Is it clear Japan has a secret ancient history?

[New England]

if science were more confident about their hypothesis that this was natural, they wouldn't be so quiet about it.

yonaguni has them shook.

[MrTambourineMan]

if science were more confident about their hypothesis that this was natural, they wouldn't be so quiet about it.

yonaguni has them shook.

[IMG]http://ist2-2.filesor.com/***********.com/2/2/4/3/22438/2/g/7/L/2g7Lp/95574bfca74cdb62b9ca5e7bcd068794c18bb06e.gif[/IMG]

[Sugar Adam Ali]

they're under a whole lot of water, bro. they'd need to be very, very old.

I'm sure they are from eons ago.. Mankind been around for a lot longer than anyone really knows... Could have been built before or during ice age and then submerged when it ended

[ИATAS]

there's a major appeal to scientists proving that they haven't been studying BS for their entire lives.

they don't like to be proven wrong, and are resistant to discoveries that overhaul their understanding.


in short, they're biased.
i'm not saying that this is a man made structure, only that it's no surprise that science is resistant to the idea.

There are plenty of scientists who would love to make a name for themselves and prove It's man made. It goes both ways which is when the science community is awesome. Man releases findings, hypothesis. Science community evaluate and research findings. So far, there just isn't the evidence that supports this being as man made. It would be cool and awesome but there is a reason for decades now most consider this natural (based on the evidence).

Also, when you just look at a few close up pictures it is much more convincing than say looking at the entire 3D model which looks much more natural:

[The Noose]

there's a major appeal to scientists proving that they haven't been studying BS for their entire lives.

they don't like to be proven wrong, and are resistant to discoveries that overhaul their understanding.


in short, they're biased.
i'm not saying that this is a man made structure, only that it's no surprise that science is resistant to the idea.

Who proves scientists wrong?
Scientists!

The science blogs i look at have 'new evidence questions old theories' headlines every other day.

Id say its a bit of a myth that scientists dont like ideas that disturb established ideas. Often, there just isnt enough evidence to be swayed.
Im sure that there is bias here and there among scientists, but also certain ideas just carry less weight than others.

I dont know a damn thing about those rocks. But it seems its a case of ...were they man made? Possibly. Could they occur naturally? Yes. So maybe one is more likely than the other at this point. Its not necessarily bias.

[titanium]

It's not secret now.