
Discovery of 6,000-year-old underwater city prompts historical rethink
The neglected underwater structures have recently resurfaced on social media, with many people claiming that the explorers found the ruins of Atlantis. However, Cuban geologist Manuel Iturralde-Vinent of Cuba's Natural History Museum was one of the skeptics who cautioned that the stone structures could be natural formations. 'It would be totally irresponsible to say what it was before we have evidence,' Zelitsky added in a 2001 interview with BBC. Unfortunately, more evidence was never gathered, as a follow-up expedition to Cuba's Guanahacabibes Peninsula never took place.
Social media users have continued to question why the research into this mysterious site was abandoned, with some claiming the implications of a city predating the ancient Egyptians have triggered a cover-up. 'Civilizations that existed before the ice age, perhaps multiple civilizations that rose and fell... The historical knowledge that has been lost (or hidden),' one person on X said. 'There is so much hidden history. Finding it so fascinating. Everything we been taught is a lie,' another person claimed. Despite rampant speculation of an archeological conspiracy, scientists have argued that there are legitimate reasons why the lost city of Cuba isn't real.
In 2002, Iturralde noted that the structures were so deep underwater, it would have taken much longer than 6,000 years for this area to sink nearly half a mile due to shifting tectonic plates. If this were a sunken city that took roughly 50,000 years to reach these depths, it would completely change our understanding of human evolution. Currently, scientists have concluded that modern humans (Homo sapiens) were hunter-gatherers 50,000 years ago, since there's no evidence they created urban societies or sophisticated buildings. 'It's strange, it's weird; we've never seen something like this before, and we don't have an explanation for it,' Iturralde told The Washington Post.
Michael Faught, a specialist in underwater archaeology at Florida State University, also shared his doubts that these structures were man-made. 'It would be cool if Zelitsky and Weinzweig were right, but it would be really advanced for anything we would see in the New World for that time frame. The structures are out of time and out of place,' Faught told the South Florida Sun-Sentinel. The unexplored city isn't the first mysterious structure to potentially rewrite human history. Archeologists have actually found several allegedly man-made temples which significantly predate the Egyptians, including Göbekli Tepe in Turkey - a site believed to have been inhabited from around 9500 BC to at least 8000 BCE.
That's over 5,000 years before the Egyptian pyramids were built and roughly 6,000 years before Stonehenge. Another underwater structure discovered near Japan, called the Yonaguni monument, features several sharp-angled steps that stand roughly 90 feet tall and appear to be made entirely of stone, leading many to believe it was man-made.
Tests of the stone have shown it to be over 10,000 years old, meaning if a civilization built this pyramid by hand, it would have taken place before this region sank under water - more than 12,000 years ago. Along with scientists widely discounting the findings in Cuba as a natural phenomenon, its location so close to the socialist national have made returning to the site politically difficult. Advanced Digital Communications, the Canadian company that was mapping the ocean floor in Cuba's territorial waters, entered into a contract with the government of President Fidel Castro to conduct the original expedition.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Daily Mail
15 hours ago
- Daily Mail
VERY fishy behaviour! Parts of Sir David Attenborough's latest series Parenthood are filmed in a TANK, BBC admit
Parts of David Attenborough 's latest series were filmed in a fish tank rather than in the wild, the BBC has admitted. The beloved British broadcaster used tanks during key scenes that featured boxer crabs, skeleton shrimps and Banggai cardinalfish across the five episodes of Parenthood. Airing its first episode on Sunday, August 1, the series promised viewers 'astonishing, never-before-seen animal behaviours in stunning ultra high definition, from the remote jungles of Bhutan to the grasslands of Botswana'. The near hour-long programme by Sir David, aged 99, focuses on animal parents that are 'having to adapt to a world that is changing rapidly', with the creatures facing 'a unique set of challenges' that they must overcome. It is the first BBC natural history series to focus on parenting, with the team using new technology to capture the weird and wonderful in the wild. However, the BBC have now revealed parts of the unique show were not filmed 'in situ', as viewers may have initially expected, but instead were shot in manufactured environments such as tanks and incubators. The decision was taken, the public broadcaster insists, due to the 'tiny scale of the animals, fragility of the environment and sensitive nature between parents and their young', The Times reported. In an article published by producers Jeff Wilson and Olly Scholey it was revealed that during the five-minute opening of an episode that showcased turtle hatchlings, filming occurred in a specialist 'incubation project' in Brazil, rather than actually underwater. The pair said that the use of the incubation project ensured that the eggs would not be disturbed while also allowing viewers to witness an 'unbelievable spectacle' that ultimately 'was crucial to the story'. In the incredible scene, described as 'a seminal moment for the film', hundreds of young turtles are shown following their mothers calls to the safety of the river, acting as a visualisation of the unpredictability of parenting in the animal kingdom. On Monday, the BBC told The Times that distributing the eggs in situ 'would've overstepped the mark'. Insisting that filming underwater 'would mean risking the survival of the young', Mr Wilson and Mr Scholey also said that the decision to use tanks was taken to 'ensure that we got the balance absolutely right'. Due to the 'incredibly fragile' animals, the filming crews sought to 'tread carefully' in order to avoid infringing on the natural wildlife. As a result, a specialist tank set in Indonesia was also used during a five-minute scene of boxer crabs shown in the opening of the show's first episode. Both Mr Wilson and Mr Scholey also acknowledged that several parts of the programme were indeed captured on location, with filming said to have taken place across locations spanning Botswana, Arizona, Tanzania, Namibia, southern Spain and Indonesia. They added that unlike on land, filming underwater presents a host of unique challenges, with water visibility changing hourly, and divers forced to wade through water in search of the story. A fascinating clip captured from the show's first instalment showed Attenborough's team as they attempt to build up a relationship with the unique silverback gorillas and their infants. Described by Max Kobl, cinematographer for the show, as 'probably the most powerful of all primates', Sir David, narrating, warns that 'it isn't going to come easy' for the film crew as they attempt to get close to the sneaky gorillas. Initially, the team face great difficulty even finding the animals, seen wading through thick swamps in order to locate them and using indicators such as the types of twigs on the ground. Commentating, one member of the crew says: 'The swamps don't pose challenges for the gorillas, the swamps pose one of many challenges for us.' In the insightful footage of their challenging trek, one member of the team is seen nearly toppling over due to the thick, knee-deep water. When asked 'you okay?', he simply responds: 'Nope'. Sir David, narrating, adds: 'The team try as best they can to keep up and just as they reach dry land, the gorilla family has other ideas'. In response, viewers took to social media to praise the 'stunning' new show, with one commenter on X gushing: 'All the contributors to Parenthood are amazing', while another added: 'Parenthood is another great programme. Congratulations once again Sir David Attenborough and the BBC'. Meanwhile, a bone chilling moment during the programme captured the moment a colony of newborn African spiders turn to hunt their own mothers. In the never before seen behaviour, a pack of African social spiders are shown hunting in packs and responding to the vibrations of their prey as they struggle in the webs. The spiders move in unison, starting and stopping at the same time, freezing together in a sinister game of musical statues. Even more disturbing, after displaying their hunting skills on their usual prey of insects, the 1,000 strong colony then turns on their own mothers and eat them alive. Parenthood also features striking footage of the lives of orangutans, elephants and cheetahs, among many others. Unique technology used across the five-part series includes military-grade infrared cameras mounted on gimbals on off-road vehicles and show hippos being chased by lions at night. The BBC was approached for comment.


Times
a day ago
- Times
Fight to save ‘most beautiful snail' from most voracious predator — us
No one knows why the Polymita snails of Cuba are so beautiful, or why their beauty is so varied. Probably, though, the array of different colours and stripes evolved as a way of avoiding predators. Which is why it is so ironic that those adornments are — today — the reason it is attracting the most voracious predator of all: us. Conservationists have warned the shells of this disappearing species are being sold to collectors, who may not even realise the snails are endangered. Now a global collaboration of scientists is looking to better understand and breed in captivity these magnificent molluscs — with the hope of preserving them. 'They are so beautiful and extraordinarily variable,' said Professor Angus Davison, from the University of Nottingham. This means that as a snail scientist he finds himself in an unusual situation. 'While all snails are interesting and beautiful to me, most snails, by and large, are not outwardly beautiful to other people.' He has been part of a team collecting samples in Cuba, with a view to mapping their DNA. He is interested in how many species there are and how they are related. It is believed that there are six, but traditional methods of counting rely heavily on intricate analysis of their genitals. The hope is that genetic data could both be more definitive, and also provide clues not contained in their penises to explain why they are like this at all. Paradoxically, said Davison, being colourful can be a way of evading predation — and this is his leading hypothesis. 'You might assume they stand out against the background. That's not necessarily true, depending on where they live.' But being very different from each other, in the way they are, could be a positive survival strategy. 'Most likely there's a bird out there that eats the snails. That bird gets a search image in its head for the most common snail — let's say it's a yellow snail. And then you get a gene change that makes a green snail. The green snail will not be eaten because the bird doesn't see them. And so the green snails will become more common. 'And then another mutation arises, which makes an orange snail. And so on.' Until, eventually, there are enough different colours that while they evade birds, they catch the eyes of tourists instead. It is illegal to collect and sell the snails, but it is hard to enforce. 'The problem is, Cuba's undergoing very great financial hardships. So there's a very great incentive for locals to collect the shells and sell them.' Davison's worry is that publicising the beauty of the snails might increase the market. His hope, though, is that educating people about them could decrease it. 'No person in the UK would buy rhino horn if offered it on a holiday. But there are people who will happily buy a shell, not even thinking about the animal or where it came from.'


BBC News
4 days ago
- BBC News
Building's hard problem: Can concrete go green?
Concrete is the most produced material on the planet. Used as a building material for centuries, production of its crucial ingredient cement accounts for eight percent of global emissions. Reporter Alasdair Keane visits a Rotterdam-based startup producing an alternative material to make concrete more sustainable. This video is from Tech Now, the BBC's flagship technology programme.