Do you believe the yonaguni monument is man made or just a sunken rock?

Question

Do you believe the yonaguni monument is man made or just a sunken rock?

Answer 1

Because of what the natural rock formation looks like above water, I would have to say I doubt that it is man-made. The best that could be said is that if there are ANY man-made elements in it, that they were simply modified from what the stone already naturally displayed. Look at these photos of Yonaguni and you'll see what I mean.

http://www.toriitraining.com/ty20.jpg

http://www.toriitraining.com/iseki1.jpg

http://www.toriitraining.com/iseki2.jpg

http://www.toriitraining.com/gunkan.jpg

All of those are photos of the island directly above water at the "pyramid" site.

Answer 2

I think that there may be a possibility that it could be remnants of the lost content of Mu. However I haven't personally seen these Yanaguni structures, but it does look quite promising. Peace&love be with you...~M~

Answer 3

it looks  manmade.it has similarities to manmade scructures eg.chichen itza,mayan buildings etc!infact very little research has been done on it at all.it does seem a mystery.some research  has found the 2nd area of the terracing which is 27 meters deep ,could not have been subjected to the tidal forces as some geolists have claimed.most geologists fob it off as a freak of nature,maybe becasue there is no real explanation for it.it has been called the worlds oldest building!so some researchers believe it could be manmade!some archaeologists believe it has a step like pyramind structure.many people believe due to the regularity  of the stone faces and steps it is manmade.the rock faces appear to be dressed stone.if this is manmade it is logical to believ this was carved stone ,when the area was above sea level.the area is known for rising sea levels and it is dated to aboput 8 to 10 ,oo years old allegedly!dr,massaki kimura thinks it isnt manmade,he has dived there twice,yet he believes they are remnants of a civilised ,intelligent ,advanced culture.the best conclusion ive heard is that it could have been mostly a natural structure,but carved by man to create a city /civilisation.more research definetly needs to be done on it,to find more evidence.because it is loacted at the tropic of cancer,perhaps it was an astronomical shrine,maybe similar to the purpose of stonehenge.it is a spectacular sight to see.it has attracted a lot of attention ,which could lead to it being manmade,because of the anthrapological ,human interest and what it was designed and made for.it is alos near a volcanic region,which affects the stone,making it appear more natural,along with algi etc.my personal opinion  is its partly natural ,but carved by man and has bits added by man.