Thread Rating:
  • 5 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Was she 800 million years old?
#1
This is Really Strange and I have reason to believe it's True.
[Image: Princess_Tisulksy_cover.jpg] They say no actual picture of her was taken.


Quote:Secret history: the mystery of Princess Tisulsky



What if a 800 million year old marble sarcophagus was found, do you think they would just leave it on display?
Let us start with what we know.
Quote:THE MYSTERIOUS TISULSKY PRINCESS
So far it has not been known of any fossils or archaeological finds that could authorize such supposition, except for a history that sometimes reappears on the web, especially on Russian sites, relating to the so-called Tisulsky Princess.

According to this story September 5, 1969, near the Rzhavchik village in the region of Kemerovo, a marble sarcophagus was found surprisingly from a coal mine.

The sarcophagus measured 250x80x90 cm with a thickness of 15 cm, inside, immersed in a pink-blue liquid, similar to a weak solution of potassium permanganate, the perfectly preserved body of a young woman of European appearance would have been found, of apparent age of 25-30 years, 170-180 cm tall.
[Image: Princess_Tisulksy_sarcophagi.jpg]

LIKE A SLEEPING PRINCESS
The "princess" was covered in a white lace dress that came just below the knees, with short sleeves embroidered with colored flowers, without other lingerie.

The girl's face showed wide open blue eyes that seemed to stare at the sky, thick hair, dark brown with reddish hues, slightly curled and falling on the chest, the soft white hands had short, well-cut nails.

According to some witnesses, Tisulsky Princess seemed to sleep or be in suspended animation more than being dead and she would have had a small dark object on the forehead the size of 25x10 cm, similar to a modern cell phone.

MEN IN GRAY AND MYSTERIOUS SCIENTISTS
A few hours after the sarcophagus had been opened and the exhibits had been brought to the local center of the region, a helicopter would have arrived on the spot whose occupants, described as sturdy-looking young men, dressed in gray, would have removed everyone from the sarcophagus saying it was "contagious".

After having taken the names of those who had come into contact with the sarcophagus, the “men in grey” (whose way of acting is reminiscent of that of the men in black) would leave again by carrying the sarcophagus in a helicopter.

According to some versions of the story, the sarcophagus of the liquid would first be emptied to lighten its weight, thus causing the rapid deterioration and blackening of the body of the Princess exposed to air.
THE DATING OF 800 MILLION YEARS
About a week later an elderly scientist from Novosibirsk would return to Rzhavchik to make the preliminary laboratory results known and the real surprise would emerge here.

According to the scientist, whose name is not found on the Internet, the examination of the body revealed that it was less than 800 800 million years old, in the Carboniferous period of the Paleozoic era when only the dinosaurs existed on earth.

Scientists would not have been able to determine the chemical composition of the liquid and the fabric of the girl's clothes, nor the function of the small mysterious object on her forehead. In the following weeks the “men in grey” would come back only to declare that the scientist was a visionary madman and deny the report of the facts published by a local newspaper.

Provided that the story, of which there are no photographic confirmations (being all the photos circulated, including those of this article, referring to sarcophagi and Egyptian mummies or to films like Snow White), is true the mysterious Tisulsky Princess could not be alien to the genetic tests of which the scientist spoke would have confirmed that her DNA was 100% human.

If the story were true the only possible explanation, however unlikely, it would be that 800 million years ago existed a very evolved human society whose traces were completely swept until the discovery of this sarcophagus.

Difficult, however, to find some evidence, especially as all those who came into contact with the princess's sarcophagus would have died in accidents in the course of just a year after the discovery.


However, in 1973 the Soviet authorities would secretly excavate just 6 km from the place where the sarcophagus was found. Years later a worker who claimed to have taken part in these second excavations claimed that an ancient stone age graveyard had been discovered.

Even in this case, however, no official information has ever been provided, nor have any photographs of the excavations and any finds ever circulated on the web.
Thus the doubt remains: the disappearance of the Tisulsky Princess was the result of a cover operation in full “cold war” or is it just a hoax that continues to circulate on the web waiting to be definitively denied?
Source

There were stories told in the Deep Dark Halls of the MSS in China.
Once A Rogue, Always A Rogue!
[Image: attachment.php?aid=936]
Reply
#2
(07-28-2020, 05:20 AM)guohua Wrote:
Quote:According to the scientist, whose name is not found on the Internet, the examination of the body revealed that it was less than 800 800 million years old, in the Carboniferous period of the Paleozoic era when only the dinosaurs existed on earth.


Source

There were stories told in the Deep Dark Halls of the MSS in China.

The Carboniferous was around 390 million to 360 million years ago, not 800 million. Dinosaurs did not exist until the Triassic, around 30 million years after the Carboniferous. None existed during the Carboniferous. Instead, the Carboniferous was known for it's giant insects - 2.5 meter centipedes, 30 inch wingspan dragon flies, etc. Amphibians existed then, some up to 2 meters long, and lizard precursors to dinosaurs - but not dinosaurs - developed during the Carboniferous from tetrapod amphibians.

Sounds like a weakly constructed cover for something else to me. Russians are devious - and weak - like that with their dizinformatziy.

.
“There is no hunting like the hunting of man, and those who have hunted armed men long enough and liked it, never care for anything else thereafter.” ― Ernest Hemingway
Reply
#3
@Ninurta 
To many other cultures the use of the word "Dinosaurs" covers all those time zone in our past history, because they were normally directed at the less educated and they spoke in simple terms.

Actually, I'd like you and everyone to know, What I heard the "in those Deep Dark Halls" was the actual depth in the Coal Deposit was over 480 meter, which was translated into 405 feet in depth.

Take it or leave it, But I'm thinking before Dinosaurs, much older.

I was cruising the dark net and found the reference to something that reminded me, that I had heard of this, so I came to Google and found this article and posted it.
Once A Rogue, Always A Rogue!
[Image: attachment.php?aid=936]
Reply
#4
I've heard of the Tisulsky Princess before, but this is the most information I've seen regarding her. A few years ago, I went searching the internet for more information, and there was not much to be had. All I could find was her name, associated with Russia and 800 million years old. This is the first mention I've seen of the find location or coal.

I live in what used to be "coal country", and have collected fossils out of the coal for over 50 years now, and am well acquainted with the timelines involved. I think that the article is probably not very precise, perhaps considering the audience it was intended for. For example, finding the sarcophagus at a depth of 480 meters in the coal seems over-simplified to me. I've seen a lot of coal, mines and seams, and have never seen one 480 meters thick. I've never even seen one 480 feet thick. I think the thickest coal seam I've ever seen was around 15 to 18 feet thick. Most of them around here are just 1 to maybe 5 feet thinck - BUT they are buried under a lot of other stuff, mostly shale and slate, and I would guess that the article is probably accounting for the depth, but oversimplifying the materials layered into that depth.

For example, this mountain I'm on right now used to be 200 feet taller. They cut 200 feet of rock and dirt off of the top off of it to get down to a seam of coal that was only 1 to 3 feet thick. Two seams actually I think - at least there is a rock cliff at the top of the mountain that has two seams exposed. The upper one, at the point it is exposed, is about 9 inches thick, and the lower one is about a foot thick. BUT - they tore off 200 feet of mountain top to get to it.

There may be a problem in the translation regarding the age - OR maybe the depth - OR maybe the material. There isn't any 800 million year old coal, but there are plenty of 800 million year old rocks of other material, some of which may be in some way associated with coal at one level or another. One has to go through a lot of other rocks to get to the coal, and in turn has to go through coal sometimes to get to older rocks.

I'm not saying the Princess doesn't exist, only that the story is not fully developed in English to the point that I can make sense of it without speculating. That's why I went looking for information on her those years ago, and why I appreciate this story which adds to what meager information I found then.

I know a lot more about coal and the carboniferous period than I do about the Princess, and that frustrates me. The place I live now is fairly "young" geologically and relatively speaking. The lower coal seam I mentioned above is 315 million years old, and called the "Eagle seam" - every coal seam around here has it's own name, and that layer can be followed over a wide area by association with outcrops of the same seam in other places. The Eagle seam outcrop, even at 315 million years old, is about 700 feet or so farther up the geologic column than my front yard, which is down in a "holler" carved out of the landscape.

The tortured terrain here was cut out of fairly flat land by water action. It was laid down by sedimentation, then raised like a flat table into a plateau and water cut the landscape into it, cut it down into the plateau, leaving behind fairly flat layers in the steep mountainsides. The location where I was raised, about 30 or 40 miles from here, is  lot older at 400 million up to about a billion years old, but it was formed when continents collided and actually folded and buckled the rocks, raising them into mountains which were then further shaped by erosion. There isn't much coal there, but there are hella old rocks. I think - and this is just me speculating - that it may be that the Princess was found in a situation like that. Older rocks near coal outcrops, but not actually IN a coal outcrop if that makes sense to you. Saying she was found IN the coal may be a claim that was lost in translation, or not really specific enough as to the relative location of the coal and the Princess. My best guess is that she was found in rock layers that old, which are UNDER a layer of coal, but not actually IN the coal.

When I was a kid, and had just started collecting fossils out of the coal and rocks close to it, I found a lot of strange things. I found one fossil that was about as wide as a man's forearm, but looked like it had scales. I was convinced it was a fossil snake, but it turned out to be a tree branch. I found another one time that was a "lizard" to my young mind, but was actually an amphibian, like a salamander. it was about 9" long, and has since been lost which is a real shame, since as far as I know it is the ONLY tetrapod animal ever found around here. Both of those were found in massive "slate dumps", massive piles of rocks that were taken out of a mine from between layers of coal and then discarded because they were not economically important.

So I have found strange things in the rocks between, above, and beneath the coal myself, and I'm not saying the Princess is fake, just that there is not enough information about her to satisfy my curiosity.

.
“There is no hunting like the hunting of man, and those who have hunted armed men long enough and liked it, never care for anything else thereafter.” ― Ernest Hemingway
Reply
#5
(07-28-2020, 02:46 PM)Ninurta Wrote: I've heard of the Tisulsky Princess before, but this is the most information I've seen regarding her. A few years ago, I went searching the internet for more information, and there was not much to be had. All I could find was her name, associated with Russia and 800 million years old. This is the first mention I've seen of the find location or coal.

Not matter what, it's a great story!!

How do seams of coal actually form?  Does anyone 'really' know?  Are they ever in a viscous to liquid state ... capable of flowing?  Does anyone 'really' know?
'Cause if they catch you in the backseat tryin'ta pick her locks
They're gonna send you home to momma in a cardboard box
You better run!!
Reply
#6
(07-28-2020, 03:29 PM)Snarl Wrote:
(07-28-2020, 02:46 PM)Ninurta Wrote: I've heard of the Tisulsky Princess before, but this is the most information I've seen regarding her. A few years ago, I went searching the internet for more information, and there was not much to be had. All I could find was her name, associated with Russia and 800 million years old. This is the first mention I've seen of the find location or coal.

Not matter what, it's a great story!!

How do seams of coal actually form?  Does anyone 'really' know?  Are they ever in a viscous to liquid state ... capable of flowing?  Does anyone 'really' know?

It forms by the compression of peat in an anaerobic environment.

Plants grow, live, die, and fall in "swampy" environments. Over time, their own weight compacts them into denser and denser layers, squeezing out the moisture and leaving only the carbon component of the original organism. It's estimated that it takes 2 feet of leaf litter to make one foot of compacted peat, and 20 feet of peat to make one foot of compacted coal.

Now, these same coal swamps where to coal is forming are subject to periodic flooding and transport of minerals from higher ground - clays and silt and the like, which, when deposited over the peat/coal leaves a layer of stone over time as it too gets compacted under the weight of subsequent layers. That is where the slate and shale found between coal seams comes from.

Although liquid is present, they are never really in a viscous or liquid state. They are more in a "spongy" state. I've walked on peat bogs where I could see the ground "roll" and "wave" with every step as the spongy layer of peat floating over the liquid layer of water beneath it caused the ground itself to ripple. You could feel the ground beneath your feet quake, ripple, and spring as the water beneath it caused the surface layer of peat to displace. It was like walking along on a semi-solid pond.

So there is potential there for the sarcophagus to have been buried beneath the coal or peat by digging or burying, or it could have been there long before the coal even formed, with the coal layers forming above it over time.

800 million years ago, the land on Earth was barren, devoid of any life at all. All of Earth's life at the time was in the oceans. It wasn't until around 550 to 540 million years ago that life migrated from the oceans and puddles onto dry land starting with plants (see "Rhynie chert" for the very first land plants) and graduating to insects and later amphibians. This means that the Princess, if 800 million years old, had to come from somewhere other than Earth, which is not entirely impossible.

.
“There is no hunting like the hunting of man, and those who have hunted armed men long enough and liked it, never care for anything else thereafter.” ― Ernest Hemingway
Reply
#7
(07-28-2020, 06:00 PM)Ninurta Wrote: 800 million years ago, the land on Earth was barren, devoid of any life at all. All of Earth's life at the time was in the oceans. It wasn't until around 550 to 540 million years ago that life migrated from the oceans and puddles onto dry land starting with plants (see "Rhynie chert" for the very first land plants) and graduating to insects and later amphibians. This means that the Princess, if 800 million years old, had to come from somewhere other than Earth, which is not entirely impossible.

Thanks (greatly) for your personal observations.  You're a brilliant man.

Some folks believe the Earth is ~4.5B years old.  It's hard to imagine when 'life' might have cooked itself up.  Hard to imagine what caused life to 'happen'.  Might have happened more than once.

Just imagine if the Earth had been around for 16B years, and it was just the moon's impact that reset the clock to 4.5B years ...  Saw a really impressive video dissertation of that a good while back.  Erased anything definitive I had ever been taught.  No?
'Cause if they catch you in the backseat tryin'ta pick her locks
They're gonna send you home to momma in a cardboard box
You better run!!
Reply
#8
(07-29-2020, 03:44 PM)Snarl Wrote:
(07-28-2020, 06:00 PM)Ninurta Wrote: 800 million years ago, the land on Earth was barren, devoid of any life at all. All of Earth's life at the time was in the oceans. It wasn't until around 550 to 540 million years ago that life migrated from the oceans and puddles onto dry land starting with plants (see "Rhynie chert" for the very first land plants) and graduating to insects and later amphibians. This means that the Princess, if 800 million years old, had to come from somewhere other than Earth, which is not entirely impossible.

Thanks (greatly) for your personal observations.  You're a brilliant man.

Don't confuse education with intelligence. I know some stuff, but that doesn't mean I'm very bright.

Quote:Some folks believe the Earth is ~4.5B years old.  It's hard to imagine when 'life' might have cooked itself up.  Hard to imagine what caused life to 'happen'.  Might have happened more than once.

The last estimates I heard placed the Earth at 4.6B years old, and the universe allegedly at 13.8B years. The oldest fossil evidence is 3.7 to 3.9B years old on Earth, meaning life allegedly started about 800 million years after Earth's formation, or just as soon as it cooled down enough to support life.

In 1993 or so, I took a course in "The Origin and Evolution of Life" at the University of North Carolina. It was a fascinating course, much heavier on the evolution aspect than the origin aspect, mostly because no one has an explanation for the origins of life. Lots of theoretical constructs, but nothing replicable or falsifiable (i.e - they are all unprovable) - they can't use any of them to "create" life yet - and so no real science. The most fascinating Idea I came across in that class was the notion that biological molecules accidentally and randomly organized themselves along and adhering to the crystalline structure of certain clays, and then began to replicate as DNA does - i.e. just became "life". Fascinating, but still to this day unproveable, so no one in the scientific community really knows how it began. I think they never will. I don't think it's a phenomema that is explainable by science as we currently know science.

ALL notions of the origin of life, both religious AND scientific, boil down to the sentence "some stuff happened, and then... magic". Science has not been able to improve on that so far.

Quote:Just imagine if the Earth had been around for 16B years, and it was just the moon's impact that reset the clock to 4.5B years ...  Saw a really impressive video dissertation of that a good while back.  Erased anything definitive I had ever been taught.  No?

Well, I don't think that is a likely scenario, simply because the Earth - or any other planet - cannot have existed since the beginning of the universe. You see, all "metals" (all elements heavier than hydrogen) did not exist in the beginning. They are all formed in the cores of stars as the stars generate energy, as by products of the stellar fusion process. This means that, at least until some time after the first generation of stars died and exploded, to release those metals into the universe, there was no material to form planets out of.

As subsequent generations of stars live and die, more metals are released into the universe, making planet formation possible, and eventually more likely. That is one of the reasons that Earth didn't form until 9B years or so after the universe did. The universe had just not yet made enough raw material to make it out of. Thee are likely planets out thee older than the Earth, and most of them will be poorer in resources. A billion years from now, there will even be more planets, and a higher number of them will be richer in resources than Earth is.

In another 4.5 B years or so, our sun will swell and explode, contributing it's products to the raw material store to make new planets out of. It will also vaporize Earth and all the other planets, recycling the raw materials used to produce them 4.6 billion years ago back into the universe so that eventually they will contribute to the formation of as yet unheard of planets.

.
“There is no hunting like the hunting of man, and those who have hunted armed men long enough and liked it, never care for anything else thereafter.” ― Ernest Hemingway
Reply
#9
(08-02-2020, 03:31 AM)Ninurta Wrote:
(07-29-2020, 03:44 PM)Snarl Wrote:
(07-28-2020, 06:00 PM)Ninurta Wrote: 800 million years ago, the land on Earth was barren, devoid of any life at all.
Quote:Just imagine if the Earth had been around for 16B years, and it was just the moon's impact that reset the clock to 4.5B years ...  Saw a really impressive video dissertation of that a good while back.  Erased anything definitive I had ever been taught.  No?
In another 4.5 B years or so, our sun will swell and explode, contributing it's products to the raw material store to make new planets out of. It will also vaporize Earth and all the other planets, recycling the raw materials used to produce them 4.6 billion years ago back into the universe so that eventually they will contribute to the formation of as yet unheard of planets.
Maybe ... 

In 3.75 B years ... Andromeda arrives.  LOL. Wouldn't that be something to see?

minusculebeercheers
'Cause if they catch you in the backseat tryin'ta pick her locks
They're gonna send you home to momma in a cardboard box
You better run!!
Reply
#10
I love this stuff. It reminds me of the one hundred million-year-old hammer found in Texas. Makes me wonder if our existence isn't cyclical in nature. 
tinybiggrin
Reply
#11
(08-02-2020, 01:19 PM)Tarzan the apeman. Wrote: I love this stuff. It reminds me of the one hundred million-year-old hammer found in Texas. Makes me wonder if our existence isn't cyclical in nature. 
tinybiggrin

There are too many ''Anomalies'' for me! it doesn't add up, I definitely don't think we were the first civilization.
Men are disturbed, not by things, but by the principles and notions which they form concerning things.

- Epictetus

Nature gave us one tongue and two ears so we could hear twice as much as we speak.

- Epictetus






Reply
#12
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siberian_Ice_Maiden

Seems a bit was known...
Reply
#13
(08-02-2020, 04:20 PM)PLOTUS Wrote: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siberian_Ice_Maiden

Seems a bit was known...

I think that is  different person. For one thing, the descriptions of the coffin do not match (marble vs. larch), and the mode of dress is different (no other lingerie vs. thigh-high stockings).

.
“There is no hunting like the hunting of man, and those who have hunted armed men long enough and liked it, never care for anything else thereafter.” ― Ernest Hemingway
Reply
#14
Reminds me of a remarkable story/event of a holy man Pamamahansa Yogananda at his death.
https://yoganandasite.wordpress.com/2017...rupt-body/ quite a story, worth a read, not very long.
Reply
#15
(07-28-2020, 06:00 PM)Ninurta Wrote:
(07-28-2020, 03:29 PM)Snarl Wrote:
(07-28-2020, 02:46 PM)Ninurta Wrote: I've heard of the Tisulsky Princess before, but this is the most information I've seen regarding her. A few years ago, I went searching the internet for more information, and there was not much to be had. All I could find was her name, associated with Russia and 800 million years old. This is the first mention I've seen of the find location or coal.
800 million years ago, the land on Earth was barren, devoid of any life at all. All of Earth's life at the time was in the oceans. It wasn't until around 550 to 540 million years ago that life migrated from the oceans and puddles onto dry land starting with plants (see "Rhynie chert" for the very first land plants) and graduating to insects and later amphibians. This means that the Princess, if 800 million years old, had to come from somewhere other than Earth, which is not entirely impossible.

if you believe these numbers. My stance is...it's just theories. Much of the today's theories will some day be "debunked" by...articles of "new research", which now show that scientists previously "thought" wrong. I cant be bothered now to look for examples, but...it is almost a daily occurrence. Some of the dogmatic ones take a little longer to punch through.

I also dont believe the stated Earth or Sun ages, not the universe's 13.8 bil years of age.
Reply
#16
(08-18-2020, 12:04 PM)MarioOnTheFly Wrote:
(07-28-2020, 06:00 PM)Ninurta Wrote:
(07-28-2020, 03:29 PM)Snarl Wrote:
(07-28-2020, 02:46 PM)Ninurta Wrote: I've heard of the Tisulsky Princess before, but this is the most information I've seen regarding her. A few years ago, I went searching the internet for more information, and there was not much to be had. All I could find was her name, associated with Russia and 800 million years old. This is the first mention I've seen of the find location or coal.
800 million years ago, the land on Earth was barren, devoid of any life at all. All of Earth's life at the time was in the oceans. It wasn't until around 550 to 540 million years ago that life migrated from the oceans and puddles onto dry land starting with plants (see "Rhynie chert" for the very first land plants) and graduating to insects and later amphibians. This means that the Princess, if 800 million years old, had to come from somewhere other than Earth, which is not entirely impossible.

I also don't believe the stated Earth or Sun ages, not the universe's 13.8 bil years of age.

It is a nicely wrapped package, ain't it?  Most people (even really smart people) have a really hard time wrapping their heads around big numbers.

I don't believe nothing can escape from a black hole.  I think they periodically 'spin out' vast vast quantities of material.  That's why we have spiral galaxies ... and the vast majority of that material exists in a plane.

Doesn't much matter to me what people say is scientific.  None of it is science ... unless it is repeatable.  That means there's an awful lot of science ... that's just Science.
'Cause if they catch you in the backseat tryin'ta pick her locks
They're gonna send you home to momma in a cardboard box
You better run!!
Reply
#17
(08-18-2020, 12:21 PM)Snarl Wrote: Doesn't much matter to me what people say is scientific.  None of it is science ... unless it is repeatable.  That means there's an awful lot of science ... that's just Science.

Agreed. Theoretical science to me is like Marvel comics...fun to read, but I dont take it too seriously, and it constantly debunks itself.
Reply
#18
Or simply dating old stuff can be out 800 million years

Logical
It’s 800 million years old?
Dating technology is unreliable?
Reply
#19
(08-18-2020, 01:55 PM)Raggedyman Wrote: Or simply dating old stuff can be out 800 million years

Logical
It’s 800 million years old?
Dating technology is unreliable?

as far as I'm concerned, it is unreliable. It all depends on our understanding of underlying processes, for which I claim...we know very little of. But there is a constant human thirst to pretend we understand, then we almost daily have to hide things that dont fit that understanding.
Reply
#20
(08-18-2020, 04:02 AM)PLOTUS Wrote: Reminds me of a remarkable story/event of a holy man Pamamahansa Yogananda at his death.
https://yoganandasite.wordpress.com/2017...rupt-body/ quite a story, worth a read, not very long.

Yogananda was amazing. His self realization fellowship center inos Angeles was super cool. His book Autobiography of a Yogi literally changed my life. I took a paridigm shift that I absolutely didn't see coming. Between him and Gibran I thonk my life was permanently altered.
internet Agent Provocateur
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)