Yonaguni Jinks

This is an interesting presentation of the lump of rock @Graham__Hancock and others see as some kind of a "monument". The "site" takes on a totally different aspect when you see it in the context of its surroundings: 

Draining the Younaguni "Monument" National Geographic TV June 2018

 The Yonaguni monument is impossible to investigate fully by

diving. With the help of survey technology, we can drain away

the water to  show the exact details  of this mysterious structure.

Look how it can be seen that this is just a portion of the same rock as behind - stripped by storms during Holocene marine transgression (the base of the so-called "monument" according to Graham Hancock is at -27 m b.s.l. the top is higher). Such a level would mean that it was submerged only after c. 10000 Kya. This four-minute film shows the same type of formations created by natural erosion all over the island (pseudoarchaeology mumbo-jumbo for first half):

The truth behind Japan's mysterious 'Atlantis'   Video by Naotomo Umewaka
BBC 23 February 2022

Beneath the coastal waters of the Japanese island of Yonaguni lies a series of mysterious rock formations. Since its discovery nearly 35 years ago, the strangely symmetrical shapes and structures of the 'Yonaguni Monument' have led to fierce debate over its true origins.

Could the odd shapes of this structure really have been carved by a lost Japanese civilisation many thousands of years ago, or is it just a stunning example of natural geology deep beneath the sea?

 In order to convince their audiences that there is some "mystery" here,the pseudo-archaeologist alternative-reality grifters will just show you cherry-picked bits of the whole [photos with no proper scale or north points], that "look like" "steps" (some 2m high!), or "terraces"....

..Or what purport to be 3d representations of the whole (looking a bit like the Athens Acropolis, no?) that deceitfully don't give a real impression of what is actually there...

@Graham_Hancock had dived there 130 times in 1997-2003, and claims that he was doing "research" on it. But has NEVER published a proper plan of the whole complex in its environment, not even a detailed sonar scan. Yet that should be the starting point of any discussion. He criticises (2003 Underworld) "armchair archaeologists" and "armchair geologists" who look at the evidence presented so far and decide that it is a natural lump of rock, "without ever having dived there like me" https://youtu.be/l5xqp28KjLk?si=swnKD0iODA6_pYxP

It seems to never have occurred to him that if he had better DOCUMENTED the site he's been "investigating" (now for 27+ years), he'd have a better chance of convincing the rest of us there is something to even consider there.

"more than 10000 BP"? The top of this wave-cut platform /transgressive surface [which is CLEARLY what this is] is only a few metres down, but the base of the "monument" (Masaaki Kimura's "path") acc. to GH (2003) is only 27m below sea level - corresponding to HOLOCENE sea levels.

And in fact if you trawl through the 600 pages of the self-centred, repetitive, wordy, inconclusive and disjointed "Underworld" (NOT recommended), you'll see that ALL of the "monuments" (ha ha) it describes have similar depths, all HOLOCENE-compliant. Not a single one that would have been built before and then submerged in the Younger Dryas, let alone preceding Allerød (if they want to claim they submerged due to "tectonic activity", that'd make them LATER).

No more surmises, or claims you are "just asking questions" and smokescreens, time for facts now please Mr Hancock!