Atlantis Online

Atlantis Online - Messages => Television: Shows & Events => Topic started by: mdsungate on October 02, 2009, 12:10:54 am



Title: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: mdsungate on October 02, 2009, 12:10:54 am
 :) According to AOL Television information, The History Channel's show: Mystery Quest’s next new episode is titled “Atlantis” and although originally set to air Oct 8th, (next Thursday), it will actually air Oct. 7th, (next Wednesday) at 7 P.M. and at 11 P.M.  It will also repeat the show on Friday Oct. 9th at 6 P.M. and 10 P.M. 

Now if Bianca was still posting we all would have know that.   But I’m glad I checked because I certainly don’t want to miss THAT episode.  Heck, if we’re in THIS forum, shouldn’t it be REQUIRED viewing, LOL.

Here’s what AOL lists as the synopsis of the episode:

Quote
Atlantis: New sonar evidence of underwater structures discovered in the Atlantic Ocean are explored.

And we all know who’s doing the exploring!  Can’t wait to see more of Dr. Greg Little in action.  It’s like having our own “movie star” here at the Forum.   In case you missed it Greg was in an episode last week about the Bermuda Triangle.  Kudos to you Greg!


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Robert0326 on October 02, 2009, 08:23:56 am
I watched the episode with the Bermuda Triangle and was hoping it was going to be more about the theory that Atlantis was once there (or at least an outpost of Atlantis).  But it was the same old thing about all the missing planes and boats.  Other than that I think it was a pretty good show.


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Qoais on October 02, 2009, 10:35:57 am
I do believe Dr. Little did say in one of his posts, that the first episode was going to be about the boats and planes.  They filmed several different shows with National Geographic.


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Mandy Esser on October 02, 2009, 11:19:31 am
Thanks for the update! They must have moved it up.


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: mdsungate on October 03, 2009, 10:45:36 pm
 :)    You’re more than welcome Mandy.  Spread the word here at AO. 

Hey Robert0, I really enjoyed the Bermuda Triangle episode.  I’ve been fascinated by the subject ever since Charles Berlitz popularized the subject.  But in some of the online line blogs that come up in a Google search, a lot of people panned the episode, and bashed the History Channel for airing it.  So I’m not sure how the rating went.  But again, I personally loved it.  ;)

Mike




Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: mdsungate on October 06, 2009, 10:32:06 pm
 :)   Tomorrow night... 7:00 & 11:00 PM... On the History Channel.... Mystery Quest's episode on Atlantis, ...
       with Dr. Greg Little....    Be there or be square, LOL.    ;)

Mike


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: mdsungate on October 07, 2009, 05:56:06 pm
 :)  Greg debuts in five minutes.  Finally!  A show on the History Channel that's actually interesting....on ATLANTIS! ;D


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Qoais on October 07, 2009, 07:29:55 pm
Where are you that he debuts in 5 minutes?  I've got to wait another hour and a half and there's no guarantee I'll be getting the same show you do either!!


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Desiree on October 08, 2009, 01:33:13 am
Watching the show.  I wish they wouldn't always include the Minoan/Santorini theme on every Atlantis special. That's the theory preferred by people too disinterested to actually look for it.

To summarize: Santorini was too small, too recent and in the wrong location to be Atlantis.  The island DIDN't have concentric circles, but rather a couple of fingers of land surrounding the island, and they were a passive people, not militaristic like Atlantis was.

Also, the disaster of Santorini did NOT ruin their civilization.  They were still making pottery one hundred years later.

Not to mention, the Santorini disaster has now been moved back to now around 1600 bc.


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Qoais on October 08, 2009, 01:49:53 am
I knew it!  There was something totally different on my History channel tonight.  Something about Africa instead.  I'm sure I'll eventually get the right show, I'll just have to watch for it now.


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Robert0326 on October 08, 2009, 05:21:53 am
I just watched the show and I'm sorry to say that I was not impressed at all.  It was just the same old thing with nothing new.  The Radio Carbon Dating reveled that the stone could not have came from Atlantis and I was looking at Bimini and the surrounding area on Goggle Earth and for the life of me I can't see any trace of the outer ring of the city that was according to Plato 50 Stades in length which is just under 6 miles.  Plus if the area of Bimini and the Bahama Islands were Atlantis would there be evidence on land? 


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Jennifer O'Dell on October 08, 2009, 12:12:38 pm
I liked it, had some good footage of the Bimini Wall.

I don't think Greg Little places the Atlantis capital in the Bahamas, but somewhere nearer to Cuba...


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Wind on October 08, 2009, 01:32:31 pm
Quote
Plus if the area of Bimini and the Bahama Islands were Atlantis would there be evidence on land?  

That's true! You would think that there'd be some evidence wouldn’t you, it doesn't make sense that there's not.  If the Bahamas had in fact been Atlantis then there should be something still there on one of the islands, but there’s not.  
I think that the Atlantean people who are believed by some to have built the pyramids of Egypt and South America would have left something behind.


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Robert0326 on October 08, 2009, 07:16:04 pm
Perhaps Dr. Little should consider looking elsewhere for Atlantis.  Personally I am in support of Atlantis being in Antarctica.  I wish they would have talked about Antarctica a little more instead of the Santorini/Crete theory.


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Wind on October 09, 2009, 02:16:03 am
I wonder if they’d even be allowed to check out Antarctica, with the government having such a tight grip on it lately. 
Even if Atlantis isn’t there I'm sure that something is, perhaps something big. The secrecy surrounding it isn't all for nothing.


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Robert0326 on October 09, 2009, 03:13:08 am
Maybe if someone brought whoever is in charge of expeditions or research sufficient evidence to allow a team of archeologists and researchers to investigate areas of interest.


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Jennifer O'Dell on October 09, 2009, 11:59:26 am
I would love for an expedition to check out Antarctica.  Probably too expensive.

At the same time, when it comes to the Bahamas, I think people have some really unrealistic expectations of what the underwater ruins would look like.  In the first place, whatever cataclysm that sent something to the bottom of the ocean is not going to leave intact temples.  You would basically have slabs of rubble, which is what we see there. And that place is also Hurricane Central for the Atlantic, so remnants of a civilization were probably swept away one hundred times over (stuff like pottery).


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Robert0326 on October 09, 2009, 02:22:16 pm
Your right it wouldn't be cheap.  But it's probably the only place that hasn't been explored as far as archeology is concerned.  And I believe that there might still some remnant.   


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: nikas on October 09, 2009, 05:25:41 pm
I knew it!  There was something totally different on my History channel tonight.  Something about Africa instead.  I'm sure I'll eventually get the right show, I'll just have to watch for it now.

So Qoais, how was the Africa show?  ;D

I was waiting for this episode for like a month and on Wednesday morning the cable guy comes and disconnects most of these info-channels, NATGEO, DISCOVERY and History channel, apparently I wasn’t suppose to get them with my current plan. Can u believe that? So I didn’t see it either. Is there someone who recorded it? Can you post it over here just for us?


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: nikas on October 09, 2009, 05:30:25 pm
Watching the show.  I wish they wouldn't always include the Minoan/Santorini theme on every Atlantis special. That's the theory preferred by people too disinterested to actually look for it.

To summarize: Santorini was too small, too recent and in the wrong location to be Atlantis.  The island DIDN't have concentric circles, but rather a couple of fingers of land surrounding the island, and they were a passive people, not militaristic like Atlantis was.

Also, the disaster of Santorini did NOT ruin their civilization.  They were still making pottery one hundred years later.

Not to mention, the Santorini disaster has now been moved back to now around 1600 bc.

Yeah, desire, I am with you. Santorini does not stand a chance. there is not a single element to support the idea of thera being Atlantis. Minoans were indeed Greeks or predecessors of Greeks while Atlanteans weren't.
Plato specified that in one night and day of misfortune (rain and earthquakes) the Island disappeared. Thera did not submerge, rather it blew up. Is not even near any of the possible locations for the pillars.


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: nikas on October 09, 2009, 05:44:04 pm
Perhaps Dr. Little should consider looking elsewhere for Atlantis.  Personally I am in support of Atlantis being in Antarctica.  I wish they would have talked about Antarctica a little more instead of the Santorini/Crete theory.

You know Robert, one of the biggest problems with Atlantis research is that is being done by people that have no knowledge on the subject. With all due respect to Greg, who is the nicest person I have ever spoke to, he is not a doctor of Geology or any other related sciences need it for this research. Yes he is a doctor of something (Psychology perhaps?!) but he is not either a geologist or an archeologist.  His knowledge is unrelated….

There are two major problems with his locations. (There are more but I only gona give two!!!)
1) All geologists, including that open-minded (who is open to alternative science) the one from Boston, that has examined the area… claim with certain that it is a natural formation. There is not a single geologist to back Greg's theory.

2) Not a single Archeologist has shown any interest on his work, in a long term. They may have looked at it but backed up and gone. If there was any manmade evidence down there that showed any human activity, even not related to Atlantis, some archeologist or perhaps anthropologist would have contacted him.
Sorry Greg but you’re loosing your time with that location, and not only but you’re exhausting your finances.
As I told greg once, find me one detain in Plato’s work that pinpoints to bimini and I will be your best follower.
As for You Robert and your Antarctica, I don’t know if the government is doing something fishy there (why not) how in heck would atlanteans survive that cold weather when it is proven scientifically that the ice sheets are at least 400,000 years old? Where on Plato’s work did you find anything that indicates something like that?


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: nikas on October 09, 2009, 05:50:20 pm
I would love for an expedition to check out Antarctica.  Probably too expensive.

At the same time, when it comes to the Bahamas, I think people have some really unrealistic expectations of what the underwater ruins would look like.  In the first place, whatever cataclysm that sent something to the bottom of the ocean is not going to leave intact temples.  You would basically have slabs of rubble, which is what we see there. And that place is also Hurricane Central for the Atlantic, so remnants of a civilization were probably swept away one hundred times over (stuff like pottery).
Ok Jeniffer you're right that we can't expect to find intact buildings, rather ruins. Were are they? the ruins? Square blocks? where is the potery? not a single potery is found in biminis. There are countles underwater ruins all over the world. the ones that are man made have alwas some potery, while biminis does not.

So now tell me what are the unrealistic expectations? People are just sceptical of Greg's claims. that's all.  ???


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: mdsungate on October 10, 2009, 01:00:23 am
 :)  Okay, I saw the show, and I have to be totally honest… I’m ashamed to say, I fell asleep half way through it, LOL.  To be fair to Greg, I’m exhausted from working late nights for several weeks now, so it wasn’t him.  But I’m going to have to agree with RobertO’ there wasn’t much that was new.  I’m going to watch it again as it airs twice more this week, and give it a second chance.  There was great pictures of the Bimini Wall.  And what I found that was totally bogus, was that they did find an artifact, which looked most certainly to be a stone anchor, but because of some stupid law about coral, they were forced to put it back.  What the heck?  There are tons of coral all over the world, and Greg finds an artifact that might be physical proof of Atlantis and has to put it back???  I’m speechless about that!

But I’m going to have to ask all my Atlantean friends for a refresher here… I’m sure Nikas will know the exact phrase of Plato that I’m trying to recall, as I only have read the usual English translations of Timaeus and Critias.  But didn’t Plato say that the lost “continent” of Atlantis was “the way to other islands”? 

So as to what you are all saying as to the Bahama’s not being the correct location for Atlantis, wouldn’t the Atlanteans have dominated all the islands in the region surrounding their “continent”?   What I’m saying is that perhaps this supposed seawall, (that is now submerged), is not Atlantis itself, but one of the nearby outposts. 

As to Atlantis being in Antarctica,  I would think that the Peri Reis maps would have had a notation like “ATLANTIS”  ::)written on it, LOL, since they accurately depict the land mass beneath the ice, as modern sonar have confirmed, (it is actually two land masses as drawn on the Peri Reis maps).   ;D

Greg is looking for evidence in a catamaran in water that is still comparatively shallow, and only requires a wet suit and tank. I would expect that a submerged "continent" to be a lot deeper down.  But the Grand Bahama bank would hardly qualify as a “continent” even if it rose above sea level today. 

But let us not forgot that Greg is NOT acting on what Plato had to say about Atlantis, but on what Cayce said about it, and his prophesy that parts of it would rise just at the time that that the Bimini Wall was discovered by Dr. Valentine.   And someone correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe that the A.R.E. has something to do with the funding for Greg’s expeditions, no? 

I love all the conjecture of where Atlantis actually is.  I have to totally agree with the nay on Minoan/Santorini theme and I’m just as sick of that as Desiree is, LOL.  People look for it in just about every place on the planet, yes even under the frozen ice of Antarctica.  But perhaps there’s some truth in all of it.  After all someone in the remote past created an unnatural grid system and harnessed the natural energy field of the entire planet for reasons yet unknown.  Their mark has been left in virtually every corner of the globe.  The work of these megalithic builders sill stands after countless years, and speaks of a united planet or at least one dominated by a global power whose work was imitated by the other civilizations.  It was an Atlantean world, and Atlantis left it’s mark in many, many places.

Sorry Qoais about the programming.  You’d think the History Channel would be more consistent.   But when you do catch it, let me know if you think that was Greg’s wife Laura on the boat talking.  How come they didn’t give her any credit?  Very politically incorrect, LOL. 

And Greg if you read this KUDOS again.  The very least of what you've accomplished is to bring our favorite topic to the forefront of popular thinking.  How can anyone hope to discover Atlantis if no one is taking it seriously, and you have accomplished that, to say the least.  What ever our own individual view points about Atlanits might be, you have done us all a great service by making the public take a serious look at the subject.

Mike

 


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Robert0326 on October 10, 2009, 09:44:22 am
Nikas,

Core samples taken from the Ross Sea during the Byrd expedition of 1947-1948 shows glacial marine sediment from the present to 6000 years ago.  From 6,000 to 15,000 the sediment is fine-grained suggests an absence of ice from the area.  Then there is a zone fine-grained sediment from 30,000 to 40,000 years ago, again suggesting that the area was ice free.  From 40,000 to 133,550 years ago there are two zones of coarse and two zones of medium-grained texture.  While compare the three samples two of them shows that the end of the temperate period and beginning of the most recent glacial period started 6,000 years ago and the third just 1,000 years after that.  So you see Nikas Antarctica has had very recent period of temperate climate.  This is why and many others believe that Antarctica is the sight of the lost city.

Plato states that the city was on a continent larger than Libya and Asia together.  Hmmmmm,  I wonder which one it could be?  8)




Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: mdsungate on October 10, 2009, 10:18:15 pm
 :)  Well if that's the case RobertO, why hasn't anyone suggested Australia?  LOL, only joking.  Actually I wouldn't be the least bit surprised by that theory.  Although I've never heard of it, just about everywhere else has been suggested.  We really should ask Nikas about the exact translation of the ancient Greek translation of that Lybia and Asia thing.  Wasn't that Asia minor, anyway?  Asia is an extreemly large continent, it wouldn't leave much of the Atlantic Ocean left to navigate, LOL.   8)


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Robert0326 on October 10, 2009, 10:40:55 pm
Maybe he did mean Asia Minor.  Who knows.  But as you can see on a map, Antarctica fit just fine and very easy to navigate to.  An your probably right about the A.R.E funding his expeditions.  So the Littles would have to go where they tell them. 


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: nikas on October 12, 2009, 07:23:03 am
Ok first of all, Plato (or …the Egyptian priest) never called Atlantis a continent!!!! It’s a pure fiction…or at least with the modern notion. The word used is ηπειρον (Ipiron/Ipiros), which is used even today and has two meanings; Continent and West. In the ancient time had only one meaning, the western part of the continent (Europe) with respect to Greece. North-west of Greece, Southern Albania and Southern Italy are in a way still called Ipiros (Northern Continent!)

Let me translate for you the part that mdsungate is referring to and pay attention to what Plato said. Bear in mind that Greek language is a tricky one. A word can have a 1,000 different meanings…on the other hand…a 1,000 words can describe the same thing. You can’t translate Plato by using PERSEUS because they just give you one of the possible manings of a particular word. When you translate ancient greek one has to look at the previews and the following word in order to get the real meaning of that word.

Quote
Τοτε(At that time) γαρ(because/was) πορευσιµον(it existed/present) ην(in) το(to) εκει(that) πελαγος(sea),

At that time there was present in that SEA,

So it was present…is not anymore!!! Helloooo!!!!
Pelagos is a Pelasgian word which means Pellag (small closed sea). This word by itself proves that he is not referring to Atlantic Ocean?! Read Babiniotis, Lexicon of the Greek Language.
 
Quote
Νησον(island) γαρ(because) προ(first/just) του() στοµατος ειχεν(has) ο καλειτε(called),
an island before/in front, the mouth(harbor)called,


No mater what Greg is saying, he can’t change the meaning of the words. It is clear that Atlantis was before you reach the pillars and not after. PRO TOU means always before you reach something. Regardless if George Montexano is trying to change the direction.

Quote
ως φατε(as eating), υµεις(you) Ηρακλεους(Hercules) στηλας(pillars),
as eat, by you the Pillars of Heracles,


It looks like these are the pillars that Greeks named them and they’re mentioning during dinner. Perhaps during praying….
 
Quote
η δε(an) νησος(island) αµα(as) Λιβυης(Libya) ην(in) και(and) Ασιας(Asia) µειζων(combined/together),
an island, as(big) Libya or/and Egypt together.

Ok, here…as big as Libya and Asia means the city states, not the modern continents!!! People, there were no continents for ancient people?! They were fewer in numbers. The comparison was made in 600 B.C and Lybia and Asia must have also been some states…e.t.c 

Quote
Εξ(from) ης(here) επιβατον(travel) επι(through/toward) τας(to) αλλας(other) νησους(island),
From here you could travel to the other islands,



So from Atlantis one can travel to the other Island. How difficult is to understand that the priest is talking with respect to east-west. So these islands are further from Atlantis. Atlantis is before you reach the pillars. Atlantis is somewhere near Tunis-Sardinia….
 
Quote
Τοις(which/to) τοτε(at time) εγιγνετο(became/was) πορευοµενοις(existent),
Which at that time were present,

 
Quote
εκ δε των νησων επιτην καταντικρυ πασαν ηπειρον,
and from these islands to the opposite continent,


Here is the moment where he mentioned the word Continent. He is saying that from these islands one can get to the opposite continent. How hard is to understand from these entire islands; Ibiza, Sardinia, Corsica…e.t.c one can get to the opposite continent? Is the priest talking, so the opposite continent would be opposite to Egypt! So it’s Europe. There are only two continents at this time. Europe and opposite, (Lybia, Egypt, Asia…)
 
Quote
την περι τον αληθινον εκεινον ποντον.
in those real waters/coasts.

 
Quote
ταδε µεν γαρ, οσα εντος του στοµατος ου λεγοµεν,
Now, everything with this mouth we talking about,

Here my friends, he is clearly stating that Atlantis is within this mouth…so is not outside the mouth (Pillars of Hercules)
 
Quote
φαινεται λιµην στενον τινα εχων εισπλουν,
is visible a narrow harbor just to pass,


So one can see a narrow harbor. That means is not narrow anymore at the time of 600 B.C but at the time of Atlantis.
 
Quote
εκεινο δε πελαγος, οντως,
but that other SEA, of course,


Aha, east-west, we have Atlantis then the mouth (the pillars) and then another Sea. Hello people does it look like Atlantic Ocean anymore?
 
Quote
η τε περιεχουσα αυτο γη παντελως αληθως ορθοτατ’
and the surrounding straight LAND


aha again. This surrounding almost straight land exist only in west Mediterranean.
 


Quote
αν λεγοιτο ηπειρος.
Could be called real continent. Or could be translated {if not really called the west…}

Quote
εν δε δη τη Ατλαντιδι νησω,
And in this Atlantis Island,

 
Quote
ταυτη µεγαλη συνεστη και θαυµαστη δυναµις βασιλεων,
this great empire and Admired powerful kingdom,
 


Quote
κρατουσα µεν απασης της νησου,
held(ruled) over the whole island,
Pay attention now; they rule the island.
 


Quote
πολλων δε αλλων νησων και µερων της ηπειρου,
many other islands, and parts of the continent,

many other island around them and some parts of the continent. He is not saying the opposite continent or other continent but just CONTINENT. Which means on the same side of Egypt. Now as he is describing the empire he is “traveling” west-east. So Atlantis is around Malta and rules all the surrounding Islands parts on Africa… 


Quote
προς δε τουτοις ετιτων εντος τηδε Λιβυης,
from here in addition parts towards Libya,

You see here how is traveling west-east. He is already in Tunis and travels toward Egypt. Parts in Tunis some parts in Libya and up to near Egypt. Not Including Egypt yet.

Quote
µεν ηρχον µεχρι προς Αιγυπτον,
within the columns as far as Egypt,

 
Quote
της δε Ευρωπης µεχρι Τυρρηνιας.
and of Europe as far as Tyrrhenian.

Quote
Now he jumps on the opposite continent (Europe) and travels east-west. So Atlantis rules up to Tyrrhenian Sea, which is in Sicily. Atlantis is not ruling Atlantic Ocean but as far as Sicily…with respect to Egypt.

One has to understand that is the Egyptian priest who tells the story and not Plato.

Do you really want the truth about Atlantis then pay attention to it:
The sea around Malta was called Atlantis Pelagus. The West Mediterranean was called OCEANUS. The Island of Atlantis was south-west of Malta (Malta being the Atlas Mountain). The Stadio that you’re looking for was 55 meters and not 150 m. It is the Egyptian Stadion not the Greek one.
Also, the Temple Of Poseidon is nothing more a replica of Parthenon. (Actually the other way around). The measurements given by the Egyptian fit precisely the two temples. The secret? Well, he called it barbaric, which he refers to Ionic and Doric civilizations…..


Anyway, if you have anymore questions I am ready to answer them,

Respect,
NIKAS


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Robert0326 on October 12, 2009, 09:13:42 am
I'm not going to pretend that I know how to translate ancient Greek but if a word can have a 1,000 different meaning how can you be sure that you are correct.  I'm not trying to a jerk about it so don't take offense.  I'm just saying.  But I did like how you used your translation to only fit your theory.  Clever.


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Qoais on October 12, 2009, 11:52:06 am
Well, here's a question for you.  What did the pillars of Hercules represent?

I read that it was a demarcation, that one could travel no further, one could not travel beyond the pillars.  It was the end of the line.


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: nikas on October 12, 2009, 02:25:19 pm
I'm not going to pretend that I know how to translate ancient Greek but if a word can have a 1,000 different meaning how can you be sure that you are correct.  I'm not trying to a jerk about it so don't take offense.  I'm just saying.  But I did like how you used your translation to only fit your theory.  Clever.

Ok I did explain something Robert but it looks like you didn't go through and read everything that I wrote. I said it has 1,000 meanings but only one meaning with certain words. I said you look at the previews and after word. That's how you determine which is the meaning of that word. Not all words have so many meanings. Certain descriptive words or nouns....

I'm not trying to a jerk about it so don't take offense.  I'm just saying. 

None taken. I like challenges... ;D

But I did like how you used your translation to only fit your theory.  Clever.

First of all, I did not alter anything to my translation. It is others who have done so and mine sound strange. Sometimes the truth(reality) is stranger than fiction. And second the only thing clever about it; the translations 99% correct.

P.S Robert you stated that Antarctica was warm recently and gave some data. I want you to reference them. By whom and when....



Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: mdsungate on October 12, 2009, 08:34:12 pm
 :)  I’m not doubting your translation, Nikas.  So then if you’re correct in you theory the Atlantis was much smaller than a continent, (as the popular conception of what Plato meant), and was located south west of Malta, then it would seem that a mistranslation started the whole “myth” of Atlantis being in the Atlantic Ocean.  

Forgive me for not getting out my copy of Plato’s dialogues, but it seems to me that if memeory serves me correctly, the Priests of Sais, seemed to imply, (at least in the popular translation), that the Atlanteans endangered all the people of the Mediterranean, and came from outside the area.  How does the ancient Greek translation differ in this part.  Also I’ve gone on your web site, and I’m not sure I understand the graphics you display.  It seems like they’re trying to say that when Atlantis sank, the terrain of the whole area inside the current straights of Gibraltar changed.  Would you elaborate on what that is all about?

There are many that contend that Plato made the whole tale up, and used it as an allegory for a utopian society.  Even his own student Aristotle apparently thought that about him.  I however think that almost everyone misses the whole point of the dialogues.  Plato’s leaving the dialogues unfinished only adds to the speculation.  I personally believe that even Aristotle didn’t get Plato’s drift, and Plato abandoned what was and still is a very unpopular theory,… the theory of destruction, which the Priests of Sais introduce at the very beginning of the dialogues.  But everyone seems to think that the myth of Atlantis is the point of the story, when I don’t see it that way.  I believe what Plato was driving at was that as perfect and utopian as Atlantis was, it was all wiped away in a fortnight, and that is the fragile state of our human endeavors.  :-[  

And Qoais, feel free to jump in here, as I know that this is much more your expertise than mine, LOL. :P

Here’s the problem I see with your theory, Nikas, (and bear in mind that I’m not saying you’re wrong, or being critical of it)… It implies that Plato started the ball rolling on a total misconception that Atlantis was a large landmass in the Atlantic Ocean.  If that were true, (and again, I’m not saying that it isn’t true), then it would mean that all the people that have written about Atlantis, (people like Otto Muck, Donnelley, Berlitz, etc), were all acting under a misconception.  The “myth” of this Island Continent has been perpetuated for over 2,000 years then.  And it is my observation that lies don’t live on, only the truth endures.  So I have a problem in thinking that all these people could have been duped into a falsehood, and despite all their instincts, spend years researching and trying to discover something that was a misinterpretation of the ancient Greek writings.  :-\

Here’s another problem I have with your theory, (and again you asked for a challenge, so please take this as such and not as an attack on what you might believe, for I totally respect your theory, and that you may in fact be correct while others could have been wrong):

Plato is not the only source of this myth.  It exits even more prevalently in the writings of the Hindu and Buddhist traditions.    Those far eastern traditions of a continent in the Atlantic that sank, (as well as an ever older one in the Pacific Ocean that also sank), are most probably even older than Plato’s account of Atlantis.  

Then there are the American Indian legends of them having come from and large island in the Atlantic Ocean that sank, (not from China by route of the Bering Straight, LOL).   And here we might add in Charles Berlitz’s observation that all the ancient peoples name for the Atlantic Ocean has the same root word in all four corners of that ocean, this not being a myth at all, but a very odd coincidence.

Lastly we need to mention Edgar Cayce’s readings on Atlantis, which if your theory is correct, than he made innumerable medical diagnoses correctly, but was totally wrong in regard to Atlantis.  

But as you mentioned earlier, “truth is stranger than fiction” so perhaps there is yet another understanding to an even larger “truth.”  Perhaps Plato was referring to an Island state off the south west coast of Malta that sank, and it is this civilization that was in conflict with Ancient Greece.  It does stand to reason that earthquakes in the Mediterranean would sink landmasses in the Mediterranean Sea at the same point in time.  But perhaps at an even older point in time there was a technologically advanced civilization on a continenent in the Atlantic Ocean that sank, leaving only legends and former name… Atlantis, a name that seems to trigger a “race memory” in many people.  And perhaps this island state southwest of Malta, took on the name of this long forgotten people as their own.

And so I present to you the possibility that while your theory may be correct, that it may not tell the entire story… a story that Plato did not fully comprehend himself.  :o

Please take what I have written in the spirit that it was intended.  Again I mean no disrespect to your laudable theory.  But if you find some resistance to your belief on the part of other’s, than what I’ve stated here is perhaps why you might meet with some criticism of it.  I’ve only stated the obvious.   You are among friends here, (this is not AR, LOL), and we all have our own pet theories that will certainly meet with criticism.  And yes Robert0', I too want to know just when was the Antarctic warmer?   ;D

Mike


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: nikas on October 12, 2009, 10:01:37 pm
Ok Mike I see that you’re afraid you may offend me. I don’t get offended by intelligent people that ask smart, honest questions.

You’re right to ask questions and to be critical of my theory. I will try and answer all of them below;

:)  I’m not doubting your translation, Nikas.  So then if you’re correct in you theory the Atlantis was much smaller than a continent, (as the popular conception of what Plato meant), and was located south west of Malta, then it would seem that a mistranslation started the whole “myth” of Atlantis being in the Atlantic Ocean. 

That’s correct. Not just mistranslation but people like Donnelly and Edgar Casey…including here Cinematography…

Quote from: mdsungate
Forgive me for not getting out my copy of Plato’s dialogues, but it seems to me that if memory serves me correctly, the Priests of Sais, seemed to imply, (at least in the popular translation), that the Atlanteans endangered all the people of the Mediterranean, and came from outside the area.  How does the ancient Greek translation differ in this part?  Also I’ve gone on your web site, and I’m not sure I understand the graphics you display.  It seems like they’re trying to say that when Atlantis sank, the terrain of the whole area inside the current straights of Gibraltar changed.  Would you elaborate on what that is all about?

Yes they came from Atlantis Sea. Not Atlantis Ocean but Sea….Jowett mistake is that he translate it Sea for Ocean. That’s how all misconception started.

Atlantis sea(The sea around Malta). One misconception is that Atlantis was outside the pillars and Egypt + Greece were inside. When in reality it was the opposite. In ancient Greek, the priest explains that everything inside the Pillars is the area (modern; Tunis + Malta + Libya) while outside is Egypt and Greece.

Look at this passage:
Quote
Let me begin by observing first of all, that nine thousand was the sum of years which had elapsed since the war which was said to have taken place between those who dwelt outside the Pillars of Heracles and all who dwelt within them; this war I am going to describe. Of the combatants on the one side, the city of Athens was reported to have been the leader and to have fought out the war;

The war between those outside the pillars and those inside
   Between         Greece                            Atlantis.

When you read this passage in Greek he uses the word men and den, which is similar to Engish version of…John and Kate respectively (example).

In Greek you say the war between those outside and those inside. IMEN (the first) were the Greeks (the leaders) and IDEN were the Atlanteans.

You see how easy is translated by me.
And yes (to answer your question about the terrain change) Mediterranean changed a lot during that period. It is supported by science. Especially Geology and Oceanography.

Quote
There are many that contend that Plato made the whole tale up, and used it as an allegory for a utopian society.  Even his own student Aristotle apparently thought that about him.  I however think that almost everyone misses the whole point of the dialogues.  Plato’s leaving the dialogues unfinished only adds to the speculation.  I personally believe that even Aristotle didn’t get Plato’s drift, and Plato abandoned what was and still is a very unpopular theory,… the theory of destruction, which the Priests of Sais introduce at the very beginning of the dialogues.  But everyone seems to think that the myth of Atlantis is the point of the story, when I don’t see it that way.  I believe what Plato was driving at was that as perfect and utopian as Atlantis was, it was all wiped away in a fortnight, and that is the fragile state of our human endeavors.  :-[ 


Whoever thinks that Plato made it up has failed in understanding Philosophy Especially Greek Philosophy. The etymology of PHILOSOPFER = Love + Wisdom or can be translated as in search of truth. These people were in love with the truth. Socrates even invented his own methodology (which still the best to date) the Socratic methodology. The Way of finding the truth….The dialog. And that’s why Plato wrote most of his work in dialog style.
To say that he invented the story would be a fallacy. Only ignorant of Ancient history would make such a claim. I would understand if they accuse Critias or Solon or even the Egyptian priest but not Plato!!!
As for the Dialog’s ending I believe it got lost or something…or maybe he didn’t have time to finish. I have nothing to say about it…as I don’t know what happened.

Quote
Here’s the problem I see with your theory, Nikas, (and bear in mind that I’m not saying you’re wrong or being critical of it)… It implies that Plato started the ball rolling on a total misconception that Atlantis was a large landmass in the Atlantic Ocean.  If that were true, (and again, I’m not saying that it isn’t true), then it would mean that all the people that have written about Atlantis, (people like Otto Muck, Donnelley, Berlitz, etc), were all acting under a misconception.  The “myth” of this Island Continent has been perpetuated for over 2,000 years then.  And it is my observation that lies don’t live on, only the truth endures.  So I have a problem in thinking that all these people could have been duped into a falsehood, and despite all their instincts, spend years researching and trying to discover something that was a misinterpretation of the ancient Greek writings.  :-\

First of all Plato never said anything. He only recorded a conversation between Socrates and Critias Quoting an Egyptian Priest but translated by Solon. Nowhere on the description did the priest say that it was a huge landmass in the Atlantic Ocean. I explained to you that he said that the island was before you reach the pillars not beyond. That’s another misconception. But the problem with Atlantis starts with the location of the Pillars. To answer here also the question from Qoasis; the location of the pillars was not what people think today. I have spent countless time at classical work (600 B.C – 300 B.C) and I found not a single reference that point at Gibraltar. They all pinpoint near Tunis, between Sardinia and Egadi Island. It’s a funny thing that even during Plato’s time…the location of the pillars was in dispute. They knew about it (near Egadi Islands) but no one knew the exact locations. Only at written records after 300 B.C did I find references that pinpoint the location at Iberia. However I have explained all these about the pillars at another thread.

Quote
Here’s another problem I have with your theory, (and again you asked for a challenge, so please take this as such and not as an attack on what you might believe, for I totally respect your theory, and that you may in fact be correct while others could have been wrong):

Plato is not the only source of this myth.  It exits even more prevalently in the writings of the Hindu and Buddhist traditions.    Those far eastern traditions of a continent in the Atlantic that sank, (as well as an ever older one in the Pacific Ocean that also sank), are most probably even older than Plato’s account of Atlantis. 
Yes he may not be the only one but he is the most correct one or at least the most detailed. Now, I have heard of tales in other cultures that mention Atlantis but I am not sure if they’re talking about the same place. The main reason why I am skeptical is that Atlantis is not the real name. It’s just a translation in Greek. Who knows what the real name was…so once more people speculate just to get attention.  And furthermore, why do they have to be Atlantis? And not some other catastrophes? A destruction of that magnitude must have been global and it may have destroyed other civilizations as well, not only Atlantis?!


Quote
Lastly we need to mention Edgar Cayce’s readings on Atlantis, which if your theory is correct, than he made innumerable medical diagnoses correctly, but was totally wrong in regard to Atlantis. 


Look, I don’t believe in this psychic thing. And I have no Idea what exactly this Casey was. I watched a documentary one day on history channel and he looked like a charlatan to me. He was talking about Crystals and flying saucers in Atlantis time which is a ridiculous thing to say when Plato describes a civilization with Spears and horses and swords for armory. A primitive society with our standards, not even close to Romans or even Egyptian civilization.

Quote
But as you mentioned earlier, “truth is stranger than fiction” so perhaps there is yet another understanding to an even larger “truth.”  Perhaps Plato was referring to an Island state off the south west coast of Malta that sank, and it is this civilization that was in conflict with Ancient Greece.  It does stand to reason that earthquakes in the Mediterranean would sink landmasses in the Mediterranean Sea at the same point in time.  But perhaps at an even older point in time there was a technologically advanced civilization on a continent in the Atlantic Ocean that sank, leaving only legends and former name… Atlantis, a name that seems to trigger a “race memory” in many people.  And perhaps this island state southwest of Malta, took on the name of this long forgotten people as their own.

That’s a possibility. I strongly believe that at one point in time there was a civilization more advanced than ours who may have genetically experimented or you named it. Nevertheless, Atlantis is not the case….unfortunately. But as I said this is just a believe based on just certain observation without scientific prove, nevertheless the case of Atlantis is a 100% a scientific research done by me.

Quote
And so I present to you the possibility that while your theory may be correct, that it may not tell the entire story… a story that Plato did not fully comprehend himself.  :o

Yes…of course but one thing at a time. Lets find Atlantis, make people believe in it and then we look for more.
Please take what I have written in the spirit that it was intended. 

Quote
Again I mean no disrespect to your laudable theory.  But if you find some resistance to your belief on the part of other’s, than what I’ve stated here is perhaps why you might meet with some criticism of it.  I’ve only stated the obvious.   You are among friends here, (this is not AR, LOL), and we all have our own pet theories that will certainly meet with criticism.  And yes Robert0', I too want to know just when was the Antarctic warmer?   ;D

Of course I believe that you intended no harm or offense in anyway. I am enjoying debating with you and wish to continue. As I previously stated, it’s called Socratic Methodology…dialog and only dialog and truth will prevail…
Respect,
NIKAS

[/quote]


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Robert0326 on October 13, 2009, 02:33:48 am
Ok guys. I hope this helps.  The cores were taken by Dr. Jack Hough of the Univ. of Illinios during the Byrd expedition of 1947-1948.  They were taken to the Carnegie Instition in Washington D.C. and dated by the ionium method of radioactive dating by Dr. W.D. Urry.  The saples were takenfrom three different locations.  70 deg. 17' S 178 deg. 15' W 2,990 M deep, 69 deg. 12' S 180 deg. S. at 3,130 M. deep, 68 deg. 26' S 179 deg. 15'W at 3,292 M. deep. 

The fine-grained sediment that was found is the sort that is carried by rivers from ice-free continents.  Also during the Byrd expedition of 1935 geologists made a rich discovery of fossils on the sides of Mount Weaver (Lat. 86 deg. 58'S) which included leaf and stem impressions and fossilized wood.  In 1952 they identified two species of a tree fern called Glossopteris once common to southern continents (Africa, South America and Australia.)


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Qoais on October 13, 2009, 10:28:36 am
G'day people,
Sungate, I have to pretty well agree with a lot of Nikas's theory, because I actually worked on it for quite a while myself, and without knowing the proper translations, could see how his conclusion is correct.  When we were back on Robert Sarmast's forum, we chatted about this and I too, did research on just where the pillars of Hercules was at the time, and found that no one knew in Plato's time where they really were originally, just that it was an expression used to denote "you can travel no farther".  I researched into where Hercules supposedly put up his bragging pillars and found that the one that "fit the bill" was the one he erected in the place where he destroyed the city of the Amazons.  Cherronesus I believe it was called.  From reading Diodours Siculus, it seems the lay of the land as they knew it, is not what it actually was.  Therefore, I found that Cherronesus was near modern day Tunis. 

One has to read the passage over and over and stay focused but Siculus says:

"As mythology relates, their home was on an island which, because it was in the west, was called Hespera, and it lay in the marsh Tritonis.  This marsh was near the ocean which surrounds the earth and received its name from a certain river Triton which emptied int it: and this marsh was also near Ethiopia and that mountain by the shore of the ocean which is the highest of those in the vicinity and impinges upon the ocean and is called by the Greeks, Atlas.  The island mentioned above was of great size and full of fruit-bearing trees of every kind, from which the natives secured their food.  It contained also a multitude of flocks and herds, namely, of goats and sheep, from which the possessors received milk and meat for their sustenance: but grain the nations used not at all because the use of this fruit of the earth had not yet been discovered among them."

So - taking the first line we see a great number of things that fit with Nikas' theory.  There was a large island in the west.  Called Hespera, BECAUSE it was in the west.  However we also find that it lay in the marsh Tritonis, and Tritonis was near the ocean that surrounds the earth.  But also in this same place we have the famous mount Atlas.  I've posted this in my thread Plato's Atlantis My Theory, but since that thread is over a hundred pages now with my ramblings, I will re-post a picture of the area in question:

I took this picture from Georges site, at first just to show where he was claiming Atlantis was, and then it dawned on me that it helped Nikas' theory as well:

(http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t267/Qoais/GeorgeosLocation.gif)

I will continue in another post, so as to keep each post readably short.


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Qoais on October 13, 2009, 10:58:13 am
In the picture in the previous post you will see a huge circular indentation on the eastern end of the Atlas mountains.  This is the Marsh Tritonis.  I did some research on that as well, and I could re post it here but it would take me some time to go back in my thread to find it and I kind of don't think this thread is really the place we should be talking about this.  Nikas has a thread I believe and we should have a go at his theory in his thread.

Anyway, we can see from the picture that at the time Siculus wrote, (and he says he was copying from earlier writers) that they thought things were in places where they weren't!!  so if we accept everything at face value for the times - like what they supposedly knew and what they understood and what they assumed and what they deducted from tales of sailors etc., we (I) find that they did think the Eastern end of the Med. was a harbour and that the Western end was part of or connected to, the world ocean.  Therefore, they thought that at the point where the water narrowed at Malta  (Sicily) was the passage to the ocean, therefore, the pillars of Heracles "as the Greeks called them" (in other words a demarcation point) were at that point.   Looking at the picture I posted, we see that this fits more or less with the story that Hercules put up pillars where he razed Cherronesus.

He says the island was of great size and in describing it's bounty, more or less describes Atlantis.  Then Siculus says:

"Setting out from the city of Cherronesus, the account continues, the amazons embarked upon great ventures, a longing having come over them to invade many parts of the inhabited world.  The first people against whom they advanced, according to the tale, was the Atlantians, the most civilized men among the inhabitants of those regions, who dwelt in a prosperous country and possess great cities: it was among them, we are told, that mythology places the birth of the gods, in the regions which lie along the shore of the ocean, in this respect agreeing with those among the Greeks who relate legends, and about this we shall speak in detail a little later." 

Continuing:  After a pitched battle with the Atlantians in their city of Cerne they defeated the Atlantians and took over that city.  They killed the men and youths, and took into slavery everyone else in the city, so the rest of the Atlantians capitualted and said they'd do whatever she wanted.  She behaved honorably toward them then and:

"whereupon the Atlantians presented her with magnificent presents and by public decree voted to her notable honours, and she in return accepted their courtesy and in addition promised that she would show kindness to their nation"

(Forgot to metion this earlier)  "The story is also told that the marsh Tritonis disappeared from sight in the course of an earthquake, when those parts of it which lay towards the ocean were torn asunder."

If you look at the picture, you will see a Cherronesus (translated - peninsula) sticking straight out into the Med at the eastern end of the Atlas mountains, towards Sicily.  We know at one time there was a land bridge to Sicily, but I've had a number of people argue as to just when it collapsed.  I suspect some of it broke away from time to time, and I think that in known history they may have always been a passage there, but farther back, I suspect the passage was narrower and shallower.  Again, that thing that picks me the most - timelines!!   

I would also like to mention that although the Amazons supposedly lived on an island, as did the Atlantians, they were likely islands within the marsh, as again, if  go back to my thread, I've posted where it is said that one can walk through the water to get to other islands in the marsh and then I suppose, to the "continent" or terra firma.


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Qoais on October 13, 2009, 11:21:47 am
Ok - I'll try to slow down a bit and make some sense!!

Yes, I believe that an erroneous translation has been perpetuated over the centuries.  When people started becoming interested  in Atlantis after Ignatious Donnelly brought it to the forefront again, THEN moderns started questioning the translations and we've been debating it ever since.  Somewhere in this forum there is a thread with the complete translation by Atalante, and the determinitives are explained regarding the language.  I was totally surprised myself when I read the differences in the translations by the different writers, Bury, Jowett, and others.   It changed the whole scenario.

My previous post was a bit disjointed so I hope you could follow along.  What I'm trying to say, is that if we take what we think was known at the time, with no embellishments, and no assuming things beyond their capacity of understanding, I believe that the two ends of the Med. were considered two bodies of water, joined by a narrow channel.  However, the western one would have been considered part of the world ocean because they thought that whatever land was west of that channel, was islands - which it isn't.  So we in our modern times, knowing that it isn't, try to place an island way out yonder in the Atlantic ocean.  I believe Nikas is correct when he says that only two "contients" or "mainlands" were thought to exist.  One on the north of the Med. and one on the South, and the two were surrounded by the world ocean, of which, the western end of the Med. (Atlas's ocean) was a part.  They did believe in the ancient times, that they could access the world ocean by going east as well.  Siculus in his works, copied from Homer as well.  Here is what is known as the Homerian map, although it's a copy of a copy of a copy etc., as apparently we don't have the original, but I think it might be safe to assume that the copy people didn't screw the whole thing up totally!!

(http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t267/Qoais/HomersMap.png)



Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Qoais on October 13, 2009, 12:17:17 pm
Scholars debate as to whether Atlantis was real or allegory.  It is my opinion, that it was both.

Plato says he's using Solon's notes to write the dialogs.  Fine.  The Egyptians kept wonderful records and it's possible that while chatting about what they knew - and Solon was on a mission to gain knowledge wasn't he? - they talked about a peoples to the west of them and described what THEY had been told about them.  Now according to Siculus, it seems that whoever wrote the history he was copying for his works, took it for granted that the Atlantians were located near the Amazons.  It was not a great mystery to THEM where the Atlantians lived because after all, theirs was the land where the gods were born and where everything was as it should be.  In other words, perfect.  How could it be otherwise - in the land of the gods' birth?  Plato was striving to teach the Greeks to be perfect.  Who else would he hold up for an example, but those who already WERE supposedly perfect?  The story of Atlantis is Plato's idea of perfection, before it deteriorated.  He's trying to point out that yes, even perfection can be destroyed if it's allowed.  So we get this wonderful description of Atlantis, Plato's idea of the ideal.  Everything necessary to luxurious living was available if they wanted to use it, but being of a more spiritual bent, they chose not to (until later). 

Now I'm absolutely dense when it comes to the origin of the gods, and I don't know who first wrote about the gods and their achievements so correct me if I'm wrong here.  Was it Plato or someone else who told about the God Poseidon mating with Clieto and having 10 sons?  Then, according to someone - I don' know who - one of those sons had 10 sons (one of Atlas's brothers that is) and they became the Titans.  Right?  So was it Plato who actually started this myth, or was it in existence previously?  It seems the Greeks (from hind site looking back) believed Poseidon mated with Clieto and had 10 sons, but nothing was said about their home life or the land they lived in until Plato described it.

We must keep in mind that Plato had been asked to tell a story of stories, one that would outshine all the stories they'd told as children to earn awards. He wouldn't have been asked if he wasn't good at it in the first place.   Everyone says Plato was not a historian he was a philosopher and because of that, he got things mixed up and had no imagination.  I say because he was a philosopher and knew the minds of men, he would have had a fabulous imagination and knew how to get through to the mind set of his times.  Not only that, he had in mind what would be a perfect society.  He knew what his peers wanted to hear and he did a fantastic job of marrying the two ideals together and still be true to his own innate beliefs of a perfect society.  Who better to choose for his example of an ideal, but the gods themselves?  Plato more than achieved what he'd been asked to do. 

He told the story of all time when you think about it, as we're still trying to find the place he talked about. Here's a man that took it upon himself to actually describe the home of the gods.  Whether anything like this was actually in Solon's notes, we'll never know, but if you're going to tell an award winning story, why not start at the beginning, with the land of the gods?  Atlantis, where in the beginning they were spiritual and peaceful.  Just what Plato was hoping the Greeks would aspire to. 

What I question is the war because I don't see such a thing actually happening especially in the time line Plato gives.  Also, altho is he telling the Greeks that they should change and try to be perfection, it was the Greeks that supposedly won out against the people who had been perfection in the past.  Therefore, what would be the point of the Greeks becoming like the Atlantians, when the Atlantians lost?  He also shows that perfection cannot be maintained, so why should they try for it in the first place? 



Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Qoais on October 13, 2009, 01:58:24 pm
In my own thread, I've been postulating about the possibility that Plato and a few others over the centuries were visiting the future in mind altered states.  That's why I said here, that without embellishing anything and just accept that what they knew about the lay of the land was different than what it really was.

That is not to say that Plato didn't see the akashic records and took a tale from there, however, in light of scientific discoveries, I would suggest that he saw the future not the past.  If science is correct and the earth was mostly covered in ice up until 10,000 years or so ago, there wouldn't really be any place for the non-existent triremes to sail, would there?


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Qoais on October 13, 2009, 05:09:59 pm
Diodorus Siculus Book III 56: 1-4

In the above noted writings, Siculus goes on to tell of the genesis of the gods of Atlantis.  

He says Uranus was their first god, who had 45 sons from a number of wives and of these, eighteen were by Titaea, each of them bearing a distinct name, but all of them as a group were called after their mother, Titans.  Uranus also had daughters.  The eldest Basileia far excelled the others in both prudence and understanding, reared all her brothers, showing them collectively a mother's kindness (their mother had died).  She united in marriage with her favorite brother Hyperion and they had two children Helius and Selene.  Her other brothers, the Titans, fearing that Hyperion would divert the royal power to himself , they killed him and cast Helius into the Eridanus river.  (a footnote marks that the Eridanus river is the Po river - the Po river being in Italy)  The sister Selene who loved her brother, threw herself off the roof, but their mother Basileia while searching for her son's body along the banks of the river, fell into a swoon in which she had a vision in which her son Helius stood over her and told her not to mourn as the Titans would get what was coming to them for their crime.  He said that he and his sister by some divine providence, would be transformed into immortal natures, since that which had formerly been called the "holy fire" in the heavens would be called by men Helius ("the sun") and that addressed as "mene" would be called Selene ("the moon").  When she was aroused from the swoon, and after telling the crown what had happened to her and her children, she became frenzied, and seizing such of her daughter's playthings as could make a noise, she began to wander over the land, with her hair hanging free, inspired by the noise of the kettledrums and cymbals, so that those who saw her were struck with astonishment.  And all men were filled with pity at her misfortune and some were clinging to her body, when there came a mighty storm and continuous crashes of thunder and lightning: and in the midst of this Basileia passed from sight, whereupon the corwds of people, amazed at this reversal of fortune, transferred the names and the honours of Helius and Selene to the stars of the sky, and as for their mother, they considered her to be a goddess and erected altars to her, and imitating the the incidents of her life by the poinding of the kettledrums and the clash of the cymbals they rendered unto her in this way sacrifices and all other honours.  

60.  After the death of Hyperion, the myth relates, the kingdom was divided among the sons of Uranus, the most renowned of whom were Atlas and Cronus.  Of these sons Atlas received as his part the regions on the coast of the ocean, and he not only gave the name of Atlantians to his peoples but likewise called the greatest mountain in the land Atlas.  They also say that he perfected the science of astrology and was the first to publish to mankind the doctrine of the sphere, and it was for this reason that the idea was held that the entire heavens were supported upon the shoulders of Atlas, the myth darkly hinting in this way at his discovery and description of the sphere.  

So in the above, we see that the "gods" already lived in Italy (so would have power there) and that the sons spread out from there, splitting the further lands amongst themselves, but it was only the children of Atlas that were called Atlantians.  Where we start to see a little problem is that I think people think that his brother's descendants (brother Eumelous who was given the land "facing" the pillars of Hercules) were also Atlantians.  I don't think so (although I could be wrong of course).  We also have a major bone of contention with the word "facing" in the translations.  It can also mean "beside", "in front of", and I can't remember what else.  Perhaps Nikas can help us with that.


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Qoais on October 13, 2009, 05:32:56 pm
I shall now switch over and post in Plato's Atlantis My Theory

http://atlantisonline.smfforfree2.com/index.php/topic,442.1560.html


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: mdsungate on October 14, 2009, 01:18:52 am
 :)  Thank you Qoais for all that, which DID take a while for me to read, LOL.  ::)  I'll follow you to your link on Plato's Atlantis, where perhaps we can debate on Nikas's theory as well as yours, as all this has little to do with Greg Little' s recent explorations, (which if you and Nikas are correct, then he's looking in the wrong place, LOL).

I'm still a bit confused as to the geography involved.  And I have lots of questions and So if we move this discussion to that other thread, I guess I'll be taking on the role of "devil's advocate" with you and Nikas.  I don't doubt that there's something substantial about what you are adressing, but there's lots of "buts" that come to mind.   8)

Mike


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Jennifer O'Dell on October 14, 2009, 11:45:34 am
Sorry, but if anyone has seen how infinitesimally small Malta is compared to the description given by Plato, there is no way it could be Atlantis.

Maybe it was a seaport, though. You know the Knights Hospitaller controlled it for centuries after the Crusdades, till Napoleon took it over.


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: nikas on October 14, 2009, 01:37:07 pm
Sorry, but if anyone has seen how infinitesimally small Malta is compared to the description given by Plato, there is no way it could be Atlantis.

Maybe it was a seaport, though. You know the Knights Hospitaller controlled it for centuries after the Crusdades, till Napoleon took it over.

Ok I have explained many times before but people don't pay attention to what I am saying; Malta is not Atlantis with the concentric circles e.t.c. Atlantis is submerged next to Malta. Malta is Mount Atlas or some mountain that was taller at that time or something. Atlantis was way bigger and is now submerged underwater and in a way subdued. Destroyed!!! Cart ruts in Malta that just drop into the sea prove that Malta itself was bigger in ancient times. Malta fits 100% the description of Plato’s Atlantis. I have done my research and I found out that Mount Etna (the Volcano) was born right at the time that Atlantis disappear. There was another volcano instead which blew up and created such destruction that parts of it were found in Arctic ice by core samples.
P.S Atlantis was not as big as people think. Read the description given by Plato but the stadio has to be 55 m (Egyptian), not 150 m(Greek). The story is narrated by the Egyptian so the Stadio is 55 meters.




Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Qoais on October 14, 2009, 08:00:50 pm
I would be more than happy for you to be devil's advocate Sungate.  Nikas, you too.  I'll just post this here - it's the second last post I made over in my thread.

However, and I should have remembered this from the last time I went this round, that Plato did mention not just the Pillars of Heracles, but the STRAITS of Heracles, so I suppose we have to admit just from that sentence, that he WAS talking about the Straits of Gibraltar.

..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; for this sea which is within the Straits of Heracles is only a harbour, having a narrow entrance, but that other is a real sea, and the surrounding land may be most truly called a boundless continent.

Now unless the waterway between North Africa and Sicily was once named the Straits of Herakles I think we have to go with it being the Straits of Gibraltar.  So we're back to square one with Atlantis being outside the Med.


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: mdsungate on October 14, 2009, 09:55:10 pm
 :)  QUOTE FROM NIKAS: 

Quote
Ok I have explained many times before but people don't pay attention to what I am saying;

LOL, I sense you frustration Nikas, but obviously Jennifer’s confusion arises from the hundreds, if not over 2,000 years of preconditioning, if you are indeed correct, and the whole notion of Atlantis arises from a misconception from failed translation of the Ancient Greek.

I’m also paying attention, as I’m sure she is, but as simple a concept as you may think your theory is, it goes against most of what we have come to know about Atlantis.  It’s not a lack of understanding, but our preconceptions that are at the bottom of the communication problem you seem to be frustrated about, LOL.   :D

I have lots more questions about your theory, and also some “criticisms” which you’ll need to address not just for me, but for the general public who has come to know the whole story of Atlantis, based on those now age old traditions.

But I’ll post them in Qoais’s Plato thread where they might be more fitting, especially if we go looking for them in the future, for who would think of looking for them in a thread dedicated to Greg Little’s explorations.  After all he is a member of the A.R.E. and he is acting on his belief in Edgar Cayce’s conception of Atlantis as an Island Continent in the Atlantic.  So in deference to Greg, I’ll now post some of those questions in Qoais’s thread on Plato. 

http://atlantisonline.smfforfree2.com/index.php/topic,442.1560.html (http://atlantisonline.smfforfree2.com/index.php/topic,442.1560.html)

And Robert0’ I’m sorry for ignoring you.  I’m reading up on the link you posted about Admiral Bird’s ice core samples.  The good Admiral is a very controversial topic himself.  If there isn’t a thread for Atlantis in the Antarctic, then YOU should start one, as you seem to have a few people here who are clearly open to the idea.
 ;D
Mike


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Robert0326 on October 15, 2009, 01:25:46 am
It's cool Sungate.  I'm sure there is a threat about Atlantis being in Antarctica.  I'll look through them and start posting.  Feel free to comment on my future post on the subject if your interested.


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: mdsungate on October 16, 2009, 01:34:52 am
 :)  QUOTE FROM ROBERT0326:

Quote
Feel free to comment on my future post on the subject if your interested.

I’m actually quite interested in Antarctica.  Though I’m not inclined to believe that it is the location of the fabled Atlantis, I do believe that there was a time in the remote past that it was free of ice and supported a thriving civilization, perhaps even a technologically advance people.   

I am not a proponent of either “ice ages” or of “global warming” due to carbon emissions.  I say that because the evidence, (and I mean ALL of the evidence), does not support either of those theories.  Our science instead picks and chooses which pieces of evidence to use to support the accepted academic theories and tries to ram it down our throats. 

But I AM a proponent of the theory of “pole shift” which even now our science is beginning to take a more serious look at.  Previously the idea of the “poles” shifting was considered utter nonsense.  But now in the advent of the currently “accepted” tectonic plate theory, the idea has reemerged in the notion that only the crust of the earth “slips” over the molten sea of magma that surrounds the core, and thus place on the surface of the earth where the poles reside now “shifts” and not the actual poles, which are considered fixed in orbit and impossible to move.  To me this is a nute point, either way the evidence points that in a mater of moments Bison in Siberia chewing on buttercups in a tropical locale, found themselves so near the North Pole that they were flash frozen.   :P

 ;D The evidence is all over the globe.  The poles have shifted several time in history, and not just the magnetic poles,.. but the actual poles.  So I believe that Anartica was once actually in a tropical location on the globe, and the evidence of the civilization that flourished there is now buried under tons of ice waiting for us to discover it… or waiting for the next Pole shift to thaw it out, LOL.

Send me a personal message as to where you post in this maze of threads that AO has become in the last two years, LOL.  Or I’ll just look for where you’ve posted last.  8)

Mike


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: nikas on December 02, 2009, 08:11:03 am
Ok I have finally found the Mystery quest episode of Atlantis:

http://mysteryquestonline.blogspot.com/

Scroll down till you see the episode.
I was really..Really disappointed. This was pure garbage. At least other times they will have few theories that compete between them and they show the pros and the cons of those hypothesis. Here, there is only Greg little looking at pure geological formations and making amateur statements.


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Robert0326 on December 02, 2009, 09:02:23 am
Well that's what happens when you listen to the ramblings of a psychic.  You end up looking really really bad.


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: nikas on December 02, 2009, 01:57:02 pm
Well that's what happens when you listen to the ramblings of a psychic.  You end up looking really really bad.
I think you're being modest here Robert...they looked worst, they looked embarrassing. With all due respect to Greg they’re wasting their time. They’re so amateur on the subject of Archeology…let alone Geology and they’re making some disturbing statements. I would rather choose the yonaguni rocks in Japan rather than Biminis road. They’re so disillusioned by their believes and they’re seeing corners everywhere.

When you undertake an expedition of this type you have to have a geologist and an archeologist on board. It is rather true (unfortunately) that mainstream archeology will dismiss anything that has to do with Atlantis but that doesn’t mean we have to dismiss their opinions. They’re experts on reviewing artifacts and we're not.

So Greg; are you telling me that if there was any indication of man-made structures they will ignore it? I am pretty sure that few of them must have examined the area and concluded that it is nothing more than natural formation. So who are you to question their expertise? Think about it Greg.

Oh Robert, in case you don't know, Greg belongs to Casey's organiazation and is somehow cofounded by them.


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Desiree on December 02, 2009, 04:28:59 pm
Well, I have to disagree with your observations, Nikas.  First off, Greg not be a trained archaeologist, but who is?  Very few people actually investigating Atlantis are credentialed academics. Point is, he does work with a geologist (Bill Donato) and he does send samples out to labs to get tested. He has done carbon 14 dating, sub-bottom profiling of Bimini, and has done more dives in that area than anyone looking for Atlantis in history.  He is one of the few "Atlantologists" actually doing field work in the Atlantic, and that alone gives him credit. I don't put much stock in "experts" opinion.  Believe it or not, only one trained geologist has ever really looked at Bimini up close, Eugene Shinn, and he has an honorary degree, he didn't really earn it (see Greg's paper, the "Bimini Hoax"). The rest are simply commenting on Shin's observations.

The formations he is looking at are made of beach rock, but that doesn't mean anything.  The Phoenicians built their ancient harbors from beachrock, too, in fact, most ancient harbors are made from beachrock. And those stones he has been bringing up with the boreholes in them are identical to those used as stone anchors by ancient Phoenician mariners.  The fact that the stone blocks on the road itself are sometime stacked atop isn't conclusive that they were worked, but it is a good indication.

Greg has never come out and said, "I found Atlantis."  Even in that email that Bianca sent out (quoting him), he is simply stating that (from the water level the stones have been found in), they date to 10,000 bc, the era of Atlantis, not that they were Atlantis itself.

I believe that the Bimini Road and the Andros Platoform have been dated by Greg to only about 5,000 bc, which he doesn't consider to be Atlantis, cause it is from a more recent era.  His claim actually is that he has found an ancient maritme culture that existed in the Bahamas in prehistory, maybe not Atlantis (unless Plato has his dates wrong), but something similar.

Oh, and he doesn't just get his direction from Edgar Cayce, he is pretty well versed on Plato, too. In fact, he has investigated just about every claim that has been made of finding Atlantis in the Atlantic of the last forty years, and sorted out which ones have merit, and which ones don't.
I do agree with you that the special was a bit lame, but that is what you get if you only look at Bimini and Santorini. There are lots of places that I have seen that are totally ignored by these docs that are just as good candidates:  Azores, Canary Islands, Antarctica, Cuba, Morocco, South America.

Finally, one last thing about the bad footage, if we ever did find Atlantis beneath the sea, we should ask, how would we expect it to look like?  It wouldn't be pristine underwater temples, like Jules Verne.  You'd actually see a lot of straight formations with corals, barnacles and other sea crud attached to them, sort of like we are seeing now in the underwater footage. You wouldn't find a temple, for instance, you’d find a collapsed temple, especially if (as Plato says) it was destroyed by an earthquake.


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Desiree on December 02, 2009, 04:34:24 pm
Quote
Oh Robert, in case you don't know, Greg belongs to Casey's organiazation and is somehow cofounded by them.

Actually, Greg has only been with the A.R.E. Association for about ten years, they have been around wayyyyy longer than that, so no, he did not co-found them.


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Qoais on December 02, 2009, 05:46:39 pm
Hi Desiree,
I think Nikas means that the Edgar Cayce Foundation pays for Greg to do the dives.  Although Nikas' English is improving, it still needs a bit of work :)


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Chronos on December 02, 2009, 10:31:14 pm
Not to intrude, but I believe one of the first conversations we had with Greg back when he began posting a few years ago (at AR, and then here) was about the funding.  Erick Wright claimed someone else was funding him, too.

Greg is self-funded. I imagine the A.R.E. Association picks up the tab for some of the equipment, but he also makes money by selling his documentaries, books and as a criminal psychologist.


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: mdsungate on December 03, 2009, 01:27:00 am
 :)  Well I’ve already stated earlier in this thread that I actually fell asleep in the part of the show on the Minoan/Santorini theme which is boring beyond senselessness to me at this point.  But Greg was the most interesting part of the show and is out there doing what I could only dream about doing… actually looking for Atlantis.  But I don’t need to defend him, as Desiree has already done a much better job at that than I could have.

QUOTE FROM NIKAS:

Quote
Here, there is only Greg little looking at pure geological formations and making amateur statements.

Well I can’t agree with that statement, Nikas.  I’ve been looking at the pictures of that particular geological evidence for for a couple of decades now, and if that’s a geological formation, than mother nature must also have sculpted Machu Picchu.  And here I should call in Qoais for some support, as we’ve been bouncing around the theory that the megalithic stone works, inclulding the Great Pyramid, are actually not stone carvings but made with a process that softened rock and turned it into a type of cement, which later was almost indistinguishable from natural stone.   

If that theory is correct than it may well be that the Bimini Road or Wall as it were, was probably produced using the same ancient technological process.  This is why you can’t even fit a razor blade between the stones at Machu Picchu, because they weren’t carved, they were poured.  The stones at the Great Pyramid are not recognized by geologists as anything but natural today.  So for any trained geologist to determine that the stones of the Bimini Wall are a natural geological formation is premature to say the least.  The stones need to be brought up and chemical analysis has to be done on them to determine that, and as yet no one has done so. 

QUOTE FROM ROBERTO326: 

Quote
Well that's what happens when you listen to the ramblings of a psychic.

Oh Robert, you really need to read up on this guy.   To compare Cayce to a mere physic is like calling the Pope a bible salesmen, LOL.  He was no Tarot Card reader.  In fact he hated having to go into the trances he was subject to.  If it weren’t for the fact that he had doctors from all over the world contacting him for help with patients that were hopeless medical cases, and him prescribing hundreds of cures, and healing countless people, than nobody would have paid a bit of attention to what he had to say about Atlantis. 

QUOTE FROM DESIREE: 

Quote
Very few people actually investigating Atlantis are credentialed academics.

Well that’s because no accredited academic is going to risk his reputation on investigating a subject that is practically scientific heresy.  Let’s face it if a distinguished scientist was abducted by a UFO he would have to turn himself in for psychiatric observation and believe that he was having a nervous breakdown, rather than risk his reputation on what he knew had happened.  Certain subjects are simply off limits to serious investigation in the scientific community and Atlantis is one of them.  I think we all owe a debt of gratitude to Greg Little for putting Atlantis into the spotlight and out of the shadows.

QUOTE FROM CHRONOS:

Quote
Not to intrude, but…

Don’t let what happened with Bianca put you off.  The Mod’s are people too, LOL.  Your opinions and comments are always as welcome here as anyone’s.  Personally when I compare this to AR, you guys do a pretty darn good job. 

We all have our various opinions. Nikas believes that Atlantis is in Malta, and that Greg is foolishly looking in the wrong place.  Robert suspects that Atlantis is in Antarctica.  Qoais too believes that the real location must be in the Mediterranean, and I think that Greg is looking at things that must have once been mountaintops in Atlantis, which in my opinion lays fathoms deeper on the Mid Atlantic Plateau.  But look at us all having a civil conversation in the best place on the web to talk about what must be a race memory in all of us.   

The show did suck.  But it beat the hell out of Ice Road Truckers or Pawn Stars.  If that’s the best the History Channel can offer, than give me more of Greg.  I think Greg mentioned something about National Geographic.  Hopefully they can do a better job.  After all it wasn’t Greg who produced the show. 
 ;)
Mike


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: nikas on December 03, 2009, 08:51:01 am
Well Desire, if he is not an academic on the subject then shouldn’t he listen to the real Geologists who tell him that those are natural formation, rather than trying to explain them himself? If that thing was build by humans wouldn’t there be something HUMAN, pottery, columns..e.t.c

Look at pavlopetry in Greece. Full of pottery. Do you see geologists dismiss it as natural formation? Look at that lake somewhere in Mesoamerica full of pottery and I think human bones.

There is not a single artifact in Biminis that indicates a human presence, let alone Atlantis.
You said that Greg never “yelled” Atlantis. That’s not true; he always states that he is sure that the road was build by atlanteans and on this particular show towards the end he states; “If we find evidence of building ruins will definitely be proof of Atlantis

An underwater human presence does not constitute Atlantis for sure. As for the carbon dating, you’re wrong; there have been many carbon dating around that area and we had various results. One carbon dating near the coast showed the date to be around 2,000 years old, the one that Greg carbon dated it was around 2-3 thousand years old. A definite proof that these beach rocks are forming continuously and as you go deeper into the sea they tend to be older.

As for the “cofounded” I meant “cofunding”. As Qoais and Chronos explained. And is not really my English rather me being lazy  ::) to spell-check my words and let the WORD do the job.  ;D
Oh cmon, give me a break got too much in my mind…you want me to find Atlantis or to do spell-check…

Well mdsungate, it’s true that Greg is doing what he wants to do (he really works hard on it!) but he is doing it at the wrong place. The problem with people like Greg is that they believe at a particular theory, spent time and money to the brick of bankruptcy (remember Bob Sarmast?) and they feel embarrassed to back up. I am pretty sure that Greg’s family and friends are making fun at them. So they tend to cross over to irrational thinking where there is no coming back. Even if someone finds Atlantis anywhere else but Biminis they will never accept that and will continue to search for it.

Quote
NIKAS:
Here, there is only Greg little looking at pure geological formations and making amateur statements.

Quote
mdsungate:
Well I can’t agree with that statement, Nikas.  I’ve been looking at the pictures of that particular geological evidence for for a couple of decades now, and if that’s a geological formation, than Mother Nature must also have sculpted Machu Picchu.


You can’t compare machu pichu with what Greg is showing us. That’s man-made building or temple or pyramid. What Greg is showing us is nothing. You have to understand something; “wherever people go…they leave behind a mess” in terms of Pottery and stuff. Machu Pichu is full of that. Greg has found nothing. Look at Yonaguni. Perfect corners perfect lines, still a natural formation. Proven by Dr. Robert M. Schoch (An open minded academic that has proven that the sphinx is older than anticipated)
As for casy’s case (?) I don’t have to read anything about it. Just the Atlantis prophecy and I am done with him. Stating that Atlantis was an advance civilization in the middle of the Atlantic with crystals and flying ships…how reliable can he be on that.


P.S As for working with Plato  ???….Greg has no idea of his work. There is not a single clue from Plato’s work that fits his theory!!!!




Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Qoais on December 03, 2009, 09:48:45 am
What did happen to Sarmast Nikas, do you know?

Oh yeah - I don't think there was a Plato's Atlantis out in the Atlantic ocean.  Nor in the Med.  but that the inspiration for the story came from Mauritania, land of Atlas. 

You see - old people have a tendency to hang on to what THEY learned when young.  Take for instance the part telephone line.  Any of you old enough to know what that was? ;D ;D  It just means there was more than one customer on the same "line" - it was shared with several clients.  Telephones originally had a crank on the side, that you turned to contact the operator and she then put you through to whoever you were trying to reach.  Only she wasn't called "operator' back then.  When you turned the crank you were connected to "Central",so when someone answered you confirmed by asking "Central?"  Then the operator would say yes, how may I help you.  To the day he died, my uncle on the farm would always ask "Central?" when the operator picked up. 

In Plato's youth, Spain and N.W. Africa were thought to be islands.  When he told the story, he was still seeing them as islands in his minds eye, although by that time, I'm sure he had knowledge of the lay of the land at the western end of the Med.  I now understand in my early "golden years" how it is that we remember best what we learned when we were young.  It's another one of those things I'm going to take up with God when I get home.  Why is it we have to struggle to keep learning all our lives, and then when we get old enough to retire to enjoy the knowledge we gained, we forget it?



Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Desiree on December 03, 2009, 12:05:20 pm
Quote
Well Desire, if he is not an academic on the subject then shouldn’t he listen to the real Geologists who tell him that those are natural formation, rather than trying to explain them himself?

I just told you that no real geologists have ever looked at it up close, and that the one who did (Eugene Shinn) has only an honorary degree. Did you just choose to ignore that or do you automatically take the word of anyone who tells you they are an "'expert?" 

Get down to that, and shucks, you may as well give up on Atlantis altogether.  Even the guys who have degrees are wrong about a lot of stuff. Most still hold onto the Pre-Clovis dating of settlements of the Americas even though there have been literally hundreds of find showing their dating is wrong.

 
Quote
If that thing was build by humans wouldn’t there be something HUMAN, pottery, columns..e.t.c

Columns and things have been found there.  Pottery hasn't been found, but that is because they are in the area that has the most hurricanes.  It sweeps the area clean everytime a hurricane comes in, which has happened thousands of times over since prehistory.

Quote
There is not a single artifact in Biminis that indicates a human presence, let alone Atlantis.

Stone columns, stone slabs and stone anchors.  Again, he isn't saying it is Atlantis, just a maritme culture from prehistory.

Quote
You said that Greg never “yelled” Atlantis. That’s not true; he always states that he is sure that the road was build by atlanteans

I have been corresponding with him for three years, and he has never once made that sort of declarative statement.  If you got that from TV, you have to allow for some editing, even sensationalism that takes place.

Quote
As for the carbon dating, you’re wrong; there have been many carbon dating around that area and we had various results. One carbon dating near the coast showed the date to be around 2,000 years old, the one that Greg carbon dated it was around 2-3 thousand years old.

He has a date of 5000 bc as the oldest parts of the Bimini Road.  Not sure where you got those other dates from as the only real dating has come from Greg and his geologist, the mainstream guys, of course, being too lazy and disinterested to do any tests themselves.

Quote
Well mdsungate, it’s true that Greg is doing what he wants to do (he really works hard on it!) but he is doing it at the wrong place.

Uh, actually he doesn’t believe that Atlantis was centered in Bimini, both he and Andrew Collins believe there is an area off of Cuba that the capital city was located in. Both Bimini and Andros are ports.

Quote
The problem with people like Greg is that they believe at a particular theory, spent time and money to the brick of bankruptcy (remember Bob Sarmast?) and they feel embarrassed to back up.

But he HAS backed up what he has found, with regular reports of his dives of at least the last five years at www.mysterious-america.net There are pictures of all the finds. If I were you, I would take the time to get educated about his work before scoffing at it.

 
Quote
I am pretty sure that Greg’s family and friends are making fun at them.


Since most of his friends (like Horus, who is a member here) are also members of the A.R.E. and share the belief in Cayce's work, I doubt that very much.  The only people making fun of them are people too lazy to look for Atlantis themselves.

Quote
You can’t compare machu pichu with what Greg is showing us. That’s man-made building or temple or pyramid. What Greg is showing us is nothing.

And what would Machu Pichu look like if it was struck by an earthquake, like Plato says actually happened?  Probably a lot like the rubble you see at Bimini.

Quote
Proven by Dr. Robert M. Schoch (An open minded academic that has proven that the sphinx is older than anticipated)

Robert Schoch isn't anybody.  He is a geologist from a small college who took so many hits from his older Sphinx theory that he is desperate to look respectable again in anyway possible.  Yonugani IS manmade, he is just too much of a coward to say so.

Quote
Stating that Atlantis was an advance civilization in the middle of the Atlantic with crystals and flying ships…how reliable can he be on that.

Greg has never said that.

Quote
As for working with Plato ….Greg has no idea of his work. There is not a single clue from Plato’s work that fits his theory!!!!

Funny, each time I talk with him about Atlantis, I go at him with it from Plato's Atlantis, not Cayce's, and he knows Plato as well as anybody.  You're the one who thinks Plato set Atlantis at Malta, aren't you, when the dialogues clearly put it out in the Atlantic.  Maybe you're the one who doesn't know Plato.  :)




Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Desiree on December 03, 2009, 12:08:09 pm
This thread is actually a lot better than this one when it comes to Greg and his work, and Greg actually participates in it, too:

http://atlantisonline.smfforfree2.com/index.php/topic,16827.0.html


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: mdsungate on December 04, 2009, 01:22:47 am
 :)  LOL, comrades, comrades.  As I’ve mentioned we all have our own little pet theories here at AO and I for one say viva la difference!  I for one have learned a lot by listening to other’s opinions of where and when the fabled land rests.  Be it in Malta, ala Nikas, or Africa ala Qoais, or Anartica ala RobertO, or Bimini where Greg Little is searching, let us not bicker, but revel in the “fact” that unlike the scientific community, we are taking the legend of Atlantis seriously, and it is NOT a taboo subject here at AO, LOL

So then Nikas just what would one expect to find after 12,500 years have passed and the land under investigation has sunk beneath the sea?  Hurricanes aside as Desiree has pointed out, if there’s any evidence of human “mess” it would surely be buried under considerable mud and muck, no?  Greg is diving and looking at the surface primarily.  If there’s anything at Bimini to be found, it needs to be dug just as it would be if it was on the surface.  And I suspect that the sediments involved would be quite deep.

As far as Machu Picchu is concerned, I wasn’t talking about the site itself, but the stone construction.  If you look at how the stones are fitted together, you’ll see the resemblance to the Bimini Wall.  And for that matter look at how the stones are fitted together at Malta.  Again can’t you see the resemblance? 

You know there’s a McDonalds golden arch in almost every corner of the globe today.  So be it Atlantean, or Egyptian, or Incan or what ever you’d like to call it, there is considerable evidence of a megalithic construction technique that is found world wide, and it all dates to prehistory.  Perhaps we should all agree to just refer to the evidence of a prehistoric global culture that shared information on building techniques.  Plato describes Atlantis in far greater detail than he does prehistoric Greece.  Yet the Parthenon sits atop a much older megalithic stone block which dates back to this prehistoric global culture.
 :)
Mike


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: vze39mpt on December 12, 2009, 06:44:34 pm
(http://img130.imageshack.us/img130/1360/img0740j.jpg)
In the video at thirty one minutes and fourteen seconds (31:14) you will hear the narrator say;
    “The formations are almost completely covered by coral and Bahamian lawforbids the removal of coral growth”!
This is where you “will” see the formation. See other pics in the Photo Album.They are still pictures taken while image is paused on my television.

 If you look at the piece that goes over the forehead, it goes up then curves back down the neckline. Can that be done naturally? Yes it does seem to have some type of “starfish” shaped coral or something on it, but it is some sort of trimming. I may be wrong but it does look convincing. It also looks like it is wearing some type of “body armor” suit. So what can  be hiding under the sand and coral there?

The show was there to examine if “Plato” and “Edgar Cayce” were correct when they said that Atlantis would be found at the “10,000 BC” shoreline and this is where these structures are located.

Scientists agree that the ancient shoreline is 100 feet below where they are today. These structures are at that location.



Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: vze39mpt on December 12, 2009, 06:48:31 pm
(http://img81.imageshack.us/img81/9272/img0720v.jpg)

It looks like the top part of a statue (bust) of a man with a "headdress" or crown with the back drape over ear and neckline.. Look at the curves and angle of it as it comes off the forehead. There looks like there could quite possibly be a design in it. He is facing to the right. You can see a "neckline", prominent Chin. You can see the curve under the bottom lip. You can see the mouth. He appears to have a thick mustache. The small rounded nose (very distinct). Eyelids with slit visible, bushy eyebrow, forehead, 


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: vze39mpt on December 13, 2009, 09:41:41 pm
(http://img688.imageshack.us/img688/6501/img0694j.jpg)

This is a zoomed in head shot of the statue showing the "headwear".
     If you will notice that there are what appears to be "skull like" images around the statue. As you frame by frame the video those "skull like" images do not appear like skulls any longer.
However the face in the coral does not lose its shape, its appearance, or facial features.
Again at thirty one minutes fourteen seconds (31:14) of the video. you should pause and frame by frame. It appears for three seconds


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: mdsungate on December 15, 2009, 10:18:21 pm
 :)  Well it’s nice to know that I’m not just seeing “faces” in the clouds, here.  Or at least I’m not the only one, LOL.

You’ve done a good job of describing exactly what I see when I look at it. 

I really don’t understand how coral is an endangered species.  It’s all over the world, isn’t it?

You would think that the government of Bimini would recognize the importance of such a find and override the laws concerning the removal of the coral in a few encrusted relics. 

Let’s just suppose that they did discover Atlantis there.  Doesn’t the government of Bimini realize what that would do for their tourist trade?
 ;)
 Mike


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: nikas on December 16, 2009, 09:55:57 am
deleted!


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: mdsungate on December 16, 2009, 11:32:36 pm
 :)  Well Malta doesn’t need to bolster its tourist trade, Nikas, LOL.  It’s been a popular vacation spot for a couple of centuries.   It was once the number one retirement location for the British military.  In fact my great great grandfather, a retired British military officer, met my great great grandmother, an Italian woman on the Isle of Malta and they settled there until my great grandmother, Rose Paris, moved to Italy and married my great grandfather, and then later came to America.

Bimini doesn’t have that kind of history yet.  And although I don’t personally believe that it’s the location of the fabled Isle, the rumors certainly can’t hurt their economy, LOL.
 ;D
Mike


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: vze39mpt on December 17, 2009, 02:06:38 pm
(http://img81.imageshack.us/img81/9272/img0720v.jpg)

Thanks for sharing with us. That is, indeed, fascinating. It appears to be a reverse chevron-style mustache. Very interesting.


Carry on.



The American Mustache Institute
(877) STACHE-1

Online: http://AmericanMustacheInstitute.org
Twitter: http://twitter.com/MustacheTalk
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/AmericanMustacheInstitute

Reply from the AMI  ::)


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: mdsungate on December 19, 2009, 02:30:50 am
 :)  The American Mustache Institute???? LOL, whoo boy.  I guess there’s an organization for just about everything, LOL. I wonder if mustaches were popular in Atlantis, LOL.
 ;)
Mike


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: vze39mpt on December 19, 2009, 03:48:28 pm
we may never know. I did that to Identify the style of mustache "I" see here. Seeing how you don't see the fog in front of your eyes. I thought that maybe Identifying the look of this, it may help determine its origin.
And for that, why are you SOOOOOO "negative", it is by choice you know


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Robert0326 on December 19, 2009, 07:05:51 pm
People see what they want to see.  Not sure why you are continuing to post the same picture everywhere on this forum.  The area that Greg investigated was not old enough to be the site for Atlantis.  Let it go.


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: vze39mpt on December 19, 2009, 08:34:27 pm
AGAIN, I'm not saying it is Atlantis, I am saying that there is a 'Coral encrusted statue" at that location in the video. You keep saying, that I am telling you and everyone that this location is "Atlantis". I am not
Again, "coral covered statue at 10,000 BC shoreline",
That is what I am reporting.
PS
do you have some personal issues with "Mr Little", because it appears you and others do. Thats your right
It also appears that you have all the answers to all there is to know.
so, sad
  :(


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Wind on December 20, 2009, 01:03:14 pm
vze39mpt lighten up man, it’s way too early in the game to be making enemies, That thing could be anything and you darn well know it.  I’ll have to admit it does look like a face but I can’t be sure, the fact is none of us can be sure.

Believe me, every time something new comes along that could be proof of Atlantis all of us here at A.O get excited, but what you’ve found is no longer new, in fact it’s getting very old.
I can assure you that we’ve all seen it, we’ve looked at it carefully and we’ve filed it away under possibilities, and that my friend is were it shall remain until may information or light can be shed upon it.

We’ve all tried to be nice to you so don’t make us regret that, let’s all just get along alright.



 
Quote
The American Mustache Institute? LOL, whoo boy.  I guess there’s an organization for just about everything, LOL. I wonder if mustaches were popular in Atlantis, LOL.
 
Mike

By the way Mike when I saw that American Mustache Institute link I lost it LOL ;D,  I even had to check it out.   I’ve got one maybe I should join LOL :D 



Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: vze39mpt on December 20, 2009, 01:56:19 pm
I am certainly not trying to make enemies, make anyone mad, make anyone upset. I have since joining AO noticed/read many "threads", (see I am trying to learn and fit in) where people are just putting others down for their thoughts and or opinions.
As far as "old", video just came out. I just found it. and I wanted to share it.
I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything except that this appears to be what "I" and I'm sure others see too. Some people like me noticed it as soon as I saw It. Others can't and I don't put anyone down for that.
But I guess I need to lighten up
I can and I will


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Qoais on December 20, 2009, 07:04:09 pm
Wind means that it's no longer new to us anymore because you've posted it in so many threads.  That is called trolling in forums, and no one likes it when someone does that.  It's actually against the rules.  Now that you know, I'm sure you'll comply.


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: vze39mpt on December 20, 2009, 09:41:40 pm
yes of course. I didn't understand that everyone "views" pretty much all the "boards", "topics", and threads looking for different things. I thought that most members stuck to "1" section, aka "board" and stayed pretty much in there. I didn't mean any harm. I just didn't understand what I was doing.


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Qoais on December 20, 2009, 10:40:58 pm
Great!  If you hear any more about your "statue", let us know.


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: vze39mpt on December 20, 2009, 10:49:33 pm
Ok, the search goes on :)


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Robert0326 on December 21, 2009, 09:38:11 am
No I don't have anything against Dr. Little.  I never said I had all the answers.  If I did then I would have found Atlantis already, right?  The evidence on the show speaks for itself.  The area is not old enough. 


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: vze39mpt on December 21, 2009, 10:17:06 am
If I recall, and I may be wrong. the evidence is, "one" stone. which may have. like this statue, "fallen from a boat", right? So, if that "anchor did not "come" from that location what might that say?
I am not trying to start a "fight", "arguement" or angry discussion, only raising possibilities.
Because someone mentioned that this statue could have fallen from a boat. If it did it landed "upright"


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: vze39mpt on December 21, 2009, 10:54:00 am
I need to make another clarification. I did buy the DVD and after further review I must report that this "statue" is not "at" the Bimini Road location but near it in the Bahamas. The Bimini Road location is a shallower area than the location that this structure is located at.


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: vze39mpt on December 21, 2009, 05:44:29 pm
Since I am feeling a little comfortable speaking here. Can I ask a couple of questions that I have that I can't seem to find answers to? such as, When I come across bits of information that "i" feel may be of some value in some way, for example something I may have seen that may resemble the look, or feature, or design or anything. Do i add a pic, a link, a sentence, a written description of what I found?
What's the best
and where?
How do I choose which board is "best"? I do know I wouldn't put this info on the "Space" board.
And I remember, I don't need any more "new" Topics, Lol
vze


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Qoais on December 21, 2009, 09:33:01 pm
It would depend on your subject matter.  If it's underwater, there is a thread for underwater discoveries so you could use that.  Feel free to post pictures, (it's always nice if you comment on why you're posting the picture unless of course a conversation is in progress and it's obvious why you're posting the picture)and always post your reference.  If you copy an article from somewhere, you also post the "somewhere".  To do that, when you are at the page of the article you have copied, highlight the http address, right click and then click on "copy".  Go back to your post, place the cursor, right click, and then click "paste". 


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: mdsungate on December 21, 2009, 10:13:33 pm
 :)  QUOTE FROM Vze39’:   

Quote
I did that to Identify the style of mustache "I" see here.

My profound apologies Vze’ if you thought I was being critical of you.  I really thought you were attempting to be humorous, as you had made a lighthearted post earlier in this thread.  We’re just getting to know you as well.  I do catch your drift now, and it makes sense to analyze the type of mustache it looks like.  But like wind, it caught me off guard, and although you may not have intended to be funny, I am still quite amused that there should even be an institute devoted to mustaches, LOL. 

You don’t have to try very hard to fit in here at AO.  The simple fact that you’re posting on a site devoted to the subject of Atlantis, makes you one of us by definition.  None of us have all the answers, we’re all here to learn more, and perhaps share ideas and theories of our own. 

As for where to post (although Qoais has beat me to the punch with an answer, LOL), what you’ve found just try to find a thread where you think it might fit in with the theme of that thread.  We all try to do that, but then again I think we’ve all be guilty of going off subject, LOL. 

You’re also free to start a new thread of your own if you have something to share that doesn’t quite fit the usual themes.  The forum has grown so much in the last two years that I get lost in it trying to find things.  A lot of us look for the posts of others we’ve come to know here.  I always start by selecting “show new replies to your posts” because I enjoy getting to know people and their opinions and views on things.  When there’s not much action there, then I look for some of my online friends here at AO to see what they’re posting.  I think you’ll find this a great place to get to know people and share your ideas with them. 

ANOTHER QUOTE FROM vze39’:
Quote

do you have some personal issues with "Mr Little", because it appears you and others do

Being that the topic of this thread was about an episode of the History Channel’s “Mystery Quest” on which Greg was a big part of, most of us here are actually big fans of Greg, (although I don’t want to speak for everyone posting here).  I personally admire Greg for devoting himself to actually getting out there and doing what I can only dream about.   I, (like a lot of others here), was not too impressed with what the History Channel did with the episode, but that wasn’t Greg’s fault.

Again my apologies with you thought I was criticizing your “Mustache Institute” post.  That’s one of the problems with blogs.  You can’t hear the “tone” of voice that the one posting intends, and the words sometimes get misunderstood.
 ;)
Mike


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: vze39mpt on December 21, 2009, 11:19:00 pm
Its ok, you think I didn't fall out of my chair, when I saw that on my google search, lol


Title: Re: ATLANTIS airs Oct 7th on History Channel
Post by: Archangel on August 14, 2011, 05:38:37 pm
(http://sheamacleod.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/atlantis-2.jpg)