Connect with us

Ancient Code

Researchers find a rock with a carving of a Mastodon at the underwater Stonehenge of Lake Michigan

Ancient History

Researchers find a rock with a carving of a Mastodon at the underwater Stonehenge of Lake Michigan

Another incredible discovery has been made as researchers have found a rock carving of a Mastodon at the underwater Stonehenge of Lake Michigan.

In 2007, at a depth of twelve meters, researchers found a peculiar set of aligned stones that are believed to be over 10,000 years old.

While searching for shipwrecks, archeologists from the Northwestern Michigan College came across something interesting at the bottom of Lake Michigan. They found mysteriously aligned rocks placed there by ancient man before water covered the area. Researchers couldn’t believe what they were seeing upon making the discovery. It’s America’s Stonehenge.

The mysterious rock formation under Lake Michigan

The mysterious rock formation under Lake Michigan

According to researchers, the stones located at the bottom of Lake Michigan all measure the same distance across, something that wouldn’t be present if we were looking at a natural formation. The rock formation found at the bottom of Lake Michigan resembles other structures found in England and France, and even those at Nabta Playa, making it very unlikely to be a natural formation.

As if the mysterious rock formation wasn’t enough, after a diving expedition was put together to look at the stones, underwater photographer Chris Doyle found a mysterious stone with an incredible depiction of what appeared to be a Mastodon, suggesting that the carving must have been made way before the Mastodons were extinct about 10,000 years ago.

Capture ss

The Mastodon rock is perhaps one of the most incredible features of the underwater Stonehenge. Researchers speculate that the rock is made out of granite, a very hard material. For people to carve something onto this stone, they had to use a tool harder than granite. So the logical question is: What could ancient mankind have used 10.000 years ago to carve something onto a granite rock?

Researchers stress that the marks and lines that make out the mastodon figure were precisely carved, the lines were not just “scratched” onto the rock.

Mark Holley & Mastadon stone.

Mark Holley & Mastadon stone.

The incredible rock formation and the correctly aligned stones circles clearly indicate a man-made structure. The areas around Michigan are a witness of early human presence in the American continent which is believed to date back over 25.000 years. In the distant past, the Lake itself did not exist since an Ice Age ruled over the lands and what is now located at the bottom of one of the five Great Lakes of North America, was once on dry land.

The man responsible for this underwater discovery is Mark Holley, professor of underwater archeology at the Northwestern Michigan College. In 2007, he searched for shipwrecks but found, 12 meters below the surface a series of stones arranged in a circle. Adding to this amazing discovery is a relatively large rock which has, on its surface a depiction of a mastodon, an animal that became extinct around 8000 BC.

Close up of the "Mastodon Rock"

Close up of the “Mastodon Rock.”

In the region near Lake Michigan, researchers have previously discovered menhirs and petroglyphs. When the first Europeans arrived in the seventeenth century, they found that Michigan had thousands of prehistoric mounds. Scholars also found “sacred stones” across the geography of the Great Lakes, stones according to the natives were placed by another race who lived there before. Statues and stone idols erected in various parts were discovered weighing over 100 kilograms.

The underwater Stonehenge of Lake Michigan must have been created before the last Ice Age when the lake bed was dry, and that is, according to researchers, over 12.000 years ago, a time that according to history, mankind couldn’t erect such elaborate constructions.

What does this tell us about history? Is this another piece of evidence that points to the fact that history books, as we know them should be rewritten? We believe yes.


Source and reference

Lake Michigan Stonehenge

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2009-02-08/news/0902070444_1_stones-mastodon-archeologists


Article edited 25.04.2016 to add source and reference.

48 Comments
  • Ben Cerney

    Interesting

  • coopepaxon

    ✤☃☛❖< Google is paying 99$ per

    Here ­­­­­­­­­is ­­­­­­­­­I ­­­­­started

    ►►►►►►►►►► www.offerseason.com

    —————————————————–

    GO TO THE SITE –>>>CLICK NEXT TAB FOR MORE INFO AND HELP

  • patriot156

    Yes rewritten and the sooner the better.

  • Hushlizard

    Watch listen and learn GAIAMTV DAVID WILCOCK “COSMIC” WITH B .COREY ! , Have faith you’ll be surprized ! Learn.

  • Bumper

    Has the image of the purported mastodon been ‘enhanced’? It appears that an overly has been added to give a more distinct outline to the shape.

    • William Throop

      It does appear that way

    • Don Jensen
    • Good eye.

    • JohnChristianJr

      Totally has been enhanced. I saw this on a TV show this over the summer (maybe it was a segment on “Expedition Unknown” or “America Unearthed”??), and it had zero enhancement and it was the exact same color as the rest of the rock —and you could barely make it out. It’s completely deceptive to only show pictures of it this way. I remember after the show, I decided that it LOOKED like it could arguably be a mastodon, but I thought it was definitely natural and a coincidence. Just like the rest of this “Stonehenge” on the bottom of the lake. Anyway, though, those “enhanced pictures” are definitely ridiculous.

      • Laqudis

        I guess your forgetting that the stones were all measured to be the same distance across, something you would never find “in nature”….

        • G Hubbard

          Don’t confuse him with math….

    • highwaterjane60

      I wondered the same thing. On the other hand, a few weeks ago, I attended a seminar. An archeologist has developed software that brings up the color on ancient pictographs, so there is at least a possibility that this photo is an accurate representation of what was put there by the artist.

  • RoJoyInc

    If posting this enhanced photo – you should also post the ORIGINAL. Maybe someone really is dreaming and this enhanced? photo doesn’t let us decide for ourselves. Also if this “circle” was created before the glaciers moved in and receded to create the great lakes… why were they not pushed and pulled by the glacial movement? Huge stones and boulders were plowed in and out with the ice. Something left these in the circle without moving any?

    • Don Jensen

      I believe your answer is in the timeline. The glaciers started their retreat some 14 thousand years ago and took several thousand years to fully retreat. The carved basin it left behind would fill up with water eventually, but between that retreat and today, the lake levels have changed dramatically. Ten thousand years ago, the lake was 100 feet lower than today’s levels. So the timing is actually right.

  • Jim Michon

    From another article, but here is the pic.

  • George Watkins

    It goes to show that people can “see” what they wish to see.

  • Sam

    The timeline fits and the discovery is huge, what’s wrong with the deniars of reality? Seems they are also the types that believe in Al Gore’s fictional story of Man Made Global Warming which conflicts with this evidence too…deniars of science and believers in the religion cult of Man Made-up Climate Change – LOL! Climate change happens cyclically and man has nothing to do with it. AGW is a SCAM ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

    • Tim Tellefsen

      You’re either trolling or have made the choice to ignore empirical evidence. http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

      • Sam

        The hypothesis of man made up climate change has failed to hold up to solid science demands of testing the hypothesis. Therefore, the Failed hypothesis was nothing more than a wet dream of the controllers who presented it, and still do for cash, which by definition defines it to be a SCAM…
        Besides the empirical evidence of the earth actually cooling proves the earth is not warming as predicted by the same control freaks for cash with their failed hypothesis – wake up, the polar bears and the snow Al Gore etal said would be dead and gone by now are still with us and multiplying…admit you have been taken and move on.

        • Tim Tellefsen

          Congratulations! You have won the daily tin foil hat award!

    • Uncle Arty

      man has nothing to do with it? 7billion people 1.3billon vehicles on roads, not to mention all the production to supply that amount of energy, and we aren’t having an impact? You need to do the rest of the world a fucking favor and wrap your lips around your exhaust pipe and inhale deeply. (hits dumb bastard with a 3rd grade earth science book)

      • Sam

        Pollution does not cause climatic changes one way or the other – no sane man likes pollution but, pollution does not cause the weather to change…never has and never will. You must have fell for the emotional rhetoric spewed by Al Gore in his fictional movie of drowning polar bears and all of that nonsense…where he also happens to be a main benefactor with the other rip off scheme of cap and trade. Most people are waking up to the fraudsters who have been peddling the fiction and of the SCAM that makes up the man made global warming pitch.

        • Uncle Arty

          Never said anything about pollution, here’s the deal, co2 is a green house gas. The last time co2 count was this high was 65million years ago. for the last 50,000 to 60,000 years the count leveled off to about 265ppm until the industrial revolution, in the last 250 years the co2 has doubled. all that oil we drill for refine into fuel and put back into the atmosphere was all the carbon from 65million years ago. To sit there and actually believe that it’s not happening is just fucking ignorant, to actually believe we aren’t the cause is fucking arrogant

          • Sam

            The “tail pipe” term you used equates to fear hysteria and of course pollution which places the entire emotional wind baggery into the chasm of the deeply flawed psydo-science category. The VOSTOK Ice Core Samples prove the exact opposite on the CO2 claims made as well. “The bottom line is that rising temperatures cause carbon levels to
            rise. Carbon may still influence temperatures, but these ice cores are
            neutral on that. If both factors caused each other to rise
            significantly, positive feedback would become exponential. We’d see a
            runaway greenhouse effect. It hasn’t happened. Some other factor is more
            important than carbon dioxide, or carbon’s role is minor.” You need to think about the scam being placed on all of us here with the preposterous claims that have a failed scientific scrutiny all for control and of course for cash – because that’s all it is.

          • Hey “scientists”o you remember the 70’s? Back then the ‘climatologists were telling us, just the opposite. If we didn’t reduce pollution and carbon emissions. We would be entering a new ‘ice age’ around the new millennium. Then all of a sudden it wasn’t an ‘ice age’ we were worried about. But rather a sudden dire prediction that we ‘heating up’.
            We were going to be past the point of no return, by 2015, if major changes weren’t made.
            Well it is 2016, and we are not any worse off then we were in 1990.

            Now if you also take into account that there are government documents from thr 1960’s, that talk about the potential need to increase tax revenue to fund government.
            One of the methods suggested was a ‘carbon tax’.
            Man made climate change is the only way they could push such a tax. And as Sam pointed out. Mr. Gore secured the controlling interest in the “Carbon credit exchange”, before he embarked on his global warming campaign.
            The “scientists” who push global warming, are all government funded scientists who are “paid” to prove global warming.
            It has also been proven that both ‘NOAA’ & ‘NASA’, chief climatologists have both been cought falsifying global temperature data. The fact that those that are 100% behind man made global warming, want any scientific evidence that contradicts their theory censored. And the scientist silanced. Should raise suspicion about their motives.

            Also the claim that the ice caps are melting at the poles, has also proven false. Over the last 10 years, the ice caps have actually gotten thicker.

          • I have never read so much nonsense! Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the primary greenhouse gas emitted through human activities, and it creates a feedback loop that increases global warming. The polar ice cap as a whole is shrinking. Images from NASA satellites show that the area of permanent ice cover is contracting at a rate of 9 percent each decade. If this trend continues, summers in the Arctic could become ice-free by the end of the century.

          • Ian Prest

            water droplets are larger cocentration of ghg than co2

  • Jonathan

    Is flint and/or obsidian harder than granite? This would not be too hard imo.

  • Albert Griggs

    Buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut. If it was built before the ice age why didn’t the glaciers destroy it? HAD to be AFTER the ice age.

    • truthseekershill

      Unless the Great Lakes were not actually formed by glaciers alone as geologists presume.

  • Metatron Dodecahedron

    bs

  • People’sArmy

    i need scale contrast ?

  • Melissa Eller

    Different angle:

    • truthbeatold

      You were so excited to post this image thinking you’d get so many up votes and comments. And now, nothing but disappointment. Try a Hillary face and see if that garners a more enthusiastic response.

      • Melissa Eller

        Ah, finally, I can pull this corn cob out of my ass. Thanks.

        • truthbeatold

          No problem. Glad I could help with your corn cob.

  • Bonicushead

    While the formation has clear value in further examinations and study, the Mastodon is basically meaningless, at least as meaningless as any optically determined form within the clouds.
    Not only would I rather see a side by side without the enhancement, but I would prefer to see it without the enhancement period…like a link to the enhancement, because once your brain has interpreted what the eye is seeing, it’s almost impossible to “unsee” the image within the abstract.

    Look at the enhancement lines that form the Mastodon…many continue along the same direction, while others part with the form, themselves continuing on…and both do so without any point for the continuation or deviation.

    This is no different that seeing skulls in wood grain…look at it long enough, he might start seeing faces of people.

    And what is with the enhancement in the middle of the body…is that supposed to be a wing?
    And what is that below the wing, just behind the front leg…is that a (p)enis? Why is it up on his body…that can’t make things too easy…no wonder their gone.

    Anyways, on a serious note, I see many lines within the outline not used that make as much sense as the ones that were.

    I hope the idiocy of the Mastodon doesn’t stop real research. If they think for a moment there is any type of bigfoot nut factor, all professionals will never go near it.

  • joegecko

    Mastodon ears are quite a bit smaller, then elephant ears, who ever did the overlay, should have known this.

  • Franklin Bacon

    Who are the red giants? Were they similar to Vikings or something else?

  • Rachel Chatterton

    No sources? Doesn’t sound very legitimate to me. Back up your story and I might believe it. Might.

  • Anyone who knows anything about mastodons knows that they don’t look anything like that. Also, why is it that this one rock is not covered with algae and plants, whereas all the other ones (shown in videos) are? Anyone taken in by this obvious hoax is a buffoon.

  • Fuzzybunny

    A “stonehenge” is not a thing.
    Stonehenge is a set of stones in the south of England.
    Aligned stones, standing stones, monoliths, a henge (not in this case) etc. can all be used but you can’t call it a stonehenge.

Subscribe to Ancient Code

Enter your email address to subscribe to Ancient Code and receive notifications of new articles by email.

Join 9,902 other subscribers

Visit our Spanish website

Popular on AC

To Top