- Part 1 - Part 2 - Part 3 - Part 4 - Part 5 - Part 6 - Part 7 - Part 8 - Part 9 - Part 10 - Part 11 - Part 12 - Part 13 - Part 14 - Part 15 - Part 16 - Part 17 - Part 18 - Part 19 - Part 20 -
In this part, I recommend that you familiarize yourself with important information and examples in the video from Western observers: just ordinary people and scientists. It turns out that in countries with frequent earthquakes, the phenomenon of liquefaction (soil liquefaction) is known. It leads to the subsidence of buildings, the release of water-clay masses to the surface, and flooding of territories. These mechanisms could be the reasons for the introduction of old buildings of the 19th century.
But in the beginning - a few more examples and thoughts on this topic:
Discussion of the Flood and Clay-Bound Buildings in Western Resources.
Western researchers are also interested in the fact of the introduced buildings. The nice thing is that the thread started by pointing out this video, where the author Philip Druzhinin comments on my article in English.
***
Promotional video:
If we assume that the cities were specially covered with accessible soil - clay and sandy loam, then the readers offered another logical version: why did they do it (except for raising the level to prevent flooding in floods in cities near the banks of rivers).
jaguaroff_yc: Compare the situation with Kiev in the Podol region. There, too, by the way, the "pestilence" raged in 1770. Perhaps it's worth looking at this from a sanitary point of view? So to speak, to work out the city / the presence of buried buildings / the presence of a "plague" in history.
A possible reason for filling cities: clay swells when it freezes. It is the property of water to expand when frozen into ice. Therefore, as a version, so that the soil below the foundation would not freeze, so that it would not be squeezed out and the walls would not start cracking during these movements - they poured 1-3 m of soil for thermal insulation. Therefore, in this version, the conclusion is this: these buildings were originally built in a different climate, without such harsh winters.
***
St. Petersburg. Pay attention to the lower right corner! Ruins, remains of buildings?
***
***
Many are beginning to think and reflect on this topic. What do I advise official historians. Recently I watched an Italian documentary about the ancient buildings of Rome (aired on the Eureka Channel).
So in it almost every 5 minutes. show ancient houses, marinas, mosaic floors located at a depth of minus 2-3 floors from modern ground level. The ancient sewage system of Rome (cesspool) was at first forgotten, but in the 16th century. built another one above it and only in the 19th century. dug out the entrances to it. What does it mean? And the presenter in the film never once asked himself: where did so much clay come from that filled up all of Rome? Cultural layers, yeah! The modern Tiber River is not capable of such a cataclysm. The presenter spoke about the fact that up to 1 million inhabitants lived in Rome at the peak of its heyday, but the population sharply decreased at the beginning of our era. And up to the 19th century. only 30 thousand people lived there. They give out ready-made puzzles even within one movie! But to add - is there not enough intelligence or courage?
Suburbs of Rome
***
Questions are often asked: well, let's say there was a cataclysm. And, possibly, again in the 19th century. Why is there no mention and who benefits from hiding it? There are answers, but they are hidden deep. They need to be unearthed by analyzing historical processes with an alternative view. Taking into account the interests of certain forces and, of course, the cataclysm that occurred.
Watch this video, evaluate the thoughts that the author put into it:
For those who do not understand the message, hints: who and with whose money began to rebuild, including construction projects in Russia during the industrial revolution? On whose capital did the manufactories build and flourish? But do not think that you need to “cut one size fits all”! There are always those who have information and those who are not in the subject.
But the cover-up process began earlier. At least since the time of the German dominance in the Academy of Sciences under Catherine. Or even earlier, when Russia (or the principality of Muscovy) turned into Russia. Not specifically, but look at it globally. Why could the turmoil happen? What European dynasties began to rule this territory later. The dominance of the Germans, then all French, the Counts of the Holy Roman Empire, the local population was given to serfdom (a derivative of slavery), etc. etc. And these processes continue to this day. I think, if you announce and rewrite everything in history from the perspective of the cataclysm that has occurred, the legitimacy of a lot in the past will be violated with an overflow to the present.
***
And now, I propose to study a new version of the reasons for the introduction of old buildings. I recommend watching all the videos below, they are not so long in time. But their study will make it possible to form the most complete picture of this phenomenon.
Alek Polek in the comments to the video:
Personally survived the strong earthquake in New Zealand in 2011 and witnessed a phenomenon called soil liquefaction or liquefaction. After the earthquake, a liquid clay-like substance was pushed upward and many parts of the city sank into clay, or rather, clay flooded everything, buildings and cars. In some places, the skid height was up to a meter, then the whole city was dug out with excavators and a dusty white fog stood over the city for a year.
Here is the author's video:
There, at 5.45 the author has a friend in the yard and the whole yard has a clay drift of 20 centimeters.
Such a phenomenon could also be caused by a powerful explosion of, say, a nuclear weapon, all that is needed is the creation of seismic waves. So the theory of craters, that is, explosions and subsequent skidding of the surface with clay, fully explains the drowned cities. And the completed second floors, which could simply have been destroyed as a result of artificial earthquakes caused either by bombings or natural seismic activity in Eurasia.
There are many similar examples:
In this video, apparently, the outlet of groundwater.
Screen from the video above. What is not a mud volcano in miniature. And we see full-scale mud volcanoes in Africa and Arabia. But geologists for some reason pass them off as magmatic.
A similar example in Japan, but filmed in real time.
Exit of mud masses. They could be the reason for the introduction of buildings built in the early 19th century. But there is one more process …
Many readers stubbornly argue that buildings can sink into the ground without deforming the foundations and walls. I proved the opposite with the same persistence. At the present time, in our conditions and with real soils, this cannot happen. And if it happens (fast enough), then it leads to the destruction of buildings.
I may have been wrong. These videos explain the probable immersion process:
Especially this analogy:
What do you think, will the old building, built on a foundation of rubble stone on clay, tilt and collapse, or will it sink vertically entirely?
Watch on YouTube on request: liquefaction (soil liquefaction).
In the west, this effect is described and modeled. Heavy objects are submerged, light ones are pushed out.
This is not a communal accident. This is a car drowned in quicksand that came to the surface during an earthquake.
During earthquakes, this phenomenon is large-scale. Outcrops of clay masses are visible.
Modern buildings buried in the ground and overturned during an earthquake.
By the way, the formation of arched bays can also be associated with this effect.
The same effect can explain the annual ejection of stones in the fields.
Need vibration? I think that microvibrations of various frequencies and amplitudes are always present in the earth's crust. From near and distant earthquakes, from movement and gusts of air masses. The impact is small but permanent. I do not exclude that it was earlier in amplitude (more often and stronger than an earthquake, for example). And until the beginning of the 20th century. at home they were sagging. Why weren't they destroyed? The question is important and only models and calculations of physicists can answer it. I think because a very long process, deformations in the foundation and walls had time to redistribute.
It is physicists who need to deal with calculations. While this is all as a version. We look further:
“This experiment reproduces the conditions that lead to soil liquefaction. At the start of the experiment, the shear strength of the soil is high enough to support the weight of the objects without breaking. However, as the shaking table begins to vibrate, an excess pressure is created in the rock with water, which leads to a decrease in effective stresses in the soil, which leads to its failure and leads to a loss of balance between the soil and objects."
It is part of the Open Educational Resources Initiative at the Faculty of Civil Engineering at the University of Aachen RWTH.
This video also talks about strange floods (in cases where the amount of water that fell with rain is much less than the volume of water in the floods themselves).
Based on these facts, I conclude that houses built on water-saturated clay soils (not yet stratified, not dried out after the flood) - sank into the ground, especially after earthquakes. I came across a video of a house sinking several meters into the ground during an earthquake in Japan. But we could not find it.
This new version of soil liquefaction does not negate previous versions of dust storms. Perhaps it is the cause of these storms and dust transport.
Continued: Part 22
Author: sibved