Atlantis' Existence and Place On Earth

[BL4CKCR4Y0NS]

(sorry if this is in the wrong section, or if this does not belong on these forums)

A friend of mine told me a while back that although the location of Atlantis is unknown, it is likely that it existed in the middle of the Seven Wonders of the World. (I naturally assumed he meant the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World because Atlantis "disappeared" long before the Medieval/Modern times)

I was just wondering whether there was any significant evidence that suggests this.

(and if anybody knows, could they please post a short description of what Atlantis is and who Plato is? All I know if that Atlantis was an island and Plato was a philosopher)

[Ivan Seeking]

I believe the only known Atlantis claims come from Plato. There is no conclusive historical evidence supporting these claims. Many people believe the story is fiction.

[Andre]

That's correct, some more information.

Atlantis is only mentioned in Plato's Timaeus and Critias (http://www.activemind.com/Mysterious/Topics/Atlantis/timaeus_and_critias.html) and claims that the story is told by Solon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solon), who heard it from an Egyptian priest. Plato's dating (9000 years before Solon's visit) brings it very close to the very turbulent end of the Younger Dryas, but this is likely just a coincidence.

The detailed describtions of the place don't lead to any existing area, hence Atlantis has been located just about everywhere on the globe. But then again, the original manuscripts have disappeared a long time ago and discussions about correct interpretations are ongoing.

One of the many speculations is that Atlantis is a fiction based on the invasions of the sea peoples (http://www.saudiaramcoworld.com/issue/199503/who.were.the.sea.people..htm) and that Solon may have seen the inscriptions about that history in the Medinet Habu temple (http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/habu.htm).

[CEL]

For a good skeptical analysis of Atlantis myth see:
http://www.skepdic.com/atlantis.html

[waht]

There is evidence of volcanic eruptions and there is an ancient city dug out from ashes on one of Greek's hundreds of islands, forgot what's it called.

If there was ever an origin of the story of Atlantis, it could have been an island off Greece, wiped out by volcanic eruptions. Then as usual, myths and legends follow saying it was a super advanced civilization bigger than Africa and what not.

[mgb_phys]

The theory is that it was based on the Minoan civilsation on Crete who were rather spectacularly inconvenienced by the tsunami following Santorini erupting around 1500BCE

[waht]

Minoan settlement on Santorini:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akrotiri_%28Santorini%29

Akrotiri is the name of an excavation site of a Minoan Bronze Age settlement on the Greek island of Santorini, associated with the Minoan civilization due to inscriptions in Linear A, and close similarities in artifact and fresco styles[1]. The excavation is named for a modern Greek village situated on a hill nearby. The name of the site in antiquity is unknown. It was buried by a volcanic eruption in the middle of the second millennium BC[2] (during the Late Minoan IA period). As a result, it is remarkably well-preserved. Frescoes[3], pottery, furniture, advanced drainage systems and three-storey buildings have been discovered at the site

[KrisOhn]

There is evidence of volcanic eruptions and there is an ancient city dug out from ashes on one of Greek's hundreds of islands, forgot what's it called.


You wouldn't be referring to the eruption of Mt. Vesuvius in 79 AD would you?
Vesuvius (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Vesuvius)

I know the dates and places are quite off, but there's a chance, since you don't know the name and there is a massive excavation going on in the cities destroyed by that eruption.

[Cryptonic]

Atlantis is probably as real as Troy or Sodom & Gomorrah... In other words, it probably existed. I saw a convincing doccumentary that placed it in the Andes. An archeological site with concentric "moats" and a central temple/city etc.

[Evo]

Atlantis is probably as real as Troy or Sodom & Gomorrah... In other words, it probably existed. I saw a convincing doccumentary that placed it in the Andes. An archeological site with concentric "moats" and a central temple/city etc.I would say that a city in the mountains of South America would be an unlikely spot.

[MotoH]

Atlantis is probably as real as Troy or Sodom & Gomorrah... In other words, it probably existed. I saw a convincing doccumentary that placed it in the Andes. An archeological site with concentric "moats" and a central temple/city etc.

They have found a massive wall that is believed to be the city of Troy.

[BL4CKCR4Y0NS]

I would say that a city in the mountains of South America would be an unlikely spot.
I'm just saying here, I'm not criticising your statement but I just wanted to know, why do you think that it's unlikely?

[Evo]

I'm just saying here, I'm not criticising your statement but I just wanted to know, why do you think that it's unlikely?Because there is no record of trade or travel between South America and Greece back then.

[CEL]

Because there is no record of trade or travel between South America and Greece back then.

Especially the Pacific side of South America.
But the Atlanteans were supposedly so advanced, that they could have built the Canal of Panama, twelve thousand years ago, when the rest of the humans were just discovering agriculture.

[BL4CKCR4Y0NS]

This is making me more and more curious about Atlantis ... where can I read what Plato wrote about it?

[Sacnoth XIII]

This is making me more and more curious about Atlantis ... where can I read what Plato wrote about it?

In the link they gave you above.

http://www.skepdic.com/atlantis.html
________

Also, you all should know some myths have been proven to be based loosely on facts: city of Troy for example now that you mentioned.

A Spanish scientist made a theory about Atlantis and says it's possible it was placed on Spain. He is going to publish his book in the next days. It seems Solon, Plato's ancestor and one of the seven greek sages according to Pausanias, had Spanish ancestry. Maybe he got the legend from them.

Sorry about my English, my first language is Spanish.

[DaveC426913]

...it is likely that it existed in the middle of the Seven Wonders of the World... As a tangent to the Atlantis question, I kind of wonder what the above means.

The Seven Wonders of the World were fairly recently designated, they are all over the world, and I don't know how anything could be "in the middle of" them.

[hamster143]

Especially the Pacific side of South America.
But the Atlanteans were supposedly so advanced, that they could have built the Canal of Panama, twelve thousand years ago, when the rest of the humans were just discovering agriculture.

There's also no evidence of interbreeding between Greeks and natives of South America. Those are some of the most genetically distant human populations on Earth and signs of interbreeding should be clear.

[CEL]

There's also no evidence of interbreeding between Greeks and natives of South America. Those are some of the most genetically distant human populations on Earth and signs of interbreeding should be clear.

Well, according to Plato, the Atlanteans were not Greek, but their enemies.
Of course, 10 thousand years, before Plato, there were no Greeks anywhere.

[Valkyr]

One thing that many people over look is the time frame that Atlantis exsisted in. With over looking this vital piece of information is where the whole thing breaks down into mythology and legend.
There is one one magic word that make the whole Atlantis argument make perfect sence and makes Atlantis very real.

"Paleoclimatology"

Now with this very handy word in mind, let us look at the time frame in question. Of coarse this is about 11,000 BCE or 13,000 years ago. Naurally this plants us at the end of the ice age. Three very large things happened 13,000 years ago, or in point of fact, 12,900 years ago. We are talking about the Younger Dryas catastrophys and near immediate return of the ice age. Scientists have been able to conclude that this final glaciation called the Younger Dryas came about in just six months. As I mentioned, three large catastrophic occurances happened 12,900 years ago:

1. The release of Lake Agassiz
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Agassiz

2. The Younger Dryas Impact Event
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Younger_Dryas_event

3. Galactic Super Wave cycle
http://www.etheric.com/LaViolette/Predict.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oURVtGKW420

Now with the ice age aspect in mind entwinned with the study of ancient human cultures and civilizations, you can eliminate one by one possible places on Earth for Atlantis. For example you can eliminate all places above 30 to 35 degrees North laititude. You can also eliminate Antarctica. Both locations' temperatures range from -30*F to -160*F. These locations to not seem to be very hospitable for ancient civilizations, especially in North America. That leaves us with three locations; The Azores, Thera (next to Creet), and the Caribbean. Also one must keep in mind the water levels of the planet back then. The water level were about 400 feet lower globally than they are now. So, if you look at some maps of back then you will see much more land mass coverage than you see now.

~~Azores? Nope! I have 3 reasons for this..... 1. The land mass coverage of the Azores is not that different now than it was 12,900 years ago. 2. There is no eveidence found of ice age human civilizations. 3. Its out in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean where temperatures would be very harsh.

~~Thera? Nope! Reason 1. Its the wrong time frame. Yes admittedly there is a very good argument of the differences in numerical systems and languages. 2. This is of coarse the fall of the Minoan People 3. It has a great location latitude wise, but there is no evidence of an ice age civilization. 4. In the old legends, you will never find that Atlantis exploded. It is said that Atlantis "sank".

~~The Caribbean? YES! (in my humble opinion anyway) I have many reasons why I say this...
1. Perfect location North Latitude wise
2. If you look at the paleoclimatology and the land mass exposure during the ice age, it is ideal
3. If you go into the old Mayan, Aztec, and ancient Caribbean Islander histories told to Columbus, it details a celectial impact, earthquakes, flooding, the ocean swollowing up very large amounts of land, the deaths of thousands upon thouands of people, and there has been artifacts recovered from the Caribbean area that date 13,000 years old and older. One such artifact is at least 13,000 years old. It is a stone map of the planet that details the different land mass coverage during that time. This map is indeed complete. It shows ALL continents including Antarctica. People widely dismiss, discredit, and deny this map because of the out dated mentality of our favorite idiot Christopher Columbus "discovering America and prooving the Earth is round". You history students will know the Columbus and that flat Earth thing is a lie but some people don't know that so here ya go. That tale was made up in this book by Washington Irving in 1828, but for some retarted reason the lie became fact and that is what we are tought as fact in school. Weird huh?:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Life_and_Voyages_of_Christopher_Columbus

I can site many groups of people who came to America and/or maping the planet going all the way back to 50,000 years ago. I'll spare you, but they are indeed historical facts. If you're interested message me or look it up yourself. I find doing my own research to be very rewarding.

As mentioned above, there are indeed artifacts found but some are out right denied. You geologists, paleontologists, anthropologists, and archeologists know this because it threatens the "popularly accepted history" and fractures preceptions of ancient peoples and civilizations. But facts are facts, these artfacts exist, like it or not they have been tested and verified. :biggrin:

For more info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Younger_Dryas
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clovis_culture
and look up for other interesting history and artifacts:
Michael Cremo
Klaus Dona
Graham Hancock

Take care and be well everyone!

[hamster143]

Well, according to Plato, the Atlanteans were not Greek, but their enemies.
Of course, 10 thousand years, before Plato, there were no Greeks anywhere.

Does not matter. Any pre-Columbian interactions between residents of the Mediterranean and residents of South America had to result in gene mixing in one or both directions.

Based on the data we have, aside from some peculiarities associated with mitochondrial haplogroup X (which could be interpreted as evidence of stone age interactions between Ice Age Europeans and native Americans of eastern Canada), all evidence indicates that all of America was settled by people who crossed the Bering land bridge and then descended down the west coast of Canada shortly after the end of the last Ice Age 12,000 years ago, and never intermarried with any westerners before the arrival of Columbus. Conversely, the only places where native American haplogroups, such as Q1a3a, have ever been observed, are North and South America and some Polynesian islands.

[Andre]

all evidence indicates that all of America was settled by people who crossed the Bering land bridge and then descended down the west coast of Canada shortly after the end of the last Ice Age 12,000 years ago, and never intermarried with any westerners before the arrival of Columbus.

There is a plethora of hints of earlier, pre-Clovis settlers in the America's (A more amusing one (http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/1154116)). Careful with the "12,000 years ago". The difference between carbon dating and calendar dating is almost two millenia. I.e. 12,000 BP in carbon years is about 13,800 calendar years (Intcal04) (http://www.radiocarbon.org/IntCal04%20files/intcal04.14c). So the palaeo - excrements of Paisley 5 Mile Point Caves (12,300 14C years B.P) could be calibrated to ~ 14,150 calendar years BP.

However the debate is ongoing (http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/325/5937/148-a).


Again Atlantis, since the only indication is a tale of Plato in the Timaeus and Critias (http://www.activemind.com/Mysterious/Topics/Atlantis/timaeus_and_critias.html) maybe translated doubtfully, one can squeeze the text into any form that would fit any random finding place and hence it has been located just all around the world. That's not very scientific.

[hamster143]

Your link does not object to the overall settling pattern. The question is only whether some people managed to get from Beringia to the Pacific Northwest before the complete disappearance of glaciers which blocked their way (around the time of the first appearance of Clovis culture, 13-13.5 ky cal bp), or the settling was completely post-glacier.

[Andre]

Your link does not object to the overall settling pattern.

But there are more, the biggest dispute (http://www.uky.edu/Projects/MonteVerde/monteverde.pdf) is about Monte Verde in Chile. One of those discussers is a member here, incidentily. Radiocarbon dates of 12Ka - 12.4ka (calibrated - 13.8 - 14.3 ka cal BP) all the way down south is a bit more of a challenge.

Another feature of crossing the beringia landbridge hypothesis, would be the successful prediction of near identical archeologic/antropologic features on both sides of the bridge at the right time, that would be consistent with a migration pattern. Has this match been demonstrated yet?

[hamster143]

But there are more, the biggest dispute (http://www.uky.edu/Projects/MonteVerde/monteverde.pdf) is about Monte Verde in Chile. One of those discussers is a member here, incidentily. Radiocarbon dates of 12Ka - 12.4ka (calibrated - 13.8 - 14.3 ka cal BP) all the way down south is a bit more of a challenge.

How long should it take for humans to get from Pacific Northwest to Chile? It's something like 10,000 km, right? That distance could be covered in 500 years at the rate of 50 m/day. Since we're talking about nomadic hunter-gatherers, who could easily travel 10 km/day or more in search of food, and they couldn't travel too far from the coast because of glaciers, they could spread out that far in the amount of time that's within radiocarbon error bars. Monte Verde is on the Pacific side of the continent, 50 km from the ocean.

Another feature of crossing the beringia landbridge hypothesis, would be the successful prediction of near identical archeologic/antropologic features on both sides of the bridge at the right time, that would be consistent with a migration pattern. Has this match been demonstrated yet?

Not sure I follow. We're talking about extremely primitive people, you can't expect much in the way of archeologic features. Even those artifacts that could be left behind, are by now mostly under 100 m of water.

There's some linguistic evidence. Two major families of North American languages (Na-Dene and Eskimo-Aleut) are related to languages spoken in Central and Eastern Siberia.

[Evo]

How long should it take for humans to get from Pacific Northwest to Chile? It's something like 10,000 km, right? That distance could be covered in 500 years at the rate of 50 m/day. Since we're talking about nomadic hunter-gatherers, who could easily travel 10 km/day or more in search of food, and they couldn't travel too far from the coast because of glaciers, they could spread out that far in the amount of time that's within radiocarbon error bars. Monte Verde is on the Pacific side of the continent, 50 km from the ocean. There is no way they could walk like that every day, they have children, they have pregnant women, elderly and ill. Why on earth would a group of people walk relentlessly day after day into the unknown? They wouldn't. Migration was gradual as they used up the natural resources or followed a herd.

Glaciers didn't go very far south in North America.

[DaveC426913]

There is no way they could walk like that every day, they have children, they have pregnant women, elderly and ill. Why on earth would a group of people walk relentlessly day after day into the unknown? They wouldn't. Migration was gradual as they used up the natural resources or followed a herd.

Glaciers didn't go very far south in North America.

He meant 50 metres per day, not 50 miles per day. He said this directly on the heels of

" It's something like 10,000 km, right? That distance could be covered in 500 years..."

Indeed, 10,000km over 500 years works out to almost exactly 50 metres per day. i.e. a paltry 18km per year.

[hamster143]

Glaciers didn't go very far south in North America.

Glaciers went as far as Seattle.

Once you get past Oregon, you're boxed in, because only the narrow strip of land along the coast is habitable, and, beyond that narrow strip, there's barren desert for hundreds of miles.

There's some room to spread out in Mexico. Then you go through Central America, which is again a narrow strip of land. On the other side of Isthmus of Panama, you hit Andes, which were covered by a big glacier from Ecuador to Cape Horn.

[bjacoby]

There is one one magic word that make the whole Atlantis argument make perfect sence and makes Atlantis very real.

"Paleoclimatology"

<Snip EXCELLENT exposition of Atlantis theory and current evidence>

I can site many groups of people who came to America and/or maping the planet going all the way back to 50,000 years ago. I'll spare you, but they are indeed historical facts. If you're interested message me or look it up yourself. I find doing my own research to be very rewarding.

As mentioned above, there are indeed artifacts found but some are out right denied. You geologists, paleontologists, anthropologists, and archeologists know this because it threatens the "popularly accepted history" and fractures preceptions of ancient peoples and civilizations. But facts are facts, these artfacts exist, like it or not they have been tested and verified. :biggrin:
k

Take care and be well everyone!

Sometimes I'm SO embarrassed at the intelligence level exhibited by those in the sciences. It seems that for many subjects, they are satisfied with mere "plausible" traditional explanations (usually outright denial) rather than true evidence. Excellent outlines such as that by this poster are typically rejected out of hand and NEVER allowed into any serious "scientific" discussions of the era.

For example some of the proof above has to do with certain cataclysmic events. But I can't tell you how many knock down drag out arguments I've had with geologists, archeologists and the like over what they used to call "the theory of uniformity". Under this theory all geological changes MUST happen at the slow pace we see right now as the rain wears down mountains etc. Volcanos, Asteroid collisions, Glacier lakes bursting, and what have you were all consider "bunk" under this thinking. The rabid attacks on Velikovsky when he suggested that ancient myths suggested such cataclysmic events in the past is an indication of the depths of resistance.

And yet, time after time after time, myth is examined and lo, the ancient places end up "found" right where the myth said they were! Troy being a salient example. Just how stooopid is "science" anyway? So we have the "myth" of a continent(s) out beyond the pillars of Herccules (in the Atlantic) sinking so quickly that the bodies of people were seen on the ocean "thick as seaweed". A really good starting point. Next there is more. Apparently the sinking had fore-runners and people knew it was coming. I say this because ringing the Atlantic are settlements that can be suspected to be Atlantean. People like to speculate that this one or that one "was" Atlantis, but refuse to take them ALL together as proof of colonization from the sunken (sinking) continent. The existence of pyramids on both sides of the Atlantic is certainly thought-provoking. Could this be some hint of the importance of the pyramid in the Atlantean culture?

One prime feature of these outposts are what have been termed "cyclopean walls". These are walls and structures easily identified by gigantic blocks of stone so carefully fitted that a knife blade STILL can't fit in the cracks. PLUS they are all irregularly shaped with one block notched into another etc. Go look some up and you'll see what I mean. You find these things in Egypt, Spain, South America. Bahamas. etc. The story is that the "Atlantean" method of construction was to use large stone blocks and sand them back and forth on each other until they fit perfectly. It's nearly impossible to duplicate even with modern technology. It's quite different from construction with the more normal smaller carved stone blocks just stacked up that we see in some later civilizations.

So is this all "proof" of the existence of the continent of Atlantis? Well, no, but it sure is some heavy duty evidence and unexplainable data!

Happily, today, the old "theory of uniformity" has fallen out of favor. But that still does not change the basic fact that "science" is forbidden to seriously discuss issues such as this one. The fact that this discussion is relegated to a "debunking" forum says it all. Shame on us. [edit by Ivan: Delete insult]

[BigFairy]

Heh, thanks for enlightening me on this topic. Sorry i cannot add anything of value.

[zoobyshoe]

Plato says Atlantis was in the Atlantic ocean, right?

[Pythagorean]

So I'm assuming the Strait of Gibraltar has already been thoroughly searched?

The wiki says that the ancients never took the story of Atlantis seriously and that it is only in modern times that people do so.

[Wodash]

So is this all "proof" of the existence of the continent of Atlantis? Well, no, but it sure is some heavy duty evidence and unexplainable data!


If you were to do some research, you would find that most of what is termed unexplainable, HAS been explained. It may not be to your satisfaction because you may have preconceived notions about science, such as is portrayed in the books of what are called "fringe" writers. These writers are explorers and adventurers but are not trained in the fields of endeavor that they write about. Michael Cremo for instance. Personally, I love the books of such writers myself - Sitchen, Cremo, Graham Phillips, etc., but often times what they say, is their opinion and not scientific fact. They are very smart, but they are not professionals. Other than being professional authors!! Andrew Collins for instance, is an author who writes books about his Phychic searches for things lost in history.

I loved the story of Atlantis myself, and three years ago or so, I thought I'd see if I could prove it was true. The facts defeated me! Atlantis did not exist. Using the information science has made available for us in these modern times, there is no evidence for the existence of Atlantis.

Plato wrote http://www.activemind.com/Mysterious/Topics/Atlantis/timaeus_and_critias.html that Atlantis was in the ocean outside the Straits of Gibraltar (Cadiz). There has been a lot of bathymetry done in that area, and there is nothing to indicate that there has been a subsidence of a land mass in that area. Especially one with mountains as high as Plato says Atlantis mountains were.

Furthermore, Atlanteans supposedly had "ships" to cross the ocean with, 11,500 years ago. There were no peoples with that technology during that time frame. People were hunter gatherers in that time frame. Plato says they had an army. No one had an army in that time frame. This army supposedly used chariots. The Wheel, nevermind the chariot, had not been invented yet. To develop these technologies and tactical applications, a prequel had to exist. In other words, these things are not developed suddenly. We do not go from a hollowed out log to a Trireme in a few hundred years. So Atlantis had to exist for a long time in the past, to be this developed.

As has been said, the world was in the grip of an ice age in this time frame. Did they put skids on their ships and slide them across the ocean or what? Who would they have fought back then? The Greeks were not known as yet, people had just barely started to think about farming, and yet supposedly the Greeks too had "warlike men" (army) according to Plato.

Not.

[CEL]

If you were to do some research, you would find that most of what is termed unexplainable, HAS been explained. It may not be to your satisfaction because you may have preconceived notions about science, such as is portrayed in the books of what are called "fringe" writers. These writers are explorers and adventurers but are not trained in the fields of endeavor that they write about. Michael Cremo for instance. Personally, I love the books of such writers myself - Sitchen, Cremo, Graham Phillips, etc., but often times what they say, is their opinion and not scientific fact. They are very smart, but they are not professionals. Other than being professional authors!! Andrew Collins for instance, is an author who writes books about his Phychic searches for things lost in history.

I loved the story of Atlantis myself, and three years ago or so, I thought I'd see if I could prove it was true. The facts defeated me! Atlantis did not exist. Using the information science has made available for us in these modern times, there is no evidence for the existence of Atlantis.

Plato wrote http://www.activemind.com/Mysterious/Topics/Atlantis/timaeus_and_critias.html that Atlantis was in the ocean outside the Straits of Gibraltar (Cadiz). There has been a lot of bathymetry done in that area, and there is nothing to indicate that there has been a subsidence of a land mass in that area. Especially one with mountains as high as Plato says Atlantis mountains were.

Furthermore, Atlanteans supposedly had "ships" to cross the ocean with, 11,500 years ago. There were no peoples with that technology during that time frame. People were hunter gatherers in that time frame. Plato says they had an army. No one had an army in that time frame. This army supposedly used chariots. The Wheel, nevermind the chariot, had not been invented yet. To develop these technologies and tactical applications, a prequel had to exist. In other words, these things are not developed suddenly. We do not go from a hollowed out log to a Trireme in a few hundred years. So Atlantis had to exist for a long time in the past, to be this developed.

As has been said, the world was in the grip of an ice age in this time frame. Did they put skids on their ships and slide them across the ocean or what? Who would they have fought back then? The Greeks were not known as yet, people had just barely started to think about farming, and yet supposedly the Greeks too had "warlike men" (army) according to Plato.

Not.

The Atlanteans could be overdeveloped in relation to all other people on Earth. But, according to Plato, they were defeated by the Athenians. Certainly there were no Athenians 10 thousand years before Plato's time.

[Jon the kid]

I have seen shows about Atlantis. They believe it to be a real historical nation, if not fabricated by the writing of Plato... Maybe atlantis was located on a part of the berring straight in alaska/russia. It could have been located in a particular area that stayed above water long enough for a exploring nation to discover it... The only thing is that Plato writes about the greeks trading with them... Im not sure but please respond to this comment.

[Wodash]

The shows you have seen have been put on by TV channels that are looking for a wide audience and good ratings, not necessarily telling the truth. Actually, there are a lot of disgruntled people in the scientific world who would like to see more factual shows regarding the histories of the cultures that DID exist in the past.

The only person in history to actually write anything about a specific place called Atlantis, was Plato. Others, in their histories, mentioned Atlanteans, however, these people were mentioned as living at the base of the Atlas mountains near modern day Tunisia and were considered to be the children (descendants) of Atlas, therefore, called Atlanteans. But there is no other writer who has described this place Plato speaks of nor the events he speaks of. For the reasons I gave earlier. The things he said existed in that time frame, didn't exist.

That does not mean there aren't sunken cities. There are. That doesn't mean that maybe just maybe, someone sailed to the Americas even before the Vikings. It simply means that Plato's story is a fabrication. As to whether or not the ancients did sail to the Americas that's still to be proven.

You will hear all kinds of stories as to where Atlantis was. But just remember. There had to be a developed society, for any of the story to be true, and if you research just a few of the things I mentioned, like ship building, horse training, invention of the wheel (especially the hub of the wheel so it could steer), organized armies, etc. etc., you will find they did not exist in the time line Plato gives for the destruction of Atlantis, never mind any time BEFORE that. No doubt there were cultures developing in different parts of the world at different times, and some were likely more advanced in certain techniques than others, but there was none that had ocean sailing vessels that could carry a non existent army into the Med., and attack three different areas at the same time. Cel is correct. There were no Athenians in the time line given by Plato.

[mugaliens]

I believe the only known Atlantis claims come from Plato. There is no conclusive historical evidence supporting these claims. Many people believe the story is fiction.

Were they even ever claims? Or were they merely fiction set amidst real geography, much as we do, today?

As for "conclusive historical evidence," there is no direct evidence supporting Atlantis, per se', but there is massive, undisputed historical evidence that ancient seafarers ranged broad and far throughout their ocean travels.

There is also evidence right in front of our noses that we may simply be standing on it. Let's consider Pato's introduction, from Timaeus:

"For all that we have here, lying within the mouth of which we speak, is evidently a haven having a narrow entrance; but that yonder is a real ocean, and the land surrounding it may most rightly be called, in the fullest and truest sense, a continent. Now in this island of Atlantis there existed a confederation of kings, of great and marvelous power, which held sway over all the island, and over many other islands also and parts of the continent."

It's well known that Plato's "Pillars of Hercules (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pillars_of_Hercules)" are the mountains (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:StraitOfGibraltar.JPG)on either side of the Straight of Gibralter. Plato makes no claim that Atlantis lies beyond the mouth, just that it was land surrounding the "real ocean" beyond the pillars, and that the land was beyond the "real ocean."

I can think one such land mass which fits this description: the Americas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Americas_(orthographic_projection).svg), and in this view one can see not only the Americas, but also the Straight of Gibralter.

How might this be possible? The only plausible explanation here would be if ancient mariners from Europe made the same or similar voyage as did the Vikings. Many people say, "Impossible! The Vikings could barely do it, and human progression has been steady..."

Has it really? Then how were the Polynesians able to settle the South Pacific several thousand years ago after crossing vast stretches of open and empty ocean (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Hawaii#Polynesian_Triangle), including to remote Hawaii, some 2,000 years ago, and most certainly most other areas many thousands of years before that, according to acheological and genetic evidence found throughout the rest of the South Pacific arena.

It's a common, and regrettably modern misconception that we were largely landlubbers, or at least confined to the coasts, until the last few hundred years, and that misconception really is a myth, certainly far less plausible than idea that the Americans may be what was referred to as "Atlantis."

[Max™]

I noticed quite a few references to this region when I was researching the last ice age for a discussion regarding climate variability in the past.

http://www.atlan.org/images/articles/checklist/zoom/fig1.jpg

http://www.atlan.org/articles/true_history/index.html

Kinda makes sense compared to the stuff I've seen in random TV "searches for the lost city of atlantis", what do you think?

[nismaratwork]

Atlantis, Lemuria... it's all in the same vein. There are certainly landmasses which are no longer above the ocean, but that doesn't mean every bit of sunken dirt housed an advanced civilization. I take Mugalians' view, which is that this was a bit of colorful fiction set amidst some contemporary geography. That, or Stargate is right, and Atlantis is now in the Pegasus galaxy! :tongue2:

[Nik_2213]

Occam's Razor suggests that the Santorini explanation is the most plausible one...

Anyone sailing to Santorini post-apocalypse will have found a flooded caldera where a substantial island had stood: Verily, it had sunk beneath the waves.

There's plenty of volcanoes around the Med', but their eruptions are on a different scale to this catastrophe. It's quite likely, given the magnitude of the eruption and probable tsunamis that no-one was around to see the island *explode* and survive to tell of it...

And, yes, the Athenians weren't around at the time. Besides, the Sea Peoples, the Vikings of their day, seem to have moved into the void created by the collapse of the My' empire and the loss of their navy...

So, when Plato wants to set his cautionary tale some-where...

It's a bit like the Arthurian legends, where Camelot seems to have grown towers in the re-telling, and the famed knights may have begun as a few descendants of Roman heavy cavalry...

[Garth]

Occam's Razor suggests that the Santorini explanation is the most plausible one...

Anyone sailing to Santorini post-apocalypse will have found a flooded caldera where a substantial island had stood: Verily, it had sunk beneath the waves.

Geological history of Santorini. (http://www.santorini.net/119.html) and Geography (http://www.santorini.net/112.html)

Garth

[mugaliens]

Santorini is on the wrong side of the Rock of Gibralter, and the Mediterranean is the wrong body of water.

The passage is clear. If Atlantis ever did exist, it was way out in the Atlantic, if not across it.

[Nik_2213]

I've seen the case made for part of Scandinavia, or even the Channel Islands...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Channel_Islands

At least those had the merit that they and their surrounding land was part of continental Europe until the sea-level rose after last ice-age. It's entirely possible that a lot of land linking the current islands was sheltered by dunes, salt-marsh etc until swamped en-masse in a great storm...

Snag is that the only mighty civilisation known to have been lost to the sea in those millenia is the Mycenaean. Sadly, even they weren't magnificent enough for Plato...

[FlexGunship]

If I may pose a question... .I've never considered Atlantis to be anything but a myth. On what grounds is it possible that it isn't simply fiction?

For example, we don't presuppose that every Agatha Christie novel is non-fiction until lack of evidence relegates it to a weaker standing. In fact, lately, I feel the same way about MSNBC and Fox. Doesn't the combination of "unlikeliness" (an anachronistic civilization) and lack of observation (reports from only a single source in a single work) kind of force it into the "fiction" category (even if we don't want it there)?

Is there any other myth with a similar background that would be taken this seriously?

[granpa]

If I may pose a question... .I've never considered Atlantis to be anything but a myth. On what grounds is it possible that it isn't simply fiction?

For example, we don't presuppose that every Agatha Christie novel is non-fiction until lack of evidence relegates it to a weaker standing. In fact, lately, I feel the same way about MSNBC and Fox. Doesn't the combination of "unlikeliness" (an anachronistic civilization) and lack of observation (reports from only a single source in a single work) kind of force it into the "fiction" category (even if we don't want it there)?

Is there any other myth with a similar background that would be taken this seriously?

the city of babel and the great flood are taken seriously by some.
BTW, there have been lots of cities called 'Babel/Able/Enoch/Mahalalel/Mehujael/Jabal/Babylon'.

[FlexGunship]

the city of babel and the great flood are taken seriously by some.
BTW, there have been lots of cities called 'Babel/Able/Enoch/Mahalalel/Mehujael/Jabal/Babylon'.

Hmm... I guess you have a point. But, for some, they are raised from birth under the perception that this particular myth (the great flood or the story of Babel) is integral to their faith system (and to the safety and security of their eternal soul).

Atlantis is just a story.

[Andre]

There is abundant proof that there was no such thing as a great flood, at least not in the calibrated part of carbon dating (http://www.radiocarbon.org/IntCal04.htm), where we find continuous uninterrupted annual processes in which the years can be counted, like annual grow rings of coral, tree rings and annual sedimentation of lakes and ice layers in ice cores. If there would have been a global flood, or even bigger than regional, all these records would have to show a hiatus in the same timeframe. That's not the case.

[DaveC426913]

There is abundant proof that there was no such thing as a great flood, at least not in the calibrated part of carbon dating (http://www.radiocarbon.org/IntCal04.htm), where we find continuous uninterrupted annual processes in which the years can be counted, like annual grow rings of coral, tree rings and annual sedimentation of lakes and ice layers in ice cores. If there would have been a global flood, or even bigger than regional, all these records would have to show a hiatus in the same timeframe. That's not the case.

Not sure you can prove something did not happen. I mean, I grant that carbon dating evidence can put some heavy constraints on it, but still...

I've read more than one story where the Great Flood was, in fact, the filling of a formerly dry lowlands area with what is, in present day, a body of water.

One story suggests that the Black Sea was once a dry valley before the Mediterranean flooded it by way of the Sea of Marmara. Another more fanciful story suggests that, prehistorically, the entire Mediterranean was once dry land until Gibraltar gave way.

These would not show up in the aforementioned land-based records.

[DaveC426913]

Hmm... I guess you have a point. But, for some, they are raised from birth under the perception that this particular myth (the great flood or the story of Babel) is integral to their faith system (and to the safety and security of their eternal soul).

Atlantis is just a story.

This is a red herring. Some people having their own reasons to believe something does not detract from its truthhood.

[Edited]

[granpa]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Sea

Sometimes during the Tertiary period the Bab-el-Mandeb closed and the Red Sea evaporated to an empty hot dry salt-floored sink. Effects causing this would be:
1. A "race" between the Red Sea widening and Perim Island erupting filling the Bab el Mandeb with lava.
2. The lowering of world sea level during the Ice Ages due to much water being locked up in the ice caps.

[DaveC426913]

doesnt

Thx.

[hamster143]

There is abundant proof that there was no such thing as a great flood, at least not in the calibrated part of carbon dating (http://www.radiocarbon.org/IntCal04.htm), where we find continuous uninterrupted annual processes in which the years can be counted.

There is abundant proof that the great flood did not happen exactly as described in the document (submerging the entire planet except for the top of mount Ararat in a few weeks of continuous rains).

There is literary as well as archeological evidence of heavy flooding in Sumer circa 2900 BC, which devastated some cities and managed to leave sediments from Uruk to Kish (about 200 km away from each other). And there is a direct connection between Sumerian flood myths and Biblical flood myths, which draws a parallel between the king of one of the destroyed Sumerian cities and Noah.

[FlexGunship]

There is literary as well as archeological evidence of heavy flooding in Sumer circa 2900 BC, which devastated some cities and managed to leave sediments from Uruk to Kish (about 200 km away from each other). And there is a direct connection between Sumerian flood myths and Biblical flood myths, which draws a parallel between the king of one of the destroyed Sumerian cities and Noah.

http://rlv.zcache.com/tru_dat_tshirt-p235168407607757186tdd1_210.jpg

The guy who gathered all of his livestock onto a raft and floated to safety was named Ziasudra.

[Andre]

Not sure you can prove something did not happen. I mean, I grant that carbon dating evidence can put some heavy constraints on it, but still...

I've read more than one story where the Great Flood was, in fact, the filling of a formerly dry lowlands area with what is, in present day, a body of water.

One story suggests that the Black Sea was once a dry valley before the Mediterranean flooded it by way of the Sea of Marmara. Another more fanciful story suggests that, prehistorically, the entire Mediterranean was once dry land until Gibraltar gave way.

These would not show up in the aforementioned land-based records.

Well, I was not excluding local floods for sure. The black sea story has been challenged here (http://www.ad-astra.ro/research/view_publication.php?publication_id=6840&lang=en), while the Mediteranian is sea since 5.3 million years (http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7017221592?Scientists:%20Huge%20Flood%205.3%20Mill ion%20Years%20Ago%20Created%20Mediterranean%20Sea) , probably not a lot of witnesses

But practically the past has some uncertainties too

Maybe that the biggest flood ever happened 55 million years ago.

[FlexGunship]

[Post deleted by author; off-topic]

[mugaliens]

Oh!!! WHO grobbied my post after I spent an hour on it..!

argh...

I actually had something inciteful to say, as I always do.

Eh, so sad.

[DaveC426913]

Well, I was not excluding local floods for sure.
Back then, that locality was the whole world.


the Mediteranian is sea since 5.3 million years (http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7017221592?Scientists:%20Huge%20Flood%205.3%20Mill ion%20Years%20Ago%20Created%20Mediterranean%20Sea) , probably not a lot of witnesses


The fanciful story I read had Neanderthals as the witnesses. That's still off by about 5.2 million years though...

[Andre]

There have been many 'local' floods of course. Here (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/flood-myths.html) is an interesting overview of flood saga's through the world. Interesting is the Greek version Deucalion (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/flood-myths.html#Greek) is mentioned by Plato in the Critias (http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/critias.html) in the story about Atlantis.

I used it in the landmark game once (http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=270543&highlight=deucalion&page=283).

Other "great floods" that occurred at the beginning of the Holocene, apart from Lake Missoula floods (http://www.glaciallakemissoula.org/virtualtour/index.html) and Lake Agassiz (https://www.dmr.nd.gov/ndgs/ndnotes/Agassiz/Lake%20Agassiz.asp) in North America and end of the last Glacial is the North Sea between the UK and the Netherlands. Hence there is also an Atlantis version for the Netherlands, the Oera Linda book (http://www.oeralindaboek.nl/), wiki here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oera_Linda_Book). It's assessed to be a fantasy forgery by a famous nineteenth century author, Piet Paaltjens, however odd detail is that the flooding of the North Sea (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1468-0092.2009.00326.x/abstract) was unknown at his time.

Bottom line the Atlantis tales of Plato give a lot of reason to unfounded speculations but it's likely that he just wanted to make a point about nature forces prevailing over humans.

[FlexGunship]

Oh!!! WHO grobbied my post after I spent an hour on it..!

argh...

I actually had something inciteful to say, as I always do.

Eh, so sad.

It happens suspiciously surprisingly often.

[FlexGunship]

This is a red herring. Some people having their own reasons to believe something does not detract from its truthhood.

Maybe, but doesn't it bias it? If I have personal reasons for believing in ghosts, aren't I more likely to give you a positive "ghost report" than someone who doesn't have that same personal reason?

The conversation you quoted followed this form:

Me: "Why does myth-A get such special attention."
Other: "Myth-B (sic. Biblical) gets the same amount of attention."
Me: "Yes, but those myth-B is part of a personal belief system, whereas myth-A is not."
You: "Regardless of belief system, it may be true."

I don't think my statement was a red herring, I believe your's was a non-sequitur (most likely because of a previous "out-of-context" quotation). We were not discussing the veracity of claims, simply why certain ones seem to get more attention than others.

[Driftwood1]

Solon.

Wasn't Solon the first to introduce a form of Democracy into Athenian political and social life?

Interesting

[DaveC426913]

Maybe, but doesn't it bias it? If I have personal reasons for believing in ghosts, aren't I more likely to give you a positive "ghost report" than someone who doesn't have that same personal reason?

The conversation you quoted followed this form:

Me: "Why does myth-A get such special attention."
Other: "Myth-B (sic. Biblical) gets the same amount of attention."
Me: "Yes, but those myth-B is part of a personal belief system, whereas myth-A is not."
You: "Regardless of belief system, it may be true."

I don't think my statement was a red herring, I believe your's was a non-sequitur (most likely because of a previous "out-of-context" quotation). We were not discussing the veracity of claims, simply why certain ones seem to get more attention than others.
Poisoning the well.

Discussion of veracity is the very next step on your line of reasoning:
'...and because beliefs are a large factor in its popularity, compelling evidence is less a factor in its popularity, therefore less likely to be true'.
Even if that is not actually stated outright, it is what goes through every reader's mind.

[mugaliens]

Poisoning the well.

Not (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_the_well).

[nismaratwork]

There is abundant proof that the great flood did not happen exactly as described in the document (submerging the entire planet except for the top of mount Ararat in a few weeks of continuous rains).

There is literary as well as archeological evidence of heavy flooding in Sumer circa 2900 BC, which devastated some cities and managed to leave sediments from Uruk to Kish (about 200 km away from each other). And there is a direct connection between Sumerian flood myths and Biblical flood myths, which draws a parallel between the king of one of the destroyed Sumerian cities and Noah.

Small correction... it doesn't really say, "on Mt. Ararat", what it says is that the ark, "...Came to rest amidst the mountains of Ararat, "or, "...Came to rest on the mountains of Ararat." Ararat at the supposed time is roughly equivalent to modern Armenia.

The "Mountains of Ararat" in Genesis clearly refer to a general region, not a specific mountain. Biblical Ararat corresponds to Assyrian Urartu (and Persian Arminya) the name of the kingdom which at the time controlled the Lake Van region, which in later centuries, beginning with Herodotus, came to be known as Armenia.

It's just another example of how people twist around even the smallest parts of what is clearly a parable to suit their needs (not you). An expedition to the modern-day mount ararat is... dumb, but it's been done for centuries. Likewise, non-religious stories and traditions keep popping up, with the "lost civilization" being one of the most common, and specifically, "Civilization lost to flood" being a biggie. Others are:

lost Golden City or Temple
Buried City
Fountain of youth
The existence of a realm of giants (when you count Chinese mythology it becomes VAST)
belief in angels or "angelic beings" of some description.
belief in demons or "demonic beings" of some description.

Obviously there are common and recurring human experiences which people the world over interpret in a fairly similar way, with a wild-card... sometimes you get a buried city (Pompeii and a few others).

Atlantis... the idea that a culturally advanced people were wiped out in one of the most complete ways possible (swallowed by the sea is pretty complete) naturally persists through lack of evidence of denial which so often is what people seen to want, and the personal experience that civilizations have had with floods from neolithic times to the present. Nothing destroys and kills like a major flood, and flood is the major means of death and destruction in tropical systems.

[DaveC426913]

Not (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_the_well).That is exactly what I meant. What do you refute?

A discussion about an idea being tied to popular belief is almost surely going to play a hand in any subsequent discussion about the veracity of the claim. That's poisoning the well.

[Max™]

Not sure you can prove something did not happen. I mean, I grant that carbon dating evidence can put some heavy constraints on it, but still...

I've read more than one story where the Great Flood was, in fact, the filling of a formerly dry lowlands area with what is, in present day, a body of water.

One story suggests that the Black Sea was once a dry valley before the Mediterranean flooded it by way of the Sea of Marmara. Another more fanciful story suggests that, prehistorically, the entire Mediterranean was once dry land until Gibraltar gave way.

These would not show up in the aforementioned land-based records.

Neither would the area where indonesia sits show up on those records. It was definitely suitable for human habitation, as homo erectus favored the area for most of a million years.


Pretty sure the atlantic ocean was believed to be a ring surrounding the known world, wasn't it? So anyone finding out there was ocean on the other side of india/china wouldn't have a reason to assume it was not the atlantic, would they?

[FlexGunship]

That is exactly what I meant. What do you refute?

A discussion about an idea being tied to popular belief is almost surely going to play a hand in any subsequent discussion about the veracity of the claim. That's poisoning the well.

I disagree, Dave. There was a real question behind it. Atlantis seems to carry a lot of weight with it. Almost a Biblical amount of weight. However, the only literary reference is in a work of fiction.

The question stands (and it's not rhetorical or facetious): why does the Atlantis myth carry such weight?

(Edit: The other side of this is: we know why Biblical stories carry so much weight. Not because they seem to have a significant amount of truth or falsity (I'm not passing judgement on the veracity of Biblical stories), but because they are part of a core belief system of a group of people. Is Atlantis similar in this respect?)

[nismaratwork]

I disagree, Dave. There was a real question behind it. Atlantis seems to carry a lot of weight with it. Almost a Biblical amount of weight. However, the only literary reference is in a work of fiction.

The question stands (and it's not rhetorical or facetious): why does the Atlantis myth carry such weight?

(Edit: The other side of this is: we know why Biblical stories carry so much weight. Not because they seem to have a significant amount of truth or falsity (I'm not passing judgement on the veracity of Biblical stories), but because they are part of a core belief system of a group of people. Is Atlantis similar in this respect?)

I'd just say because it isn't unique... like Lemuria the concept of a lost land under the water is a recurring theme... in the west we're concerned with the work of fiction concerning Atlantis, but the same isn't true for every culture.

[Studiot]

Perhaps in 13000 years time Pphysics Forums will be debating the placement of Brobdingnag and Lilliput.

And one fellow will say "There was only one person in literature that wrote about it"

Of course some archeologists will dig up video of G's travels as proof


..........

[FlexGunship]

Perhaps in 13000 years time Pphysics Forums will be debating the placement of Brobdingnag and Lilliput.

And one fellow will say "There was only one person in literature that wrote about it"

I'm that fellow!!!!

Besides, the long lost city of New York is a perfect match for Lilliput.

[PolarisNorth]

I'm not sure if Atlantis existed, but I am sure it is very possible for a large amount of land to become submerged in large bodies of water over time, because we have evidence of that right now. So it is possible for a once-inhabited land to be underwater.
It would be great if one day we could see Atlantis.

[Andre]

Obviously talking Atlantis, part of the discussion could always be the now almost again forgotten lost City in Cuba

http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=6347
http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=38797

Must be sad to be forgotten twice.

[nismaratwork]

I'm not sure if Atlantis existed, but I am sure it is very possible for a large amount of land to become submerged in large bodies of water over time, because we have evidence of that right now. So it is possible for a once-inhabited land to be underwater.
It would be great if one day we could see Atlantis.

A populated region being destroyed by flood or otherwise drowned is not unique, but the legend of Atlantis is really about the city being somehow advanced. Otherwise, it's like biblical flood stories...

edit: Herculaneum and Pompeii spring to mind as other "lost" cities... and the tombs of The Valley of The Kings in Egypt... etc...

Atlantis isn't just a lost place, it's a lost "special" place that in the minds of many is somehow mystical or nearly sci-fi.

[PolarisNorth]

A populated region being destroyed by flood or otherwise drowned is not unique, but the legend of Atlantis is really about the city being somehow advanced. Otherwise, it's like biblical flood stories...

edit: Herculaneum and Pompeii spring to mind as other "lost" cities... and the tombs of The Valley of The Kings in Egypt... etc...

Atlantis isn't just a lost place, it's a lost "special" place that in the minds of many is somehow mystical or nearly sci-fi.

What I was referring to about the general information was that, even without the fact that Atlantis was believed to be mystically advanced, it would be possible for a city named Atlantis to have existed as an inhabited land that sunk. The type of technology and intelligence they harbored, that was the "I'm not sure" part.

Anyhow, yes indeed Atlantis is mysterious and interesting so it would be great if somehow we could discover proof that it existed, while I'm still alive. :smile:

[DaveC426913]

What I was referring to about the general information was that, even without the fact that Atlantis was believed to be mystically advanced, it would be possible for a city named Atlantis to have existed as an inhabited land that sunk. The type of technology and intelligence they harbored, that was the "I'm not sure" part.

Anyhow, yes indeed Atlantis is mysterious and interesting so it would be great if somehow we could discover proof that it existed, while I'm still alive. :smile:

I often wonder how many decades or even centuries civilization was set back from the burning of the library of Alexandria...

[nismaratwork]

I often wonder how many decades or even centuries civilization was set back from the burning of the library of Alexandria...

... And how many Mozarts, Hilberts, Twains, Ghandis, or Einsteins died of malaria or in childbirth? I personally think it's amazing, if unfortunate for us in the long run, that we've come this far. When you consider the Black Death in Europe, and other population bottlenecks... this is very impressive, and probably makes the destruction of the library seem trifling.

[DaveC426913]

... And how many Mozarts, Hilberts, Twains, Ghandis, or Einsteins died of malaria or in childbirth? I personally think it's amazing, if unfortunate for us in the long run, that we've come this far. When you consider the Black Death in Europe, and other population bottlenecks... this is very impressive, and probably makes the destruction of the library seem trifling.

Well I as thinking of the burning as a human-instigated*, preventable accident, as opposed to ... life happening.

*I'd always thought it was burned deliberately, but apparently that's only one of several theories.

[Studiot]

Dave, about the library at Alex, it's time I fessed up, I only did it because my scrolls were overdue and I didn't want to pay the fine - honest.

:rofl:

[DaveC426913]

Dave, about the library at Alex, it's time I fessed up, I only did it because my scrolls were overdue and I didn't want to pay the fine - honest.

:rofl:

:biggrin:

Well, after 2260 years, that fine is now $82,490.00 per scroll. You're not making it any easier on yourself by procrastinating.

[nismaratwork]

:biggrin:

Well, after 2260 years, that fine is now $82,490.00 per scroll. You're not making it any easier on yourself by procrastinating.

I'm also fairly sure that the penalty for a common thief in that place and time was to have the soles of the feet beaten, then flayed on the second offense. How many scrolls do you have Studiot *sound of steel on a whetstone*?

[Studiot]

I also have a good collection of unknown picassos, vangoghs, trechikoffs, michaelangelos....

[nismaratwork]

I also have a good collection of unknown picassos, vangoghs, trechikoffs, michaelangelos....

I've got a Maltese Falcon for trade if you're interested... guaranteed GENUINE too! :wink:

"Never get personally involved with a client. It’s written in large capital letters on page one of How to Be a Private Detective. Right next to Get as much cash as you can up front, just in case the cheque bounces, and Don’t go looking for the Maltese Falcon because it’ll all end in tears." (Simon R. Green's John Taylor character)

[Studiot]

Maltese Falcon

I bought one of these off the same guy who sold me a piece of the orignal cross ( that was guaranteed genuine too) but it flew away.

[nismaratwork]

I bought one of these off the same guy who sold me a piece of the orignal cross ( that was guaranteed genuine too) but it flew away.

They do that sometimes, but you're alive to talk about it and you have that piece of 'The Cross' so you should be just fine! :wink: I'm off to spend a small fortune on the tip of the Lance of Longinus!

[klimatos]

Atlantis is probably as real as Troy or Sodom & Gomorrah...

Troy is quite real, has been excavated, and can be visited. There is no scientific consensus on the question of whether Sodom and Gomorrah are real or mythical. There is certainly no archeological consensus tying them to any present geographical location.

There has been much speculation on the possible location of Atlantis and whether it was real or fabulous. Some of this speculation has been by reputable scholars and some has been by certifiable crackpots. It is, at best, still speculation.

[dantenewton]

Plato is a philosopher, and sometimes he did went overboard. 'Atlantis' is probably apocryphal. Hitler thought that Aryans were the descendants of Atlantis' natives, so Aryans are viewed as superior (that's chauvinism, and Hitler is saying that because he has nothing to corroborate that Aryans are superior). This induced a lot of misconceptions and feuds.

Also, we are now living a hectic life. Finding and studying Atlantis might be too archaic.

[MoonlitFractl]

Meh, it's cool, but all I'm trying to point out is that the possibility is very likely, and leaves alot to answer itself. But I'm aware the proof is like an empty answer, blank, no better than Sodom and Gomorrah, yet, indeed, verrrry possible.

[Nicodemus]

Meh, it's cool, but all I'm trying to point out is that the possibility is very likely, and leaves alot to answer itself. But I'm aware the proof is like an empty answer, blank, no better than Sodom and Gomorrah, yet, indeed, verrrry possible.

The possiblity of WHAT? I'm still confused.

[MoonlitFractl]

Oh. The possibility, that a civilization to be that advanced, several thousand years ago. Atlantis. It would just take a constantly lucid mind and an intense fear of life and death, the willingness to accept everything, and an naturalistic demand for an answer, no matter what that might be. (In other words, the first Atlantains were probably insane, paranoid geniuses, whom became more insane as they kept inventing the tec. theorized by Plato. And due to their tec, they could take over nearly any1. And like any civilization, would fall due to their own human faults.)

Sorry for the confusion, but I thought you already were thinking about it. ^^" (it being atlantis)

[Nicodemus]

Oh. The possibility, that a civilization to be that advanced, several thousand years ago. Atlantis. It would just take a constantly lucid mind and an intense fear of life and death, the willingness to accept everything, and an naturalistic demand for an answer, no matter what that might be. (In other words, the first Atlantains were probably insane, paranoid geniuses, whom became more insane as they kept inventing the tec. theorized by Plato. And due to their tec, they could take over nearly any1. And like any civilization, would fall due to their own human faults.)

Sorry for the confusion, but I thought you already were thinking about it. ^^" (it being atlantis)

OK, I see what you're getting at, but why do you believe this based on very meager evidence that is largely considered a fictional source? You're adding a great deal of complexity to the situation, and seem to be taking it as read that it follows logically.

[MoonlitFractl]

I see what you mean, I tend to jump the gun when I think, and try to weave it through, letting imagined momentum follow through piece by piece. But I tend to think it through b/c I can imagine a paranoid group of people trying to fix something with just simple knowledge, increasing step by step constantly, working in total fear until a practical result. Invariably, with a little luck and chance, being incredible, much like genius today, playing with an arcane art, and discovering something amazing, fueled by fear and wounder.

Ok, this hopefully unrelated, but I just typed that and accidently opened 14 windows at once, including this one. That, was creepy. *Also I have no clue how I did that.

[Nicodemus]

I see what you mean, I tend to jump the gun when I think, and try to weave it through, letting imagined momentum follow through piece by piece. But I tend to think it through b/c I can imagine a paranoid group of people trying to fix something with just simple knowledge, increasing step by step constantly, working in total fear until a practical result. Invariably, with a little luck and chance, being incredible, much like genius today, playing with an arcane art, and discovering something amazing, fueled by fear and wounder.

I can imagine that too, in fact I think we could both find examples in history of just that. I'm still not sure that it's enough to justify the existence of Atlantis, merely because people COULD live in such a way. Frankly, with so much power in their time, and so much strife such as you imagine, I'd think we'd see a record.

By the same token, in many ways your description is valid for our lives today, in oh so many ways. If you're saying that you believe in Atlantis because you can imagine it, I disagree, but if you're saying that the mentality of possible Atlantians would naturally lead to destruction, I can see that being possible.

[CEL]

OK, I see what you're getting at, but why do you believe this based on very meager evidence that is largely considered a fictional source? You're adding a great deal of complexity to the situation, and seem to be taking it as read that it follows logically.

According to Plato, Athenians defeated the Atlantean invasion 10 thousand years before Plato's time.
But at that time there were no Athenians (no Greeks at all) and no Egyptian or Mesopotamian civilizations, so no writing except for possible Atlantean documents.
Since no signs remained from Atlantean civilization, how did the Egyptian priests know of it?

[granpa]

http://www.maicar.com/GML/Atlantis.html

[CEL]

Imagine that 50000 years from now our civilization has ended and alien explorers arrive on Earth.
Those aliens decypher our writings. They find Asimov's Foundation series and believe we have colonized the galaxy. Then they go in search of Trantor.
This is similar to the search of Atlantis, based on Plato.

[nismaratwork]

Imagine that 50000 years from now our civilization has ended and alien explorers arrive on Earth.
Those aliens decypher our writings. They find Asimov's Foundation series and believe we have colonized the galaxy. Then they go in search of Trantor.
This is similar to the search of Atlantis, based on Plato.

Hopefully they'd find a little more than that, like our garbage, and our EM emissions (radio, TV, satellite). I think the biggest problem with Atlantis is... where are the Atlantean dumps, wineries, bakers, anything?

If I were those aliens I'd trust vast evidence of other civilization, and the total lack of anything matching Asimov's writings, and conclude that it was an aberration.

[Tyrannical]

I noticed quite a few references to this region when I was researching the last ice age for a discussion regarding climate variability in the past.

http://www.atlan.org/images/articles/checklist/zoom/fig1.jpg

http://www.atlan.org/articles/true_history/index.html

Kinda makes sense compared to the stuff I've seen in random TV "searches for the lost city of atlantis", what do you think?


I stumbled upon that theory about ten years ago.

What makes it interesting is that we know for a fact that large areas of the South China Sea was dry land, and Indonesia was a contiguous land mass instead of an island chain. That area sunk into the ocean as sea levels rose around the time Plato claimed Atlantis sunk.

Now the glacial melting wasn't a sudden event, but a tsunami caused by a large volcano (Krakatoa? )could have caused a sudden and permanent flooding of land that was already near or below sea level. If you even want to consider this the "Biblical Flood", an erupting undersea caldera could have even provided the 40 days of rain in an area around Indonesia.

Here's a quick check list the author put together comparing Plato's description with Indonesia, and they match on many points.
http://www.atlan.org/articles/checklist/

[nismaratwork]

Ummm that link isn't something I'd use as a check-list... or anything else. This isn't a question of the realty that which land masses are above sea-level... it's more to do with the very commonality of that event. The idea that a city could be destroyed is hardly new, and not even controversial! Pompeii and Herculaneum spring to mind, but they weren't magically advanced cultures.

As for the biblical flood, I argue for that as a parable, but others who do like to find concrete elements to support their faith often look at the Black Sea Deluge Theory: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea_deluge_theory .

There are all kinds of things wrong the "links" made by that author, but then... when you're selling a book purporting to have found Atlantis, it probably hurts sales to do anything else. I strongly suggest that you read the S&D guidelines regarding what is and is not a legitimate source. Even casually, the link you provide hurts you more than it helps.

[berkeman]

<< crackpot 2012 prophecy YouTube link deleted by berkeman >>

there u go....watch that before you delete my post again

I understand that you are new to the PF. Please re-read the rules links, especially the parts about valid sources, and about forbidden topics.

Thank you.

[Tyrannical]

Well he passed away a few years ago, and his day job was physics professor. It seemed strictly a hobby and not a money making scheme. The checklist was based on Plato's description.
But don't you find it interesting that such a large area of habitable land was flooded around the time Plato claimed?

[granpa]

Atlantis was said to be outside the straights of Gibraltar. Of course there is nothing there but the atlantic ocean.

when sea level was lower during the last ice age there would have a straight between Italy and Libya. I wonder if atlantis was simply an island beyond that straight.

[berkeman]

And on those continued necroposts, I'll close the thread.