Theory on the enigma of the demolition of America past.


This topic has been intriguing to me but also dreadful as I continue to get an overwhelming feeling of the dark truth. My theory is this...We are aware that prior to the invasion of the British, the majority of America was split between indigenous people, Spanish, and French (primarily). They claim NAPOLEON "sold" Louisiana which led to the Victory of America etc. For some reason I just can't shake the feeling that this isn't true. That some huge deceptive act occurred and led to our downfall, DESTRUCTION and enslavement. Could the area once known as LOUISIANE had been the "final frontier" or "Armageddon"? We always get these "two sided major wars and events" like EAST AND WEST ROME, NORTH AND SOUTH, REPUBLIC VS DEMOCRACY, REVOLUTIONS AND CIVIL WARS.. well with this in mind I look at the world during the time between the French Revolution and WW1 and how drastic of a change we underwent. Now think about the "fall of Rome" followed by "dark ages". The original LONDON BRIDGE was said to had been built by Romans. Could this bridge had connected London and New York? LONDON BRIDGES FALLING DOWN. This "fall" put "west rome" aka Europe into a DARK AGE. No power, no communication, etc. Now they say the Renaissance was because Europe finally regained some of the knowledge of the Greeks/Romans...could this had been the knowledge of the route to the West or how to turn the "lights" back on? Could these Expositions (sounds a lot like EXPOSE) be the re lighting of the cities and/or the conquering of them and the plundering of their spoils?! Like huge liquidation sales? Or it could be looked at as how they say in ancient times when the treasury got low or in times of war, the Emperor or King would take the art like Gold and Jewels etc to be melted down for money or trade and for weapons. Could we all be prisoners of war? They also mention that AMERICA was prior to the purchase ONLY THE 13 COLONY STATES and the rest was FRENCH pretty much and that when the surveyors were going around and checking out their new land buy they were HORRIFIED by what they saw... WHITES, COLORED, AND INDIANS all DRUNK IN THE STREETS TOGETHER AND LIVING EXTRAVAGANT LIKE KINGS AND HAVING BALLS EVERY NIGHT. THEY HAD WEALTH AND GRAND HOUSES AND THE SLAVES WERENT REALLY MUCH SLAVES AT ALL!! This they ran and reported back to the KING IN EUROPE and the demolition and suppression began..sorry if this is all over the place I'm just trying to throw the idea out there and hopefully some of you can help me build on it or connect some seemingly unconnected dots!


*SideNote the "London Bridge" could've been some land mass that was between America and Europe in the Atlantic. I think about that strange "Transatlantic" accent they used in early Tv/media that they say was something made-up for the sake of TV and it wasnt real. It was a combination of AMERICAN AND BRITISH English. Maybe this strange accent/culture came from the missing center of their triangle Empire A Transatlantic place (like the Capital in Hunger Games) that was purposefully destroyed or victim of cataclysm?

Old New Orleans...looks like a Palace

Allegedly just "Costumes"

The people from those eras looked so different...
almost "otherworldly"

Supposedly just a "movie set"

Another alleged costume

Old post office in St Louis...who built this??

Supposedly just a movie set that was destroyed
and buried in California after filming

More "costumes"

Yep... "costume"

Another building supposedly made
temporarily for the worlds fair

Colossal statue made for the "fair" it was torn down by the US NAVY.
Her name was "Pacifica" an American Icon I've oddly

NEVER heard of

Strange how they were OBSESSED with old religions...
strange way to represent "America"..

Where did America go??

Hmm Greco-Roman float to represent America..?

A close up view of some of the float... gladiators and such....
Last edited:


View attachment 12303another building supp osedly made temporarily for the worlds fair View attachment 12304colossal statue made for the "fair" it was torn down by the US NAVY. Her name was "Pacifica" an American Icon I've oddly NEVER heard of
View attachment 12305strange how they were OBSESSED with old religions...strange way to represent "America"..
View attachment 12309where did America go??
View attachment 12307hmm greco/Roman float to represent America..?View attachment 12308a close up view of some of the float...gladiators and such....

More "fair architecture"

Up close picture of "Pacifica"
Here are some pictures of the Intolerance set being built. It looks like a set to me but who really knows. View attachment 12312View attachment 12311

They've also partially recreated it at Hollywood and Highland in 2001, for what it's worth.
View attachment 12313
I notice a lot of things are destroyed and "rebuilt" or partially salvaged...also during the archeological boom of the early 1900s they would rebuild a lot of the ruins..right, who knows


Well-known member
View attachment 12303 another building supp osedly made temporarily for the worlds fair View attachment 12304 colossal statue made for the "fair" it was torn down by the US NAVY. Her name was "Pacifica" an American Icon I've oddly NEVER heard of
View attachment 12305 strange how they were OBSESSED with old religions...strange way to represent "America"..
View attachment 12309 where did America go??
View attachment 12307 hmm greco/Roman float to represent America..?View attachment 12308a close up view of some of the float...gladiators and such....
View attachment 12314 more "fair architecture"
View attachment 12315 up close picture of "Pacifica"

I notice a lot of things are destroyed and "rebuilt" or partially salvaged...also during the archeological boom of the early 1900s they would rebuild a lot of the ruins..right, who knows
From what I read, D.W. Griffith's intolerance was made in 1916 and the set wasn't torn down until three years later when it was said to be "in ruins". It is interesting that the movie is basically a story of our history; from Babylon to America. So the movie could have actually served as a way to kill two birds with one stone, so to speak. Use existing architecture as a set and then tell a false history with it. I will say that either way, they certainly don't make movie sets like they used to. ha. Look how there are people standing by the elephants (which DW Griffith insisted on having for some reason).


Active member
Awesome post! This quote was going to be part of a thread I am working on but it is entirely relevant to your "London Bridge" theory so here you go:

"For these histories tell of a mighty power which unprovoked made an expedition against the whole of Europe and Asia, and to which your city put an end. This power came forth out of the Atlantic Ocean, for in those days the Atlantic was navigable; and there was an island situated in front of the straits which are by you called the Pillars of Heracles; the island was larger than Libya and Asia put together, and was the way to other islands, and from these you might pass to the whole of the opposite continent which surrounded the true ocean...
Now in this island of Atlantis there was a great and wonderful empire which had rule over the whole island and several others, and over parts of the continent, and, furthermore, the men of Atlantis had subjected the parts of Libya within the columns of Heracles as far as Egypt, and of Europe as far as Tyrrhenia."

Monkwee: reminds me of the post from @KorbenDallas regarding the true meaning of Tyrant

"This vast power, gathered into one, endeavoured to subdue at a blow our country and yours and the whole of the region within the straits; and then, Solon, your country shone forth, in the excellence of her virtue and strength, among all mankind. She was pre-eminent in courage and military skill, and was the leader of the Hellenes. And when the rest fell off from her, being compelled to stand alone, after having undergone the very extremity of danger, she defeated and triumphed over the invaders, and preserved from slavery those who were not yet subjugated, and generously liberated all the rest of us who dwell within the pillars. But afterwards there occurred violent earthquakes and floods; and in a single day and night of misfortune all your warlike men in a body sank into the earth, and the island of Atlantis in like manner disappeared in the depths of the sea. For which reason the sea in those parts is impassable and impenetrable, because there is a shoal of mud in the way; and this was caused by the subsidence of the island." - From the Timaeus by Plato.

I have so many questions after reading this and I hope you find it as interesting as I have!


Very interesting thread. And yes, North America was very French not too long ago. And Canada('New France') was a lot bigger.....

This would be why Canada took in slaves 'the underground railroad', took in many French 'US' citizens during the civil war, took in US Vietnam draft dodgers.... these were originally Canada's people that were stolen?...


Don't you love old maps :)


New member
I looked for the most suitable thread to ask these questions in. I wasn't sure where was best. Please move this if you can to one you think is more suitable if not here. I have many questions interesting threads of thought. That , as I observe this strange thing ive seen since january 2019. The clear evidence , breathtaking images of all the ''world fairs'' in north America. I realise we have been lied to. Mudflood, for another thread, also raises serious red flags for me. Anyway I will post my questions here. Please advise if i should hve created a brand new post for these.....strange interdimensional thoughts
Could it be the anomalies that dont add up in Seattle and other places could be a kind of Time and Space ''dimensional stitching'' where another reality gets inserted? I have read this kind of thing before. And that it is forces from outside this dimension literally ''programming in '' stitching in new timelines/reality.

But what of the Chicago White City for example which is surreal, looks hauntingly like some other civilisation that just doesn't exist today, those immense beautiful buildings. Those world fairs , expecting us to believe they got built so fast then demolished not long after. Was surely just a linear predictable thing these evil men did.? How can there be mandela like effects with regards to the world fairs appearing then disappearing. Sleight of hand and demolishing was going on.

Could these incredible Atlantean cities of Chicago, St Louis, San Francisco and others have snly started to appear out of nowehere in this reality timeline, wjen realities bleed into each other? A far out thought. But seeing as Mandela effect is being discussed I have some feelings and suspicions. Ive also read elsewhere when new landmasses rise up out the sea, or diseappear, it has to do with the changing of earths frequency and there are various dimensional versions of earth, Terra, Gaia, and other names too.

Somene also told me too, at the end of each decade, such as in the 20th century and then the Y2K thing, we have had some kind of dimensional reset. Done by hyperdimensional technology. Ill send this comment onto my friend to se if he can offer better explanation than im giving.


Active member
Could it be the anomalies that dont add up in Seattle and other places could be a kind of Time and Space ''dimensional stitching'' where another reality gets inserted? I have read this kind of thing before. And that it is forces from outside this dimension literally ''programming in '' stitching in new timelines/reality.
I have no idea, but I've thought similar things myself. I was an Anthropology/Archaeology major in college, found the Newearth channel a few years ago and was introduced to sites I'd never seen before. Places like Star Forts that I'd never seen before- which is really interesting because there's one in NY and I could almost swear it wasn't a Star Fort when I was a kid. Reality is acting strange. You might want to check out Lone Eagle on Youtube, he's saying something similar these days.


New member
I am not sure if there was a 'land bridge' between North America and Europe or that these buildings appeared as a result of some kind of reality collapse where these buildings fall into our reality (or vice versa). Even though I'm an ardent Platonist, I have always been skeptical of the myth of Atlantis as nothing more than a cautionary tale against the hubris of civilization, but this has me thinking. Maybe they are Atlantean though? Perhaps the north American continent was in fact the mythical Atlantis, and it had multiple cities? The cities do appear to make eager use of waterways (a feature of mother Atlantis as well). I am not convinced of the Tartary hypothesis myself, but maybe there was an Atlantean Empire whose hegemony, if not outright jurisdiction, nearly spanned the entire globe and left its influence to western Eurasia and to a lesser extent, eastern Eurasia, who preserved to some extent the Atlantean memory along with its technical and cultural attributes, up until more recent times, with the last remaining province of this culture that fought to the death being Tartary?

I have always been fascinated by the expositions, specifically for their architecture. Something about them being built up and then torn down shortly after never really resonated with me as it seemed wasteful and excessive even for the 'Gilded Age', but I never stopped to reconsider their entire context. The buildings at these 'expositions' shine far brighter than the other Beaux-Arts buildings that were supposedly constructed by the same men. I am not an architect nor a professional architecture historian (I do like to consider myself an amateur student of architecture though), but I have noticed that the term 'Beaux-Arts' appears to denote most buildings outside of Europe that would generally be considered simply neoclassical in Europe, it appears to be an effort to separate them in a periodized category. I would differentiate Beaux-Arts and Neoclassical from 'ancient' classical simply because the former two appear to be a natural progression of the latter which is less decorative although equally ornate.

I had to ask myself: if these buildings are supposed to be the apogee of the style, why not keep them? In some cases, they appear to have done so. Why not build more in a similar style? If the Burnham plan for Chicago is more than just a nice piece of early 20th century concept art then it may well have been possible that plans were in place, but somehow Chicago settled for the 'Chicago school' industrial style instead. The Beaux-Arts buildings we have don't hold a candle to what was built for the expos and the ones that survived the expo also appear to be much more drab (I guess the paint wore off?). Surely they could have been repurposed? A lot of buildings today are repurposed. The attitude that this aesthetic is outdated and 'of its time' didn't become a trend until the Interbellum period, and one which sadly persists today in the architecture industry. The aforementioned can be satisfied by simply accepting the mainstream narrative but the mainstream narrative itself remains unsatisfying.

Aside from aesthetics, one begs to ask the question: what is the purpose of these buildings if they were not exhibition halls? It's a perfectly valid question. Truthfully, they make no sense in the context of American urban planning if we are to consider expos are in fact cities in their own right. The buildings are given the name 'palace' which seems to be a catch-all in later times for any large, 'palatial' building even if it isn't a palace proper (this is a common practice in Europe; and it appears that usage of royal-related terminology was used in earnest prior to the Civil War). The palaces could very well function in a manner similar to the Roman basilica in its traditional sense, a public hall or 'multi purpose' building that could house judicial courts, gatherings, act as marketplaces to sell goods, and a whole host of other uses. Other possibilities could include a bath or spa of some sort, or even a hospital. We only see the insides of just a handful of these buildings, not all of them. Why? Especially if they host a great deal of great contraptions and innovations? It is unfortunate that I don't live in any of these cities to rummage through archival photos. Although I think Chicago 1893 has a book or two, which I may avail myself of in the future. Some of these places had over 1,000 buildings. Some of the smaller buildings do display the qualities of a temporary structure, especially the ones that are built in contextually exotic architectural styles like Japanese or Egyptian.

The layouts of these cities remind me of the grids of Roman colonies, which were usually laid out in rectilinear grid fashion when compared to the 'medieval' organic grids of Europe; especially Roman colonies in areas that were not constrained by geography; another hallmark of these cities are their broad thoroughfares, something the flat land gave an advantage for if comparing to European cities. What's even more remarkable is that it wasn't just one exposition, but a succession of multiple expositions. It would be more believable if only one exposition was constructed in the manner of a city. The Pan-Pac exposition in San Francisco 1915 has buildings that appear to be so quintessentially Roman in such a way they look like they were simply ripped up from 6th century Constantinople and placed near the mouth of San Francisco Bay. And the 'quadriga' seen in Buffalo 1901 appears to have been the centerpiece of some kind of 'triumph' parade (celebrating a military conquest?); similar parades happened during World Wars I (also complete with magnificent and ornate arch, also claimed to be made of plaster) and II (although no arch for the latter), but nothing after that.

It's said the Chicago 1893 exposition was an exhibit itself, representing the industry of urban planning. It was supposed to be a model for the City Beautiful movement, a philosophy and urban planning movement intended to create cities for people and culture ('civic cities') over mere commerce, an agenda which appears to have been inexplicably abandoned. Was it too expensive? Up until recent times, it would seem that there's no issue building a lot of structures that would be considered extravagant in terms of economics. But even then, how much is the world being ripped off for if we suddenly can't 'afford' to build 'like we used to'? Today we have ended up with highly commercial cities rather than these cultural or civic cities. Commercial is an understatement actually, considering current events; cities like New York salivating for the affections of big business. In fact the whole idea of civic community is abandoned, save for small social groups like charities and individualist activism in the postwar era. It is said that money talks, and I would bet that a radical culture shift happened. As a whole, we value the cheapest common denominator moreso now than ever before.

All in all, the series of expositions began during the Civil War, gained traction during the late Reconstruction Era and the Gilded Age, and then radically changed in nature after the Interbellum period, becoming much more easily believable as fairs. Architecture doesn't just reflect culture it also nurtures it. I'm sure some of these questions have been asked but it does make one wonder.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Npcghost Aliens and UFO's 1
Tonep General 40

Similar threads