Bimini Columns

Re: Atlantis-any proof ? - Bimini Columns and Barrels.
From: southdar 
Date: 1995/12/10
MessageID: v01510100acf0d9d871bf@[199.249.10.47]
x-nntp-posting-host: www.tyrell.net
x-sender: southdar@tyrell.net (Unverified)
content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
mime-version: 1.0
newsgroups: sci.archaeology

Subject: Re: Atlantis-any proof ? - Columns and Barrels.
Distribution: world
Organization: Friends of Fossils

alam@delphi.comlalam@delphi.com wrote:
>Doug Weller correctly notes that there may be columns other
>than the ones that were tested and apparently are concrete,
>post-1800.  Yes, I do believe there are other columns.  The
>people I was with can see concrete versus fluted marble (??
>was it marble  ?? , it sure was fluted) even underwater.  And
>the depth may be only 18 feet underwater down to 30 perhaps.

There is some confusion over what exactly Harrison (1971) found.
He did note that two of the cylinders are composed of marble
and have flute-like marks parallel to the long axis of the column.
However, he noted that the remainder of the "columns" consist
of cylinders of an early natural cement encrusted by a layer of
whitish calcium carbonate a few millimeters thick.  Figure 3 of
Harrison (1971:288) shows at least 28 of these natural cement
cylinders in addition to the two marble columns.

Concerning the size and shape of the marble and concrete
cylinders, Harrison (1971:289) stated;
      "The most striking aspect of the cylinders is the constancy 
        in size and shape of the whole ones. They are all 
        barrel-shaped, about 70 cm long and 50 cm in diameter
        (Table 1)."

Anybody who takes the time and trouble to read Harrison
(1971) will find that on page 288 the following analysis;

  "The cement cylinders are also composed of material which
    is not indigenous to the Bahamas (unpublished communication
    from R. Perkins). On balance, the material seems to be a
    hydrated natural cement.

    Mr. P. Klieger of the Portland Cement Association, Skokie, 
    Illinois, has supported this-opinion on the basis of X-ray and 
    petrographic analysis, as has Dr. R. C. Mielenz (Master Builders, 
    Cleveland, Ohio) on the basis of petrographic analysis. Dr. R.
    Nurse of the Building Research Station (England) has examined
    a thin section and concludes that it is a high temperature product
    and not an oxychloride cement and that "it resembles the 
    'grappier' made from the overburnt product of .. lime kilns".

    Mrs. Bryant Mather, US Army Corps of Engineers (unpublished
    communication), says that the material consists of "calcite, 
    brucite, a complex calcium aluminum hydrate, quartz,
    hydrogarnet, a little ettringite and some sort of calcium 
    aluminoferrite", suggesting that the material is a hydrated
    natural cement manufactured after about 1800.  The material
    also contains widely separated particles of partially carbonized
    coal, supporting the belief that it is a simple natural cement
    from lime kilns in the United States, England, France or 
    Belgium."

The characteristic of the cement as described above clearly
suggests that the cement are historic artifacts and not of
prehistoric origins.

In a previous post, I have summarized arguments by Ball and
Gifford (1980) and Gifford (1973) that the so-called "Bimini
Roads are natural beachrock that has formed along prehistoric
beaches.  Thus, the lack of any other identified prehistoric
structures, the following statement by Harrison (1971) provides
a working hypothesis that is consistent with the known data;

   "It seems most likely that the objects were formed by cement
   hardening in barrels or casks. The wooden containers would
   have by now been broken up and lost. The most likely explanation
   of the marble and cement cylinders is therefore that they are
   construction materials that were being transported by ship when,
   either by shipwreck or design, they came to rest on the seafloor
   off Entrance Point."

If the area within which the columns and barrels lie actually was
the site of an ancient Atlantean city, then should enormous
quantities of marble (and granite) lying about.  However, only
two pieces of marble and no pieces of granite have been
documented by Harrison (1971).  The abundance of concrete
barrels amid a couple of short sections of marble columns
greatly favors the marble columns being part of the same
shipload of construction material that was either dumped or
shipwrecked on the Bimini Islands

>I do not believe the reports of columns refer to the ones I
>have seen photographed.  The columns are too much like
>building columns and too unlike concrete piles.  Also,

The photos that Mr. Hammonds have illustrated at his web site;
<  http://archon.lib.umn.edu/ruins.htm  > as the original figures
in Ferro and Grumley (1970) from which he scanned his web
pictures show a well-defined convexity that make them look much
more like barrels than any known column.  The only things that
would look like columns are likely the two fluted columns
described by Harrison (1971).  However, I really do not see
anything the pictures that look like fluted marble columns
although present at the barrel site.

References Cited;

Ferro, Roberto,  and Grumley, Michael, 1970, Atlantis: the
Autobiography of a Search, Doubleday and Company, New York.

Harrison, W., 1971, Atlantis undiscovered; Bimini, Bahamas.
Nature. vol. 230, no. 5292, p. 287-289.

>granite was reported as well as marble.  Granite is not
>natural to the Bahamas, so far as I know.

Granite was not reported by Harrison (1971) as having been found
at the barrel site.  This must be yours or someone else's finding
and, thus, you need to give the source of this information rather
then incorrectly citing Harrison (1971) as the source of this data.
But even with granite is present, it would mean that a ship carrying
granite and marble, instead of just marble, along with cement got
into trouble and had to dump stuff overboard or was shipwrecked.

In -_Re: Need new challenge_, lalam@delphi.com
also mentioned the presence of granite as he wrote;

....much material omitted
>other divers on the site since 1971.  Bill was there twice this
>year.  He does not believe that the granite stones found there
>are local or natural.  The find of the granite stones was
>accidental by curious divers.  A lab in Baltimore, MD, I was
>told, decided that it was granite.  

Unfortunately, it is unclear as to the size, shape, and context of
which the "granite stones" that he talks about in his post.  As a
result, evaluation as to what these stones are and their significance
is impossible to do.  Given that Ball and Gifford (1980) and
Gifford (1973) have clearly documented that the slabs that
compose the so-called "Bimini Road" consist entirely of naturally
occurring beachrock, the granite stones could represent either
ballast stones or ornamental stone dumped from a ship in trouble
or shipwreck.  The simple presence of scattered pieces of granite
fails to be proof of the existence of a former Atlantean city given
the documented abundance of historic trash present in the area.

Granite is a very easy rock to identify in hand specimen.  It is
something that first year geology student should be able to do.
That a laboratory had to identify it for you is revealing of the
level of geological expertise available among your group of
divers.

Mark Hammons  wrote:
>dweller@ramtops.demon.co.uk (Doug Weller) wrote:
>>In article <49notm$reb@newsbf02.news.aol.com>,
>>          mrbungl195@aol.com (MrBungL195) wrote:
>>
>>> Mark Hammons wrote
>>> >   I also do not believe the photographs were cement droppings,
>>> >   as one moron posted.  I suppose most of those who replied
>>> Doug Weller wrote:

>Mark Hammons did not write such a phrase.  I don't think they are
>conveniently dumped concrete barrels, either, but I didn't call them
>droppings.

As mentioned above, Harrison (1971) presents documented proof
that concrete cylinders occur with the marble cylinders.  In fact, the
vast majority of the cylinders consist of concrete instead of marble.
Again, the presence of numerous, documented concrete barrels along
the shore of Bimini Island indicates that by dumping or shipwreck, 
the nearshore zone of these islands has been littered with historic
debris.  Unless you have some way of dating or tracing the source
of the marble and granite, it will be impossible for to argue that
these granite and marble represent the remains of any prehistoric
cultures.

References Cited;
Harrison, W., 1971, Atlantis undiscovered; Bimini, Bahamas.
Nature. vol. 230, no. 5292, p. 287-289.

Back to article ,
in which m-hamm@maroon.tc.umn.edu says;
>There are clearly shown dressed stone columns in 30 feet of water.
> I can't remember the magazine, but somewhere I saw an article on
>a piece of carved sculpture that was brought up from this site.  The
>figure was reportedly of some abstract feline form, and was a
>"cornerstone" of some sort.

There are four problems with the "feline sculpture" as evidence for
a man-made origin of the slabs of beachrock.  First, you present
absolutely no evidence that this sculpture is any way related to the
limestone slabs.  Because the surface deposits within the nearshore
been frequently mixed by wave action, the age of the sculpture is
unknown.  Second, the origin of the sculpture is unknown.  It
could be either an artifact of your mythical Atlantean culture, a
Mayan sculpture lost in a shipwreck on its way back to Spain, a
modern or historic sculpture dumped or lost overboard, or from
any of number of other possible sources.  Finally, research by
Kuche (1975) has demonstrated that many of the mysteries 
reported about the Bahamas region have been fabricated by writers
of books and producers of documentaries who were more interested
in creating entertaining fiction disguised as fact instead of truthfully
reporting the facts about the Bahamas.  Thus, unless the existence
of this sculpture can be documented with a reliable citation, it is
only another Bermuda Triangle fish story that proves nothing.

Reference Cited;

Kuche, Larry, 1975, The Bermuda Triangle - Solved.
Harper and Row, 302 pp.

Conclusion:

1. an abundance of historic barrels of concrete have been clearly
documented by Harrison (1971) along with two short sections
of marble column as having been observed within the nearshore
of the Bimini Islands, Bahamas.

2. There are undocumented claims of "stones" of granite having
been found also.  Because of an utter lack of details about
this finds, it is impossible to make any interpretations concerning
the significance of their presence.  They could have been deposited
on the nearshore surface any time in the last 15,000 years.  For
the granite, any number of explanations can be given, e.g. ship
ballast stones, cargo debris from a shipwreck, etc., given the
gross last lack of information about their physical characteristics
and the context of where they were found.

3. In case of the marble columns, the fact that only two 60 cm
long sections of columns has been documented in addition to and
associated with numerous historic concrete barrels suggests that
they part a cargo that was either dumped overboard or shipwrecked.

4. The "feline sculpture" is so poorly documented that for all is
known about it, it could just as well be another Bermuda Triangle
folktale.

5. Given that the so-called "Bimini Roads" have been clearly
documented by Ball and Gifford (1980), Gifford (1973),
Harrison (1971), and McKusick and Shinn (1978) as being
natural Holocene beachrock, there is an absolute lack of any
evidence for the presence of any major prehistoric cities or
structure just offshore of the Bimini Islands.  If any city 
had existed, it should have left something more substantial
than a couple of 60 cm long marble columns and a few
"stones" of granite.

References Cited;
Ball, Mahlon M., and Gifford, John A., 1980, Investigation of
submerged beachrock deposits off Bimini, Bahamas. Research
Reports National Geographic Society. vol. 12., p. 21-38.

Harrison, W., 1971, Atlantis undiscovered; Bimini, Bahamas.
Nature. vol. 230, no. 5292, p. 287-289.

Gifford, John A, 1973, A description of the geology of the
Bimini Islands, Bahamas. University of Miami, Florida, 88 p.

McKusick, M., and Shinn, E. A., 1980, Bahamian Atlantis
reconsidered. Nature, vol. 287, no. 5777, pp. 11-12.

Yours,
Darby South
southdar@tyrell.net
Baton Rouge, LA



Return to Wildside Index Page.


Return to Home Page.


Dec 14, 2001

Copyright © 1996-2002 Paul V. Heinrich All rights reserved.