lines and the Graenaveldi
                                            > >> > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_3.3propertyboundarylines.htm>
                                            > >> >
                                            > >> > 3.4 Knutson's search for the Graenaveldi
                                            > >> > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_3.4knutsonssearch.htm>
                                            > >> >
                                            > >> > 3.5 Appendix: The Kensington inscription: word-by-word
                                            > >> translation
                                            > >> > <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_3.5appendix.htm>
                                            > >> >
                                            > >> > 4. End Notes <http://www.lastkings.com/paper2_4.endnotes.htm>
                                            > >> >
                                            > >> >
                                            > >> > Susan
                                            > >> >
                                            > >> >
                                            > >> > --- Inancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com
                                            > >> <mailto:ancient_waterways_society%40yahoogroups.com>, Vincent Barrows
                                            > >> > v_barrows@ wrote:
                                            > >> > >
                                            > >> > > Steve and all;
                                            > >> > > It is correct that we moderns have constructed canals for purposes
                                            > >> of
                                            > >> > draining
                                            > >> > > swamps, building pipelines, roadways, right of ways, property
                                            > >> > boundaries. The
                                            > >> > > following link includes some information about modern canal
                                            > >> building.
                                            > >> > This
                                            > >> > > shows that the majority of mosquito drainage canals were built in
                                            > >> the
                                            > >> > early
                                            > >> > > 1900s.
                                            > >> > >
                                            > >> > >
                                            > >> >
                                            > >> http://www.coastalguide.com/IntraCoastalWaterway/SouthCarolinaCanals.sht\
                                            > >> \
                                            > >> <http://www.coastalguide.com/IntraCoastalWaterway/SouthCarolinaCanals.sht>>
                                            > >> ml
                                            > >> > >
                                            > >> > > Rafinesque in 1838 wrote "But our monuments do not merely consist in
                                            > >> > such mounds
                                            > >> > > or tumuli, since we find besides in North America, ruins of cities,
                                            > >> > some of
                                            > >> > > which were walled with earth or even stones, real forts or citadels,
                                            > >> > temples and
                                            > >> > > altars of all shapes, but chiefly circular, square or polygonal,
                                            > >> some
                                            > >> > > elliptical, hexagonal, octagonal, &c., quite regularly pointing to
                                            > >> the
                                            > >> > cardinal
                                            > >> > > points. We have also traces of buildings, foundations, roads,
                                            > >> avenues,
                                            > >> > > causeways, canals, bridges, dromes, or racecourses, pillars and
                                            > >> > pyramids, wells,
                                            > >> > > pits, arenas, &c. And of these not a few, but hundreds of them, many
                                            > >> > of which
                                            > >> > > are unsurveyed and undescribed as yet. "
                                            > >> > >
                                            > >> > > Some prehistoric humans constructed canals for architectural and
                                            > >> > > irrigation purposes. Gladwin discusses an archaeological site report
                                            > >> > from
                                            > >> > > Arizona that discusses Hohokam irrigation canals. These canals were
                                            > >> > built and
                                            > >> > > rebuilt in prehistoric times to irrigate arid desert farmland.
                                            > >> William
                                            > >> > Morgan
                                            > >> > > also has published Prehistoric Architecture in the Eastern United
                                            > >> > States and
                                            > >> > > shows examples of canals and moats. His book uses survey data from
                                            > >> > 1830's
                                            > >> > > (Squier and Davis) to illustrate examples of mound sites with
                                            > >> evidence
                                            > >> > of
                                            > >> > > manmade canals and waterscapes.
                                            > >> > >
                                            > >> > >
                                            > >> > > Respectfully;
                                            > >> > > Vince
                                            > >> > >
                                            > >> > >
                                            > >> > >
                                            > >> > > ________________________________
                                            > >> > > From: Susan beldingenglish@
                                            > >> > > To:ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com
                                            > >> <mailto:ancient_waterways_society%40yahoogroups.com>
                                            > >> > > Sent: Fri, December 3, 2010 8:35:11 PM
                                            > >> > > Subject: [ancient_waterways_society] Re: "Ancient Canals?"
                                            > >> > >
                                            > >> > >
                                            > >> > > Steve and All,
                                            > >> > > The public admissions and closing down of the Ancient Canal Builders
                                            > >> > in America
                                            > >> > > project and web sites when holes were found in the research
                                            > >> > demonstrates to me
                                            > >> > > sound scientific practices as well as high integrity and humility.
                                            > >> > > Considerable obvious effort has been made by your research team and
                                            > >> > I've no
                                            > >> > > doubt members of the team are burnt out. I doubt that any of you are
                                            > >> > denying
                                            > >> > > that substantial numbers of canals, perhaps canal networks, were in
                                            > >> > existence
                                            > >> > > hundreds, perhaps thousands of years ago with remnants of
                                            > >> > scientifically
                                            > >> > > provable evidence yet to be discovered and tested by underwater
                                            > >> > archaeologists,
                                            > >> > > geoligists and others such as Jensen , you and those willing to lay
                                            > >> > your time
                                            > >> > > and credibility on the line to consider and explore such
                                            > >> > possibilities.
                                            > >> > > I continue to believe America was riddled with ancient,
                                            > >> > > humanly-constructed canals, some very likely leaving traces and
                                            > >> > scientifically
                                            > >> > > provable evidence for underwater archaeologists, geoligists and
                                            > >> others
                                            > >> > > like Jensen, Garcia willing to explore such possibilities.
                                            > >> Riverways,
                                            > >> > intra-
                                            > >> > > and intercontinental waterways, humanly constructed/altered canals
                                            > >> are
                                            > >> > at the
                                            > >> > > very roots of diffusionist exploration and to me, advanced
                                            > >> > socio-cultural
                                            > >> > > research.
                                            > >> > > I think a parallel here: as is well known and voiced by avocational,
                                            > >> > academic
                                            > >> > > researchers, old texts and many of the populace around the Lake
                                            > >> > Superior Copper
                                            > >> > > Country.....most, if not all historic copper mines originated from
                                            > >> > ancient
                                            > >> > > copper pits and mines. I'd be very surprised if that did not hold
                                            > >> true
                                            > >> > to a
                                            > >> > > certain extent with contemporary canals where water routes have not
                                            > >> > been totally
                                            > >> > > altered from centuries, millinnea ago. Unlike the copper mining
                                            > >> > parallel
                                            > >> > > where tbe physical evidence of discarded hammerstones was present
                                            > >> > until a few
                                            > >> > > decades ago, imperical evidence for ancient canals is far more
                                            > >> > difficult. If
                                            > >> > > such canals existed and evidence no longer remains, it will be
                                            > >> another
                                            > >> > case
                                            > >> > > where ignorance will continue to prevail, knowledge of ancient human
                                            > >> > genius is
                                            > >> > > lost to time, population expansion, and the increasingly total
                                            > >> > technological
                                            > >> > > dominance of the natural world continues.
                                            > >> > > I commend the efforts of the Ancient Canal Builders team and look
                                            > >> > forward to
                                            > >> > > Steve and any of you here at AWS continuing into the roots and
                                            > >> > > scientifically-based intent of some of the fine research the
                                            > >> > courageous team
                                            > >> > > began not very long ago.
                                            > >> > > Thanks to so many of you here for the interesting Posts, subjects,
                                            > >> and
                                            > >> > responses
                                            > >> > > to each others' letters here the past couple of weeks. It is a
                                            > >> > pleasure to be a
                                            > >> > > member and a co-host of this site.
                                            > >> > > Susan
                                            > >> > >
                                            > >> > > --- Inancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com
                                            > >> <mailto:ancient_waterways_society%40yahoogroups.com>, "bigalemc2"
                                            > >> puppet@
                                            > >> > > wrote:
                                            > >> > > >
                                            > >> > > > Well, folks, the ancient canals aren't ancient, after all.
                                            > >> > > >
                                            > >> > > > We finally were able to find explanations for them and are
                                            > >> satisfied
                                            > >> > that we
                                            > >> > > >were wrong.
                                            > >> > > >
                                            > >> > > > We found out that the long parallel canals were created in the
                                            > >> > 1915-1960 period
                                            > >> > > >as ways of combating mosquitos. Beginning with New Jersey, the
                                            > >> > coastal states
                                            > >> > > >found that literally "draining the swamps" worked quite well as the
                                            > >> > backbone of
                                            > >> > > >efforts to make the coast more congenial for humans.
                                            > >> > > >
                                            > >> > > > Why did we think they were not mosquito abatement measures? We saw
                                            > >> > on many
                                            > >> > > >sites that the canals did not reach to the seashore. The canals
                                            > >> were
                                            > >> > most often
                                            > >> > > >dead-headed short of the shore. If the bottom end is not open,
                                            > >> > drainage doesn't
                                            > >> > > >happen. These dead-end canals thus looked like irrigation canals.
                                            > >> > > >
                                            > >> > > > What we didn't know was that in the 1960s they found out they'd
                                            > >> > changed the
                                            > >> > > >ecosystem and had lost the fauna that had formerly used the
                                            > >> > marshlands for
                                            > >> > > >habitat. By then they had other ways of combating the mosquitos, so
                                            > >> > the decision
                                            > >> > > >was made to close the drains by filling in the lower ends of the
                                            > >> > canals.
                                            > >> > > >
                                            > >> > > > By the time we came along drainage ditches had long since been
                                            > >> > turned into what
                                            > >> > > >looked like irrigation - in a place where irrigation didn't make
                                            > >> > sense, at least
                                            > >> > > >on our modern world.
                                            > >> > > >
                                            > >> > > > The symbol features? A good look at them tells us they are more
                                            > >> > recent even
                                            > >> > > >than the drainage ditches, since they all are tucked nicely between
                                            > >> > the ditches.
                                            > >> > > >Had they been older, the more or less random spacing of the ditches
                                            > >> > would have
                                            > >> > > >broken into the symbols.
                                            > >> > > >
                                            > >> > > > So, what did they end up being? Our best guess is muskrat lodges.
                                            > >> > Muskrats are
                                            > >> > > >kin to beavers and are very industrious in terraforming things to
                                            > >> > suit
                                            > >> > > >themselves. They make lodges in marshy areas(but not dams), and
                                            > >> have
                                            > >> > the
                                            > >> > > >entrances under water as often as not. If they need to, they dig
                                            > >> > their own
                                            > >> > > >ditches around their lodges. They also dig ditches so that they can
                                            > >> > swim as much
                                            > >> > > >as possible. All in all, it is a pretty certain thing that the
                                            > >> > muskrats did
                                            > >> > > >them.
                                            > >> > > >
                                            > >> > > > Google Earth and Bing both flatten out features, so the lodges
                                            > >> > appear as flat
                                            > >> > > >islands.
                                            > >> > > >
                                            > >> > > > We need to take this all as an object lesson: We cannot trust that
                                            > >> > what we see
                                            > >> > > >on GE is a true representation.
                                            > >> > > >
                                            > >> > > > As to the big canals in the Gulf, we are now aware of how much
                                            > >> > damage has been
                                            > >> > > >done to the bayou areas, how much land has been lost due to human
                                            > >> > activity. That
                                            > >> > > >is one reason Katrina did so much damage - there just wasn't enough
                                            > >> > barrier land
                                            > >> > > >anymore. So the submerged ones seem to have an explanation as to
                                            > >> why
                                            > >> > they are
                                            > >> > > >submerged: The wave action obliterated the crests of the canal
                                            > >> berms.
                                            > >> > > >
                                            > >> > > > But what ARE they?
                                            > >> > > >
                                            > >> > > > After finding mundane explanations for the other two, John and I
                                            > >> are
                                            > >> > beaten up
                                            > >> > > >enough to admit there is probably a mundane explanation for them,
                                            > >> > too. So, John
                                            > >> > > >is closing down his site shortly, and I will be closing down the
                                            > >> > blog, too. I
                                            > >> > > >posted there about the "mosquito ditches," and expect that traffic
                                            > >> > will cease
                                            > >> > > >even if we kept the sites open.
                                            > >> > > >
                                            > >> > > > So, this is a mea culpa. We were wrong.
                                            > >> > > >
                                            > >> > > > Sorry to get everyone's hopes up.
                                            > >> > > >
                                            > >> > > > Take care. I will still be around...
                                            > >> > > >
                                            > >> > > > Steve
                                            > >> > > >
                                            > >> > >
                                            > >> >
                                            > >>
                                            > >
                                            > >
                                            >
                                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.