 Over a hundred years ago, a curious discovery was made in a town now named after this upart, Rockwell within Texas. An ancient wall was unearthed, and although it was clearly of an artificial nature, its possible age predictably made a number of people in the academic world deny its artificial origins in favor of a far less likely scenario involving natural formation. Although magnetic exploration suggested that the Rockwell had been where it lay for over 100,000 years, its origins have been heavily debated ever since its initial discovery. In 1852, farmers in Texas were digging a well when they discovered the wall. Conservative estimates have placed its creation some 100,000 years ago. Yet now, many believe it to actually be an antediluvian relic left by a now lost civilization some 200,000 to 400,000 years ago. Dr. John Geisman of the University of Texas, Dallas, tested the Rocks as part of a history channel documentary, giving credence to the denial of its artificial origins, suggesting they formed where they were, claiming that they were all magnetized in the same way. This tremendous age has led many to believe in modern paradigm, to deny a man-made origin as this does to cooperate with the Bering Strait theory and currently upheld timelines in regards to evolution. However, there are others in similar fields who have found curious characteristics of the wall which do indeed suggest artificial origins. Geologists James Shelton, for example, and Harvard's architect John Lindsay, have focused on its unique design features, including architectural elements, archways, lintel portals, and square doorway and window openings, which all suggest not only artificial creation, but functionality for humans, which nature would simply not create. The depth or past height of the wall is also an impressive legacy. The family of T.U. Wade, who moved to the area and initially made the discovery, dug to a depth of 40 feet to try and find the bottom of the wall. This excavation, however, was abandoned without finding the bottom. Years later in 1949, Mr. Sanders of Fort Worth took up the baton and continued excavation exploration of the wall, finding a number of megalithic stones at considerable depth and weighing several tons. After bringing them to the surface, mysterious pictographs were found upon them, further supporting the thesis of artificial origin. In addition, curious metal rings of modern composition were found embedded in rocks, suggesting the presence of lost technology. It would appear that the wall is indeed an antediluvian relic, one possibly submerged and subsequently buried in ancient sediment during the Great Flood. Modern studies have found that the wall is in fact six stories tall and 20 miles in length, with a number of individuals now attributing the wall to a lost civilization of giants due to its inexplicable nature. Quote, It is good when examples like rock wall appear that test our abilities and cause us to question basic Newtonian mechanistic assumptions that have not been modified for over 150 years. Physics had to abandon this approach at the turn of the century, opting instead for relativity and quantum mechanics in order to further their understanding of matter and the universe. Said James Shelton, geologist from New Orleans, it is a relic which we find highly compelling. Although many academic bodies and the individuals funded by said institutions are only allowed to attribute ancient ruins to known heavily researched past civilizations, there exist many features within these sites found all over the world, which tell a very different story. Not only are the indicative of an ancient civilization far more capable than our well-studied more recent ancestors, but many of them share features within their builds, with many other sites who are separately claimed by the as-mentioned institutions as the work of completely different past civilizations, who we feel are far more likely, based on said evidence, to have been mere re-inhabitants of these sites, which allowed these civilizations to flourish, adopting said features into their own cultures, and often claiming said works as their own to outside groups. Not only do the similarities show an undeniable connection with sites currently argued as completely isolated ancient works of architecture, but many of the most astonishing features of said sites are not only ignored, but often overlooked by the world as a result, which we also feel is strong evidence of not only a deliberate attempt to ignore the facts in favor of fallacy, but clear proof of a conspiracy which is largely funded in an effort to keep these particular proverbial smoking guns hidden and under wraps, often avoiding further study as a result, this clearly due to the reality they contain regarding facts about the history of man, which academia is not only responsible for hiding in favor of funding, but are responsible for hiding the true history of man from man himself, in an effort to merely appear all-knowing in the face of things they currently have no explanation for. And the so-called Inca Road is indeed one of these said ancient anomalies, which is of an astonishing size. It is so big, in fact, it even dwarfs the Great Wall of China, an ancient relic so big it can be seen from space. One might ask, how can I not have been informed of such an ancient relic? But once one realizes the current academically baffling accomplishment, this so-called Inca masterpiece must have once been, the conspiracy to keep such a site largely unknown will become clear. It is a road system that not only links nearly every unexplained ancient ruin currently known to exist within Peru, connecting Puma Punca, Saxe Huaman, Machu Picchu, Olante Tambo, along with many others. It, in fact, covers an incredible 25,000 miles, topping the Chinese Wall by nearly 7,000 miles, going all the way through Peru, Chile, and spreading out far beyond, with bridges, tunnels seemingly carved straight through clifffaces, and even following sheer drops, once cut horizontally into near vertical rockfaces with plunging sides dropping at times thousands of meters to valleys below. We strongly believe that although the road has clearly been utilized by an unimaginably large number of travelers, and has been severely eroded away nearly everywhere, the method of construction now hidden by erosion, that this surface, just like that of the roads of Pompeii, were actually formed using a now lost stone technique, now largely known as that of polygonal masonry. Not only a lost, now unexplained technique of stone building, indicative of a lost civilization and technologies, but the sheer size of the road, and the features accomplished along its incredible length, still provides countless unexplained features, which cannot be explained as Inca. Yet not only is it and its features academically ignored, but we feel the proposition of it being an Inca relic, just like all the ancient sites we have already covered in which it connects, are far too advanced to be claimed as Incan. How can one claim that such a relic was built by our more recent ancient ancestors, when not only does this site link much of ancient Peru, and is largely ignored, but not only the road but all said sites currently hold feats of ancient engineering which cannot be explained. It is clearly a feature that is indicative of a far more advanced, far more ancient civilization, which once constructed this road, and the sites found along it, merely re-inhabited by our now well-studied, far more recent ancient ancestors. It is a place we find highly compelling. In 1768, the Thunderstone, an enormous Rappachevi granite boulder currently claimed to have weighed 1,250 tons, was successfully moved many miles by our modern ancestors, a stone which gained its name from a lightning strike having split it from the bedrock. This feat, if true, would alter many attested views regarding the currently understood limitations of ancient civilizations. It would insinuate that the successful movement of seemingly impossibly huge stones used in ancient constructions were done by the claimed civilizations. Sculpted by the French sculptor Itienne Maurice Falconet, and transported by Marinos Carboras, a lieutenant colonel in the Russian army, who was tasked with figuring out how to move the stone from Ladka, 6 km inland from the Gulf of Finland, to its final location beneath a bronze statue of Peter the Great within St. Petersburg. Originally embedded deep within the ground in an area of marshy terrain, they had to develop revolutionary methods to transport the colossal stone, waiting until winter to liberate the stone from the earth and attempt to move it over solid frozen ground. This, however, is where diligent research and academic assumption partways. Although there are engravings of the stone nearly in its original shape, seemingly being moved across the earth by manpower, many modern researchers of this event, along with a number of highly capable scholars, believe that these images were taken on the first day of the stone's transport. Many suspect that Catherine the Great, present at the event, was there only to witness the start of this arduous task. After this event, she traveled back to St. Petersburg to await its arrival. What's more, this first day, according to numerous reliable, yet rarely academically shared sources, state that in its original form, these workers were only able to move the stone an inch. A declaration, also according to these same sources, was made by Catherine herself, elated at witnessing this stone move an inch before departing for Russia. Not only do many independent researchers now believe that the original weight was incorrect, but also that when it was eventually moved, had lost a dramatic amount of its body. Falconet had originally intended to cut the stone to a mere 600 tons before its transportation, and as the original stone was seemingly impossible to move when Catherine the Great left for St. Petersburg. Furthermore, now in position and attributed as over a thousand tons in weight, this is also an academic fallacy. As Graham Hancock's website puts it, quote, seen from the back, the stone is about three meters wide at the top and six meters wide at the base. If it were shaped like a perfect cube, its weight would be some 1200 tons. However, because the stone slopes on all sides, its weight does not exceed one third of this, about 400 tons, a far cry from the currently touted 1,250 tons. It's claimed that, at 1,500 metric tons, the Thunder Stone is the heaviest stone ever moved by human power, and that this is supposed to be a proof that no advanced technology was needed for the transport of colossal ancient stones. However, unlike Russians in the second half of the 18th century, Romans and their predecessors had no ball bearings, iron rails, or metal sledges. Those things all benefits of modern technology. As much as one has to admire Falconet's engineering achievement, what he has proved is that technology of the late 18th century was indeed capable of transporting large megaliths, end quote. It seems that the Thunder Stone, being used as a proven example of primitive techniques and civilization, able to have constructed the currently unexplained sites which dot the earth, however, like with many other academic explanations as to the construction of these sites, it is not only contradictory to the facts, but based on a faulty premise. Due to these deliberate twisting of the facts, the story of the Thunder Stone is undoubtedly highly compelling. If we could prove, beyond doubt, that our continued posit of an ancient, once highly advanced, yet pre-Ice Age civilization once existing here on our planet, we would literally have to rewrite our understandings of antiquity. We have covered numerous sites, found submerged all around the world. Yet unfortunately, due to their proximity to islands and the continental regions they are found amongst, many are dismissed as merely being five to ten thousand year old ruins, fitting with modern paradigm and alas avoiding controversy or the questions which inevitably follow. Yet our next side of interest may turn out to not only be that most important of submerged ruins ever found on earth, but the smoking gun previously mentioned. On the 19th of May 2001, India's Union Minister for the Science and Technology Division, Murli Manohar Joshi, announced that the ruins of an ancient civilization had been discovered off the coast of Gujarat in the Gulf of Kambahat. The site was discovered by INOT, National Institute for Ocean Technology. Using sonar, the discovered ruin is now being strongly argued as definitively pre-Ice Age, yet also advanced in nature. An IoT went on to describe an area of regularly spaced artificial structures. Located twenty kilometers from the Gujarat coast and spans nine kilometers, Joshi claims the site as an urban settlement that predates the Indus Valley civilization. Further descriptions of the site by Joshi describe it as containing regularly spaced dwellings, a granary, a bath, a citadel, and a drainage system. According to Wiki, quote, the structures and artifacts discovered by NIOT are the subject of contention. The major disputes surrounding the Gulf of Kambahat cultural complex are claims about the existence of submerged city-like structures, the difficulty associating dated artifacts with the site itself, and disputes about whether stone artifacts recovered at the site are actually geofacts or artifacts. One major complaint is that artifacts at the site were recovered by dredging, instead of being recovered during a controlled archaeological excavation, end quote. Simply put, due to the fact that it has not been excavated properly, and we predict, probably never will, academia are dismissing this ancient city as simply unconfirmed. We feel a quite ridiculous position to take despite NIOT's supporting data of its existence, due to its accidental discovery, presumably via dredging. We find the marine archaeology in the Gulf of Kambahat highly compelling.