Posted on 01/12/2006 11:42:35 AM PST by blam
FEARS FOR ANCIENT REMAINS BELOW WAVES
By Martin Neville
DIVERS face a desperate race against time to recover 8,000-year-old artefacts from the bottom of The Solent before they are lost forever.
The underwater site, off Bouldnor, is the only one yet discovered in Britain and dates from when the sea level was 12 metres lower than today, when the IW would have been much larger and The Solent was a dry coastal valley. It remains because it was covered in silt and protected from erosion as the sea rose above it. Most Stone Age sites on land have lost all associated organic remains, having been exposed to weathering. However, underwater, the oxygen-free mud can preserve delicate objects for thousands of years.
Unfortunately, this is being eroded by the currents and is likely to be gone within two to three years.
Radiocarbon dating has underlined the international significance of the ancient drowned landscape and given archaeologists further tantalising evidence of human occupation.
Tests have revealed material, thought to be the remains of a wooden structure, are around 300 years younger than the surrounding ancient oak trees, which have been dated from around 8,400 years ago.
Garry Momber, director of the Hampshire and Wight Trust for Maritime Archaeology (HWTMA), said the irregular nature of the timbers would suggest the remains were not those of a large tree.
"We know that because by this period the larger trees in the area were being killed by rising sea levels," he said.
"The remains are on an elevated piece of land with water either side of it. It's possible the area was developed because it was next to water with plentiful food nearby.
"The dates have been very interesting because they demonstrate the timber structure is not contemporary with the oak forest, which remains on the floor of The Solent.
"If it is the remains of an occupation site, the structure would have been sturdier and more substantial than a wind break or tent-like shelter, as there are some sizeable timbers remaining."
Mr Momber said the evidence also showed how quickly sea levels can rise, in this case coming at the end of an ice age, when sea levels were rising much quicker than today.
The structure is also next to a pit filled with burnt flint that is believed to be an oven or hearth and archaeologists now hope the two can be linked with further tests.
But the rapid rate of erosion of the Bouldnor site means it is a race against time before it is gone forever. Mr Momber said: "On land you may find indicators such as post holes that would testify to the remains of Middle Stone Age buildings but the time would be lost.
"We have protected the site as best we can with sandbags but it is quickly being eroded and there's no telling what still remains today.
"We hope to dive the site this year but, despite its importance, it's very difficult to get money to do it."
It sounds like they had a problem with global warming 8400 years ago.
And the enviro-wennies are griping about "man-made" glo-bull warming that "might" raise the sea levels by a few inches?????
This always saddens me because, although not crucial to my life (or anyone else's), I would rather spend money on something like this than in many other areas where I actually resent spending, like the "palestinians" and UN.
Is there a place and process where contributions can be made?
Didn't read it. Not all of Hancock's stuff is kooky. He has some decent ideas.
does anyone know why sea levels change in 8-10k year timeframe
Ice age ended.
Karl Rove used his time machine to cause global warming then to help Haliburton(sp?)
Glaciers from the alst ice age melted. Britain was once connected to Europe by land and there was a Texas sized piece of land connecting Siberia with Alaska. The glaciers held a lot of water and when they metled, sea levels rose A LOT!.
I just finished it about 2 weeks ago. I thought he did a good job of stating fact/fiction/hypothesis in the book. Some of his stuff over the years has been a little out there, but he takes a lot of info and sorts it quite well and plausibly in this book. IMO.
when the rest of them melt
what are we looking at
I just posted this on the Augustine volcano thread:
There is a volcano presently erupting in Antarctica that is melting so much ice that it is creating the largest flow of fresh water on earth.
Please FREEPMAIL me if you want on or off the
"Gods, Graves, Glyphs" PING list or GGG weekly digest
-- Archaeology/Anthropology/Ancient Cultures/Artifacts/Antiquities, etc.
Gods, Graves, Glyphs (alpha order)
I'm always confused by this. If water expands when it freezes, why wouldn't the sea levels lower when the polar ice melts? Is there enough ice on land to make the difference? Pardon my ignorance....
lol...
I immediatly thought the same thing. I'm starting to swing back his way more and more these days mainly because the "Scholars" are being found out wrong more and more.
My guess is even though the level drops in a glass of ice water, the additional water being "swung" to the equator would cause levels to rise during tides especially... But, I may be far from accurate...
"Is there enough ice on land to make the difference?"
The last Ice Age had a mile of ice over Seattle. This Continental Ice Sheet extended across the country. It covered all of Canada and into the middle of Minnesota.
So yes - all lot of ice on land. (Think of it as thawing out the ice bin in your freezer into a glass of ice water!)
I agree. I read it witha little scepticism but the farther I got into his book the better the argument he made. Also, adding the transcripts, references and bibliography helped sell his case. it's one thing to state somethiing but it's a whole other thing to post sources, facts and references. It will be quite interesting to see how this plays out over the next few years. I assume you are on the GGG ping list, which is one of my favorite lists.
Yes, there is. During the last glacial period, the ice was 2 miles thick over a substantial part of the Northern U.S. and Canada. This isn't sea ice, but ice resting on the continent. That is a lot of water removed from the oceans and is why sea level was so much lower in the past. The glaciers were so heavy that they actually cause North America to sink in the north and rise in the south, like a continent sized teeter-totter. The continent is still subsiding where the north is rising and the south is sinking. The great lakes are like giant puddles left from when it melted. Lake Athabasca (I think the name is right) was once one giant lake where the great lakes are today. There isn't nearly as much ice on Antarctica and Greenland today as compared to all the ice during the last glaciation. If you look at the underwater topography of Chesapeake Bay, for example, you can see it was once a river channel and you can identify where the ancient seashore was.
Okay that makes sense. I suppose if all the precipitation is being locked up on land instead of returning to the oceans via watersheds that would do the trick.
"The glaciers were so heavy that they actually cause North America to sink in the north and rise in the south, like a continent sized teeter-totter. The continent is still subsiding where the north is rising and the south is sinking."
Dang, then the South shan't rise again for quite some time! Har har.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.