Atlantis Online

Atlantis => the Scientific Atlantis => Topic started by: Ostanes on September 09, 2010, 10:48:22 pm



Title: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Ostanes on September 09, 2010, 10:48:22 pm
Hodell, E.A., et. al, Abrupt Cooling of Antarctic Surface Waters and Sea Ice Expansion in the South Atlantic Sector of the Southern Ocean at 5000 cal yr B.P. (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6WPN-45B661N-W&_user=10&_coverDate=09/30/2001&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_origin=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1456480342&_rerunOrigin=scholar.google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=783d8a41b2bce9028039379f0127bac2&searchtype=a), Quaternary Research, Volume 56, Issue 2, Pages 191-198, 2001

Quote
Antarctic surface waters were warm and ice free between 10,000 and 5000 cal yr B.P., as judged from ice-rafted debris and microfossils in a piston core at 53°S in the South Atlantic. This evidence shows that about 5000 cal yr B.P., sea surface temperatures cooled, sea ice advanced, and the delivery of ice-rafted detritus (IRD) to the subantarctic South Atlantic increased abruptly. These changes mark the end of the Hypsithermal and onset of Neoglacial conditions. They coincide with an early Neoglacial advance of mountain glaciers in South America and New Zealand between 5400 and 4900 cal yr B.P., rapid middle Holocene climate changes inferred from the Taylor Dome Ice Core (Antarctica), cooling and increased IRD in the North Atlantic, and the end of the African humid period. The near synchrony and abruptness of all these climate changes suggest links among the tropics and both poles that involved nonlinear response to gradual changes in Northern Hemisphere insolation. Sea ice expansion in the Southern Ocean may have provided positive feedback that hastened the end of the Hypsithermal and African humid periods in the middle Holocene.


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Qoais on September 11, 2010, 09:01:07 pm
The rather deceptive manner in which you are utilizing this data, will only fool those who don't do their own research.  Here's a link to some more recent information regarding the Quaternary glacial and climate history of Antarctica.

http://www3.hi.is/~oi/quaternary_glacial_history_of_antarctica.htm

the Vostok Ice Core Timescales

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/icecore/antarctica/vostok/vostok_timescales.html


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Ostanes on September 11, 2010, 10:36:48 pm
The rather deceptive manner in which you are utilizing this data, will only fool those who don't do their own research.  Here's a link to some more recent information regarding the Quaternary glacial and climate history of Antarctica.

http://www3.hi.is/~oi/quaternary_glacial_history_of_antarctica.htm

the Vostok Ice Core Timescales

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/icecore/antarctica/vostok/vostok_timescales.html
Why do you think peer-reviewed science published in Quaternary Research is deceptive?

Do you claim scientists are deceptive because they wrote and published the following words, "Antarctic surface waters were warm and ice free between 10,000 and 5000 cal yr B.P., as judged from ice-rafted debris and microfossils in a piston core at 53°S in the South Atlantic."

Do you claim to know more than the professional research scientists published in peer-reviewed journals?

If you do, then I suggest you write a paper and submit it for peer-review telling the scientists how stupid they are because they don't agree with your dogmatic orthodox pseudoscience.

The most recent data proves Antarctica was warm in the Holocene: http://atlantisonline.smfforfree2.com/index.php/topic,25794.0.html


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Qoais on September 11, 2010, 11:16:40 pm
Quote
Why do you think peer-reviewed science published in Quaternary Research is deceptive?

I don't.  I said your manner of using the info is deceptive.  Stop trying to twist what I say. 

Read the information.  The waters were warmer as stated.  However, this did not make the Antarctic "ice free".  The  ice-rafted detritus they are speaking of, did not wash up on an ice free shore of the land mass.  It washed up on the outer edges of a somewhat receded ice shelf. 
Quote
and the delivery of ice-rafted detritus (IRD) to the subantarctic South Atlantic increased abruptly.

The coring was done in the South Atlantic, not Antarctica. 


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Ostanes on September 12, 2010, 12:11:58 am
Quote
Why do you think peer-reviewed science published in Quaternary Research is deceptive?

I don't.  I said your manner of using the info is deceptive.  Stop trying to twist what I say. 

Read the information.  The waters were warmer as stated.  However, this did not make the Antarctic "ice free".  The  ice-rafted detritus they are speaking of, did not wash up on an ice free shore of the land mass.  It washed up on the outer edges of a somewhat receded ice shelf. 
Quote
and the delivery of ice-rafted detritus (IRD) to the subantarctic South Atlantic increased abruptly.

The coring was done in the South Atlantic, not Antarctica. 
The deceptive manner in which you are trying to interpret the words "warm and ice-free" is blatantly obvious.

Exactly what part of "ice free" don't you understand?

Stop trying to twist what scientists have actually published.


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Helios on September 12, 2010, 12:41:46 am
I'll admit that the idea of Antarctica as Atlantis has always been intriguing to me.  In fact, this satellite photo (from the documantary, "Search for Atlantis") is something we have been passing around here for years.  Does it show concentric circles beneath the ice?

(http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n243/Atlantisimages/ANTARCTICA.jpg)

But no ancient relics, let alone ruins have ever been found there.  In fact, the ice sheet is so thick it would be impossible to even search for them.


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Qoais on September 12, 2010, 09:53:06 am
Ostanes, all you seem to want to do is argue, rather than having a discussion on the results of different scientific expeditions and research, so I'll leave you to it.

Please note that the article says that
Quote
Antarctic surface waters were warm and ice free between 10,000 and 5000 cal yr B.P
.  It does not say that the Antarctic was ice free.  If you ever had to melt ice to get a drink of water or to wash clothes, etc., you would realize that although the surface water can become quite warm, the ice is still there, below the surface water.  I have no doubt the scientists are reporting exactly what they found, and that is what I am studying.  If I don't understand the information, I try to find someone who is qualified who can help me out.  Don't try to keep insulting me with childish remarks, like I think I know everything.  I most certainly don't know everything and that's why I keep studying and personal insults have no place in a conversation or discussion with mature adults.

I realize you are studying also but if you want to interact with others and discuss the findings of different scientific endeavors, then perhaps you should lose the chip on your shoulder.  If you don't want discussion, then just open a thread and post your theory like others have done.  However, you must expect others to question your deductions and reasoning.  A lot of the posters in this forum are students, acquiring an education to achieve their career goals.  This forum was actually started by students who were in a different forum to begin with, and they got tired of certain people dominating the conversations, and not listening to what they had to say even though they were offering some wonderful dialog on a number of subjects.  In this forum, people are free to express themselves, although there are a few who still don't get it, that even though someone doesn't agree with them, that person is still entitled to have their say without being insulted.  How boring it would be, if this was just a mutual admiration society, where everyone agreed with what everyone else said, and no one did any research for themselves. 

I said your manner of using the info is deceptive.  I said this because you deliberately drop bits and pieces of information you seem to feel are relevant to whatever it is you're trying to point out, but you don't explain why you're using this information, what relevance it has to whatever you're trying to say, and in my opinion, you have misinterpreted the information given.  That is not an insult.  It's my observation of what you've put forward.  As far as I can figure out from what bits and pieces you've been dropping about the Antarctica,
you're trying to show that the Antarctica was ice free.  If that's not what you're trying to show, then I've totally misunderstood what it is you are trying to show.  However, if you re-read what the article says, as I pointed out before, it does not say the Antarctica was ice free. 

Perhaps you could fix the link in your first post in this thread as it doesn't work.


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Qoais on September 12, 2010, 11:10:41 am
In an effort to help students understand what is being discussed in these papers, here is the further explanation by the same researchers, for Ice Rafted Detritus in the Antarctic and what it means. 
http://www.agu.org/journals/ABS/2010/2008PA001691.shtml

PALEOCEANOGRAPHY, VOL. 25, PA1202, 18 PP., 2010
doi:10.1029/2008PA001691

Determination of Antarctic Ice Sheet stability over the last ∼500 ka through a study of iceberg-rafted debris

Lora Teitler
Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, California State University, East Bay, Hayward, California, USA

Detlef A. Warnke
Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, California State University, East Bay, Hayward, California, USA

Kathryn A. Venz
Department of Geological Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA

David A. Hodell (NOTE:  THIS IS THE SAME PERSON AS CREDITED WITH THE ARTICLE OSTANES QUOTED)
Department of Geological Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA

Sabine Becquey
Association OCEAN, Bordeaux, France

Rainer Gersonde
Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research, Bremerhaven, Germany

Winston Teitler
Space Sciences Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley, California, USA

We have analyzed ice-rafted debris (IRD) from the South Atlantic Ocean (∼43°S, 9°E) in order to investigate Antarctic Ice Sheet history during the late Pleistocene; the cores examined for this study include piston core TN057-6-PC4 and Ocean Drilling Program Leg 177 drill core Site 1090 (177-1090). Over the last 500 ka at this distal location, IRD arrived during both glacials and interglacials. IRD is present even during warmer intervals, is greatest during colder intervals, and is absent only during terminations and a few other brief intervals. Four different methods are used to normalize the IRD counts, which are then compared to support our interpretation. Several other high-quality climate proxies from this location also aid our interpretations. We conclude that sea surface temperatures are the primary control on the delivery of IRD to this site. During cold times more icebergs survived to reach this distal location. During warm times only a few of the largest icebergs could travel this far. Garnets found in these sediments suggest a likely East Antarctic origin for the IRD; the presence of garnets even during warm intervals further strongly supports that the iceberg source must be the East Antarctic Ice Sheet (EAIS). Therefore, the EAIS must have continued to reach the ocean at least in some part of its margin throughout the last 500 ka. On the other hand, we cannot specifically trace any IRD to the West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS), so WAIS persistence cannot be tested. A particular radiolarian, identified as Dictyocoryne profunda (Ehrenberg) (sensu Boltovskoy (1998)), shows up in the examined size fraction generally only during warm phases. We suggest that D. profunda is a sensitive indicator of warm water temperatures and that it deserves further study.

Received 22 September 2008; accepted 11 September 2009; published 23 January 2010.

Citation: Teitler, L., D. A. Warnke, K. A. Venz, D. A. Hodell, S. Becquey, R. Gersonde, and W. Teitler (2010), Determination of Antarctic Ice Sheet stability over the last ∼500 ka through a study of iceberg-rafted debris, Paleoceanography, 25, PA1202, doi:10.1029/2008PA001691.


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Qoais on September 12, 2010, 11:42:27 am
In case you haven't looked it up, here is the location of the core sample- 43S 9E -  that shows that detritus was ice rafted here from the Antarctic.  This area is called the South Atlantic Ocean.

(http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t267/Qoais/43S9E.jpg)



Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Qoais on September 12, 2010, 12:08:16 pm
53 Degrees S. Atlantic

(http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t267/Qoais/53DegreesSouthAtlantic.jpg)



Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Qoais on September 12, 2010, 12:24:20 pm
Subantarctic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


The Antarctic Convergence, approximately 200 km south of the Antarctic Polar Front, is the border between two distinct regions: the subantarctic and the antarctic.
The Subantarctic is a region in the southern hemisphere, located immediately north of the Antarctic region. This translates roughly to a latitude of between 46° – 60° south of the Equator. The subantarctic region includes many islands in the southern parts of the Indian Ocean, Atlantic Ocean and Pacific Ocean, especially those situated north of the Antarctic Convergence. Subantarctic glaciers are, by definition, located on islands within the subantarctic region. All glaciers located on the continent of Antarctica are by definition considered to be antarctic glaciers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subantarctic

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


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Tom Hebert on September 12, 2010, 12:58:15 pm
Hi Qoais,

You certainly have done your homework!

I know you don't believe Atlantis ever existed, but IF it ever existed, it was located in the Atlantic.  Wouldn't you agree?

Tom


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Ostanes on September 12, 2010, 02:44:17 pm
Qoais, you seem to think that the more you believe something the more true it is.
 
Since all you want to do is mislead people because you are in denial of history rather than discuss the results of different scientific expeditions and research, I'll leave it to you.

In an effort to help actual students, here are more peer-reviewed papers proving Antarctica was warm and ice-free during the time specified by Plato.

Stager, J.C., Mayeswski, P.A., Abrupt Early to Mid-Holocene Climatic Transition Registered at the Equator and the Poles (http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/276/5320/1834), Science, Volume 276, Number 5320, Pages 1834-1836, Jun 1997

Quote
Paleoclimatic records from equatorial East Africa, Antarctica, and Greenland reveal that atmospheric circulation changed abruptly at the early to mid-Holocene transition to full postglacial conditions. A climatic reorganization occurred at all three sites between 8200 and 7800 years ago that lasted 200 years or less and appears to have been related to abrupt transitions in both marine and terrestrial records around the world.

Masson, V., et al., Holocene Climate Variability in Antarctica Based on 11 Ice-Core Isotopic Records (http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/qres.2000.2172), Quaternary Research, Volume 54, Issue 3, Pages 348-358, Nov 2000

Quote
All the records confirm the widespread Antarctic early Holocene optimum between 11,500 and 9000 yr; in the Ross Sea sector, a secondary optimum is identified between 7000 and 5000 yr, whereas all eastern Antarctic sites show a late optimum between 6000 and 3000 yr.

Hjort, C., et al., Holocene and Pre-Holocene Temporary Disappearance of the George VI Ice Shelf (http://www.journals.cambridge.org/action/displayFulltext?type=1&fid=217140&jid=ANS&volumeId=13&issueId=03&aid=217139), Antarctic Penninsula, Antarctic Science, Volume 13, Number 3, Pages 296-301, 2001

Quote
Barnacle Bathylasma corolliforme shells sampled from ice shelf moraines at Two Step Cliffs on Alexander Island have been dated to c. 5750-6000 14C yr BP (c. 6550-6850 cal yr BP)

Pudsey C.J., and Evans, J., First Survey of Antarctic Sub–Ice Shelf Sediments Reveals Mid-Holocene Ice Shelf Retreat (http://www.geology.geoscienceworld.org/cgi/content/abstract/29/9/787), Geology, Volume 29, Number 9, Pages 787-790, Sep 2001

Quote
The retreat of five small Antarctic Peninsula ice shelves in the late 20th century has been related to regional (possibly anthropogenic) climate warming. We use the record of ice-rafted debris (IRD) in cores to show that the Prince Gustav Channel ice shelf also retreated in mid-Holocene time. Early and late Holocene-age sediments contain IRD derived entirely from local ice drainage basins, which fed the section of ice shelf covering each site. Core- top and mid-Holocene (5–2 ka) sediments include a wider variety of rock types, recording the drift of far-traveled icebergs, which implies seasonally open water at the sites. The period when the Prince Gustav ice shelf was absent corresponds to regional climate warming deduced from other paleoenvironmental records. We infer that the recent decay cannot be viewed as an unequivocal indicator of anthropogenic climate perturbation.

Perkins, S., Antarctic Sediments Muddy Climate Debate (http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1200/is_10_160/ai_78681643/), Science News, Sep 8th 2001

Quote
Ocean-floor sediments drilled from Antarctic regions recently covered by ice shelves suggest that those shelves were only 2,000 years old.

Gore, D.B. et al., Bunger Hills, East Antarctica: Ice free at the Last Glacial Maximum (http://www.geology.geoscienceworld.org/cgi/content/abstract/29/12/1103), Geology, Volume 29, Number 12, Pages 1103-1106, Dec 2001

Quote
Optically stimulated luminescence dating of glaciofluvial and glacial-lake shoreline sediments indicates that the Bunger Hills area, in coastal East Antarctica, was largely ice free by the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM). Deglaciation commenced as early as 30 ka, and the southern hills were completely exposed by 20 ka. The sediments do not record evidence of an LGM readvance. Previous reconstructions of LGM ice limits for the area are incompatible with this new evidence.

Bentley, M.J., et al., Early Holocene Retreat of the George VI Ice Shelf (http://www.geology.geoscienceworld.org/cgi/content/abstract/33/3/173), Antarctic Peninsula, Geology, Volume 33, Number 3, Pages 173-176, Mar 2005

Quote
The recent collapse of several Antarctic Peninsula ice shelves has been linked to rapid regional atmospheric warming during the twentieth century. New high-resolution lake sediment records of Holocene ice-shelf behavior show that the George VI Ice Shelf was absent beginning ca. 9595 calibrated (cal.) yr B.P., but reformed by ca. 7945 cal. yr B.P. This retreat immediately followed a period of maximum Holocene warmth that is recorded in some ice cores and occurred at the same time as an influx of warmer ocean water onto the Antarctic Peninsula shelf. The absence of the ice shelf suggests that early Holocene ocean-atmosphere variability in the Antarctic Peninsula was greater than that measured in recent decades.

Bentley, M.J., and Hodgson, D.A., Antarctic Ice Sheet and Climate History Since the Last Glacial Maximum (http://www.pages-igbp.org/products/newsletters/2009-1/special%20section/science%20highlights/Bentley+Hodgson_2009-1(28-29).pdf), Pages, Volume 17, Number 1, Jan 2009

Quote
Results showed that there are two warm periods recorded in most of the proxy records - a period of early Holocene warmth, and a Mid-Holocene Hypsithermal (Fig. 3)

Bentley, M.J., et al., Mechanisms of Holocene Palaeoenvironmental Change in the Antarctic Peninsula Region (http://www.hol.sagepub.com/content/19/1/51.abstract), The Holocene, Volume 19, Number 1, Pages 51-69, 2009

Quote
Two warm events are well recorded in the Holocene palaeoclimate record, namely the early Holocene warm period, and the `Mid Holocene Hypsithermal' (MHH)

Sime, L.C., et al., Evidence For Warmer Interglacials in East Antarctic Ice Cores (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v462/n7271/full/nature08564.html), Nature, Number 462, Pages 342-345, Nov 19th 2009

Quote
We conclude that previous temperature estimates from interglacial climates are likely to be too low.


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Ostanes on September 12, 2010, 02:47:10 pm
In case you haven't looked it up, here is the Antarctica we are referring to.

(http://i52.tinypic.com/2qxb4i8.jpg)


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Qoais on September 12, 2010, 04:07:55 pm
Nowhere, in any of those links, do any of those articles say that the Antarctica was ice free in the last 750,000 years.  If they do, then it is up to you to show in simple language that most non-professionals understand, where it says this.  We know there were temperature fluctuations, we know the ice came and went repeatedly, to certain degrees, we know the ocean doesn't freeze right to bottom, so in order for an ice berg to travel from it's point of frozen origin, the surface ice had to have melted enough for an ice berg to break through it and travel over 1200 miles to where they took the core sample.  But nowhere, does anyone say that Antarctica was ice free in the last 750,000 years.

It is you Ostanes, that feels because you believe it so much it's true. 


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Ostanes on September 12, 2010, 04:12:56 pm
Nowhere, in any of those links, do any of those articles say that the Antarctica was ice free in the last 750,000 years.
Do you claim that when scientists say "ice free" what they actually mean is "not ice free"?

Do you claim that when scientists say an "ice shelf was absent" what they actually mean is the "ice shelf was not absent"?

Do you claim that when scientists say "warm" what they actually mean is "cold"?

Do you claim that when scientists say "neoglaciation" what they actually mean is "postglaciation"?

Do you claim that when scientists say "Holocene maximum" what they actually mean is "Holocene minimum"?

Do you claim that when scientists say "abrupt climate change" what they actually mean is "snail-paced uniformitarianism"?

Do you claim that when scientists say "temperature estimates from interglacial climates are likely to be too low" what they actually mean is "temperature estimates from interglacial climates are likely to be too high"?


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Qoais on September 12, 2010, 04:57:12 pm
Copy and paste here, in this thread, from those articles, where it says that Antarctica was free of ice any time in the recent past.  Don't ask me what I think the articles say.  Show us exactly what you're referring to.  Since it is you who is saying the continent was ice free, it's up to you to show us exactly where it says that in the scientific research papers.



Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Qoais on September 12, 2010, 05:18:00 pm
Hi Qoais,

You certainly have done your homework!

I know you don't believe Atlantis ever existed, but IF it ever existed, it was located in the Atlantic.  Wouldn't you agree?

Tom


IF I was to answer that question Tom, I'd do it most carefully, for right from the start, Plato is not telling the truth, even though he says he is.  I posted this in my own thread almost a year ago.

From Diodorus Siculus:

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. 

In this story, we find that Atlas is the son of Uranus, not Poseidon.  So why would Plato say Atlas was the son of Poseidon?

This article also says that Atlas received as his part, the regions on the coast of the ocean and called the greatest mountain in the land Atlas.  Now we know the Atlas mountain(s) are in N.W. Africa, and that they end in the west opposite Gibraltar and in the East at Tunisia.  So from this account, Atlantis would be from Tunisia, west along the Med., and then once clear of the Strait of Gibraltar, South for who knows how far, since all of the rest of Africa, is bordered by the Ocean, and is therefore on the "coast".



Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Tom Hebert on September 12, 2010, 06:05:01 pm
I don't know.  Maybe he fell asleep during his religion class at the temple.   :)



Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Qoais on September 12, 2010, 07:25:44 pm
 :D :D


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Ostanes on September 13, 2010, 05:14:51 am
Plato is not telling the truth, even though he says he is. 
Said the Sophist about the philosopher.

Quote
In this story, we find that Atlas is the son of Uranus, not Poseidon. 
So?

In Hellanicus of Lesbos's version it's Poseidon.

So since some say Rome was founded by Romulus and Remus and others say Aeneas, therefore Rome does not exist... ::)

Quote
So why would Plato say Atlas was the son of Poseidon?
Hmmm...I'm guessing because Plato actually knew what he's talking about and you don't.

"Plato's detractors have accused him of inventing the Atlantis myth in its entirety, but a book called Atlantis was written a century before. Unfortunately, only a fragment of Hellanicus' Atlantis survives, including the line, 'Poseidon mated with Celaeno, and their son Lycus was settled by his father in the Isles of the Blest and made immortal.' This bears similarities with Plato's account where Poseidon mates with Cleito and their son Atlas becomes the ruler of a marvelous land, while Hellanicus in turn may have taken the story from a still earlier Atlantis epic; alternatively, both may have drawn on Solon's story, which may have had a wider currency in the sixth century than we now realize." -- Rodney Castleden, author, Atlantis Destroyed, 1998


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Qoais on September 13, 2010, 09:14:54 am
Quote
I'm guessing because Plato actually knew what he's talking about and you don't.

Obviously, he doesn't. Nor does the writer who Siculus is copying, although in my opinion, what Siculus writes, is much more logic and probable than what Plato writes.  Plato used real events and real places for inspiration, but the story  is fabricated.

Theogeny of Greek Gods

Uranus mated with Gaia to create twelve Titans: Oceanus, Coeus, Crius, Hyperion, Iapetos, Theia, Rhea, Themis, Mnemosyne, Phoebe, Tethys, and Cronus; three cyclopes: Brontes, Steropes, and Arges; and three Hecatonchires: Kottos, Briareos, and Gyges.[12]

 Iapetos marries Klymene (an Okeanid Nymph) and had Atlas, Menoetius, Prometheus, and Epimetheus.


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Ostanes on September 13, 2010, 01:07:12 pm
Obviously, he doesn't.
Obviously you're wrong and Plato was right.

Quote
Nor does the writer who Siculus is copying, although in my opinion, what Siculus writes, is much more logic and probable than what Plato writes.
LOL.

What "logic" tells you that Atlas is the son of Uranus and not Poseidon?

Would that be the same "logic" that told you that Antarctica has been covered in ice for tens of millions of years?

Would that be the same "logic" that told you that Columbus invented the sailboat?

Quote
Plato used real events and real places for inspiration
I agree.  Antarctica is a real place.

Quote
but the story is fabricated.
All stories are fabricated.  Doesn't mean Rome and Atlantis don't exist.


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Essan on September 13, 2010, 02:58:00 pm
So Antarctic surface waters became ice free 10,000 years ago - only after Atlantis was supposedly destroyed .....  They were not ice free when Plato said Atlantis was at war with Athens.  Not that this study has any relevance to the land surface which was very much ice covered, though as today some coastal fringes would simply have been bitterly cold.

Anyway, of interest, the Arctic Ocean was probably ice free in summer around the same time.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/10/081020095850.htm
 (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/10/081020095850.htm)
This was the height of the Holocene Climatic Optimum - before the neoglacial set it.


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Ostanes on September 13, 2010, 10:03:29 pm
So Antarctic surface waters became ice free 10,000 years ago - only after Atlantis was supposedly destroyed .....  They were not ice free when Plato said Atlantis was at war with Athens.
False.

Plato said Atlantis existed in 9,600 B.C.-8,600 B.C. and possibly afterwards.

Therefore warm and ice-free.


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Essan on September 14, 2010, 03:02:55 am
But this study says the waters were ice free from 10,000 years ago - ie 8,000BC.   And by implication not ice free prior to then ;)


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Qoais on September 14, 2010, 09:27:50 am
When all else fails, get the facts from the source.

Ostanes, one of the links you gave for evidence of your theory was

Quote
Sime, L.C., et al., Evidence For Warmer Interglacials in East Antarctic Ice Cores, Nature, Number 462, Pages 342-345, Nov 19th 2009

You don't seem to be able to interpret what the article means, so to help you out, I contacted L.C. Sime, the author of that article.

Here is my inquiry and her reply:

Dear Sir or Madam

I am having a discussion with some folks about the Antarctic, and whether or not it was ever ice free, during the last 750,000 years or so.  I'm saying that it hasn't been, and one person has quoted your above work to prove that the ice was completely gone.

 
Would you be so kind as to affirm for me, one way or the other, just exactly what your work does say regarding the Antarctic being ice free in the semi-recent past?  I'd really appreciate it.

 
Thank you in advance.

Sincerely

Marie

Dear Marie,

 

The continuous EPICA Dome C ice core from East Antarctic extends back to about 820 000 year ago. This is direct evidence that Antarctica was ice covered at this time. It is thought that the Antarctic has not been ice free in several million years. There is strong evidence for this in ocean cores.

 

There have been some changes in the last 820 000 years to the shape, volume, and extent of the Antarctic ice sheet. These are changes are small  relative to the total volume of ice contained by the sheet. 

 

I am not aware of any ice core scientist or glaciologist ever suggesting that Antarctica was ice free 750 000 years ago, thus I am not sure where anyone might have got this idea from. It is not suggested in my 2009 Nature Letter. (The 2009 Letter also explicitly argues, using ice core evidence, for little change in the shape of the East Antarctic ice-sheet during the last ~340 000 years.)

 

Hope that helps,

Best wishes,

Louise Sime


Another one of the links you gave for reference for your ice free Antarctica theory was
Quote
Abrupt Early to Mid-Holocene Climatic Transition Registered at the Equator and the Poles

I contacted these people also.

My inquiry:

Dear Sir or Madam
I am in discussions with some folks, concerning whether or not Antarctica was ever ice free in the past 750,000 years or so.  I contend that it was not, but someone has linked us to the above article, and I'm hoping you will verify for us, what this means regarding an ice-free Antarctica.  Does this article in any way indicate, that you've discovered there was a time in the not so distant past, that the Antarctic was ice free?
 
Thank you in advance.
Sincerely
Marie

The reply:

Hi Marie;
 
Here's a comment you can pass along if you like:
 
Our 1997 article in Science doesn't indicate ice-free conditions on mainland Antarctica.  In fact, the very presence of the ice layers from which our Taylor Dome core data were obtained demonstrates that ice was present at there throughout the Holocene epoch, and that particular record extends even farther than that back into the depths of the last ice age.  The Mount Moulton ice sequence covers about half a million years, and the EPICA ice core, the longest one yet obtained from Antarctica, represents at least 750-800,000 years of continuous ice cover.
 
On the other hand, it might well be possible that certain small areas along the coastlines could have been ice-free at various times in the past while the main body of the continent was buried; areas such as the Dry Valleys are without ice cover today, for example.  And areas of floating sea ice could have changed dramatically over time.  But none of these conditions would qualify as an "ice-free Antarctica" in general.
 
Hope this helps;

Curt


As was said before, the SURFACE WATERS had to be ice free somewhere in time, for huge icebergs to be able to travel 1200 miles North and more, which is where they finally melted and dropped the detritus they were carrying which showed up in the ice cores, and allowed scientists to determine where the ice berg originated, which was on the Eastern side of Antarctica.  The Heard and McDonald islands lay east of Antarctica and they have a lot of volcanic activity.  Perhaps due to multitudindous euptions, as well as warmer temperatures, the surface ice melted or at least thinned enough for the ice bergs to break through and travel the great distances.




Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: nikas on September 14, 2010, 09:48:29 am
deleted!


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Qoais on September 14, 2010, 09:53:53 am
Hi Nikas.  Long time no see.  Are you now advocating for Antarctica to be Atlantis, instead of Malta?  Perhaps you posted before you read my previous post, showing the response from the scientists who wrote the articles regarding the ice at the S. Pole. 


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: nikas on September 14, 2010, 10:47:43 am
deleted!


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Tom Hebert on September 14, 2010, 12:05:09 pm
Wow Qoais, you certainly have gone the extra mile in your research!

So it looks to me like the Atlantis-in-Antarctica notion has pretty much flatlined or was already DOA.


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Qoais on September 14, 2010, 01:36:39 pm
Yes Tom, it was dead in the water - no pun intended :D right from the get go.  The Antarctic has never been ice free for at least 700,000 years, so no, it was not further north than it is now, except maybe back when pangea broke up, before it came to rest where it is now.  There are those here in this forum, who put down others who ARE educated in different fields, and seem to think that having an education is  something to be mocked and sneered at.  However, it is from those very same educated people, we are not in ignorance of numerous things such as were the people of the "dark ages". 

The Piri Reis map has been shown to be not even close to indicating the true Antarctic, but rather it seems, in those days, people assumed there had to be land in the south, to counterbalance the land in the north, so they drew it in.  Also, when drawing the map, hides were expensive, so because he was running out of room, Reis turned the coast line so as to be able to fit it on the skin he was drawing on. 

Here's a link about that map.  There's another site I wanted to reference as well, but I have to find it again first!!

http://gianthoax.com/ancient-mysteries/

Nikas

Will you translate this for us?

http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:POxy1084_Hellanicus_Atlantis.png


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Helios on September 14, 2010, 11:09:04 pm
With respect to Qoais and her experts, I can see how the above hypothesis can be correct and science wrong (and I state this being a person who does not actually believe in the Antarctica theory, yet have always been intrigued by it).

In the first place, Antarctica is actually a microcosm of the earth. Anyone who looks at the natural state of this planet knows that the earth's natural state is that of ice and snow.  We are in an interglacial period now, a warming trend, but eventually the ice will return and the ice will grind most of what we built in the northern hemisphere, skyscrapers, bridges and the like, to nothing. 

Second, the reason why we think the ice in Antarctica (apart from the inhospitable climate) comes from dating the ice cores.  Well, science has shown it is wrong when it comes to carbon dating, so it is not beyond the realm of possibility that there is an error factor with ice cores dating as well.

This sentence of  Essan's intrigues me:

Quote
But this study says the waters were ice free from 10,000 years ago - ie 8,000BC.   And by implication not ice free prior to then Wink

I am sure if we thought about this, we can see the flaw in this thinking.  First off, Antarctica didn't need to be ice free for long, only for a period warm enough for a civilization to flourish there.

(As I said, earth's natural state is one of ice and snow).

Our current civilization is, at best, about five thousand years old, that's including the Sumerians and the Egyptians.  Most  of history is a blur before them.

The history of the British Isles is about two thousand years old.

America has only lasted for a little over two hundred years.

Plato does not state that Atlantis existed for hundreds of thousands of years, only that it was destroyed around 9600 bc.  It could have lasted two thousand years, or even simply two hundred years.  Therefore, all Antarctica would have needed is a warm spell just that long for a previously unknown civilization to have flourished there.  Ice cores are, of course, are not uniform in their age throughout the whole continent, and I very much doubt that every area of the continent's ice has been tested for age. That, plus the previously mentioned error factor when it comes to dating the ice cores still gives a possibility that a civilization did exist there, we just don't know about it yet.  That said, as I stated earlier, my first choice would be an Atlantic based location for the Atlantic.


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Ostanes on September 15, 2010, 01:20:09 am
With respect to Qoais and her experts, I can see how the above hypothesis can be correct and science wrong (and I state this being a person who does not actually believe in the Antarctica theory, yet have always been intrigued by it).

In the first place, Antarctica is actually a microcosm of the earth. Anyone who looks at the natural state of this planet knows that the earth's natural state is that of ice and snow.  We are in an interglacial period now, a warming trend, but eventually the ice will return and the ice will grind most of what we built in the northern hemisphere, skyscrapers, bridges and the like, to nothing. 

Second, the reason why we think the ice in Antarctica (apart from the inhospitable climate) comes from dating the ice cores.  Well, science has shown it is wrong when it comes to carbon dating, so it is not beyond the realm of possibility that there is an error factor with ice cores dating as well.
"Fundamentally, in counting any annual marker, we must ask whether it is absolutely unequivocal, or whether nonannual events could mimic or obscure a year. For the visible strata (and, we believe, for any other annual indicator at accumulation rates representative of central Greenland), it is almost certain that variability exists at the subseasonal or storm level, at the annual level, and for various longer periodicities (2-year, sunspot, etc.). We certainly must entertain the possibility of misidentifying the deposit of a large storm or a snow dune as an entire year or missing a weak indication of a summer and thus picking a 2-year interval as 1 year." -- Alley, R.B. et al., Visual-Stratigraphic Dating of the GISP2 Ice Core: Basis, Reproducibility, and Application (http://www.agu.org/journals/ABS/1997/96JC03837.shtml), Journal of Geophysical Research, Volume 102, Number C12, Pages 26, 367–26, 381, 1997.

"First glance intuition is often very helpful in coming up with a good hypothesis to explain a given phenomenon, such as the hundreds of thousands of layers of ice found in places like Greenland and Antarctica. It seems down right intuitive that each layer found in these ice sheets should represent an annual cycle. After all, this seems to fit the uniformitarian paradigm so well. However, a closer inspection of the data seems to favor a much more recent and catastrophic model of ice sheet formation. Violent weather disturbances with large storms, a sudden cold snap, and high precipitation rates could very reasonably give rise to all the layers, dust bands, and isotope variations etc. that we find in the various ice sheets today." -- Sean D. Pitman, doctor, December 2006

Quote
That said, as I stated earlier, my first choice would be an Atlantic based location for the Atlantic.
FYI Antarctica is in the Atlantic and furthermore it is a lost island continent in the "navel of the sea" (it being at the center of all longitudinal lines) and it "knows the depths of every sea."  Antarctica holds the world on it's shoulders.

"... on a sea-girt island, where the sea's navel is.
The island is forested (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1200/is_v129/ai_4164401/), and on it a goddess makes her home,
the daughter of malign Atlas, he who knows the depths
of every sea and by himself holds the tall pillars
that hold apart heaven and earth
." -- Homer, poet, Odyssey, Book I, 50-54, 8th century B.C.


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Qoais on September 15, 2010, 01:43:43 am
There is none so blind as he who will not see.

They aren't MY experts, Helios.  They were quoted by Ostanes.  It was obvious he didn't understand the papers, so I contacted the authors of said papers, who have confirmed that the Antarctic has never been ice free.  The WATERS of the S. ATLANTIC have been ice free at times, but not Antarctica.  And yes, the core samples, thousands of them, do show that the ice has been there for hundreds of thousands of years. 

Ostanes, you can quote those same quotes over and over and over.  It doesn't change a thing.  I've already pointed out that even with an error margin of 75%, which is totally ridiculous to even contemplate, that the Antarctic would still have been covered in ice or 3 million years.  The one person you quote, Sean D. Pitman,  is merely a doctor who has no experience in geology, or archaeology or any other ology.  Get a grip.  Do some research.

The Antarctic is not lost, we know perfectly well where it is.



Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Qoais on September 15, 2010, 01:53:55 am
Found the other link I was looking for regarding the Piri Reis map:

http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/pseudosc/piriries.htm


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Helios on September 15, 2010, 02:11:49 am
Quote
There is none so blind as he who will not see.

I take it that is to be directed at me? 
Did you even bother reading my post?  You don't address a single thing I brought up. And, as for the Piri Reis map, it has long been cited as evidence of an ice free Antarctica, even though I don't see it. Charles Hapgood cited it in his book, "Maps of the Ancient Sea Kings," a fine book postulating the idea of an Ice Age civilization, emanating out from the southern hemisphere.
There is much more we need to learn about earth's prehistory, I would not be so quick to place my faith in someone who suggests they have all the answers.  Especially when those answers are apt to change with each new discovery.


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Qoais on September 15, 2010, 02:50:27 am
No Helios, it wasn't directed at you.  However, if the shoe fits, wear it.

I have already addressed the fact that the Antarctic has not been ice free for hundreds of thousands of years.  There's been hundreds of scientists, who have done thousands of tests and core samples, and they all say the same thing.  Are they all wrong?  No they are not. As I've said already, even at 75% error factor, the results show that Antarctica has not been ice free.  You ask if I did not read your post.  Yes I did but have you not read the scientific papers? 

When all is said and done, Ostanes is basing this theory on Plato.  He says his sources are Sonchis of Sais, Solon, Dropides, Critias, and Plato. but who WROTE the story of Atlantis?  Only one of those people.  Nowhere does Plato give the name of the priest.  Anyone who comes after Plato, cannot know the name of the priest, because they weren't there.  Critias is a character in Plato's dialogs. 

Quote
Charles Hapgood cited it in his book, "Maps of the Ancient Sea Kings," a fine book postulating the idea of an Ice Age civilization, emanating out from the southern hemisphere

Yes, I've read the book and it IS a good read.  However, there are others who also have an interest in ancient maps, who explain that the Piri Reis map is not actually depicting Antarctica.  Hapgood also had the theory that Antarctica was ice free at one time, however as we have seen from the scientists themselves, the samples prove otherwise. 

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


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Helios on September 15, 2010, 07:14:17 am
I suppose the shoe does fit a and I will gladly wear it. You have a very tiresome manner of debate, do you know that?  Not only are you overly negative, you ignore other people's points, make a big deal out of inconsequential points, then make things personal needlessly.

I have noticed also that Bianca,Jim Allen, Greg Little, and many, many others have all left this forum after arguments with you. You are like a poison infecting this forum, and I, for one resent it.  A little skepticism is healthy, but the forum is all about the researchers, which is why it is called "Atlantis Online," not "Atlantis-haters anonymous." You don't even seem to be interested in the topic anymore (or any new ideas), so I have to ask, what are you even still doing here?


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Qoais on September 15, 2010, 09:52:50 am
Quote
You don't even seem to be interested in the topic anymore (or any new ideas)

And what have you contributed lately?  I notice my thread is 140 pages long, built that large because I've been posting information that I've found in my travels, searching for Atlantis.  How many pages is your thread?

Quote
You have a very tiresome manner of debate, do you know that?

No, I didn't.  Sorry.  I thought we were looking for the truth.  At least, I am.  I suppose that is tiresome isn't it?   

Helios, I was not making "it personal" so much, as trying to point out that even after I posted the messages from the scientists, you still were maintaining - like Ostanes - that the Antarctic was ice free.  So - like him - you're wearing the same shoe in other words.  Even after you've had the facts from the scientists, you still went on to say
Quote
I am sure if we thought about this, we can see the flaw in this thinking.  First off, Antarctica didn't need to be ice free for long, only for a period warm enough for a civilization to flourish there.

Let me quote you from another thread Helios:

Quote
It's hard to find good relevant information on Atlantis, there is so much New Age/channeling stuff on Atlantis.  Strictly speaking, I try to stay away from the mystics and stay with science.

So really, you don't believe in science then?

Quote
I have noticed also that Bianca,Jim Allen, Greg Little, and many, many others have all left this forum after arguments with you


I'm afraid you don't know what you're talking about.  Bianca and I were friends, up until the American election, and I said I liked Mr. Obama.  Then she turned on me.  She turned on  a number of other people who thought they were close friends and that was because of things that were going on behind the scenes regarding Greg Little and the A.R.E.

Jim Allen and Greg Little are professionals, they've written books, and put themselves out in the public domain.  They are adults and have to expect people to query their ideas.  The only reason they post in forums, is to promote their books.  It has nothing to do with what I said, that they aren't posting here.  For instance, if you check it out at Unexplained Mysteries, you will find that Greg Little pops in every once in a while, to mention some little thing that he's up to, say regarding Egypt and the illegal digging, and then he doesn't show up again until something else happens.  It's not like he takes part in the forums.  Most authors don't have time to participate in forums, so they have their own blogs.  Said authors are making money off of the story of Atlantis.  Of course they're going to be ticked off, if someone comes along and shows the buying public that they're chasing a rainbow.

Quote
but the forum is all about the researchers

You mean the ones still pretending Atlantis exists, so they can make money from it?
I am a researcher too.  I don't dive, I don't crawl around in caves, but I search out the truth.  But I guess the truth does hurt, in more ways than one. 

Quote
so I have to ask, what are you even still doing here?

Let me quote myself.

Quote
In this forum, people are free to express themselves, although there are a few who still don't get it, that even though someone doesn't agree with them, that person is still entitled to have their say without being insulted.  How boring it would be, if this was just a mutual admiration society, where everyone agreed with what everyone else said, and no one did any research for themselves.





Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Ostanes on September 15, 2010, 10:56:11 am
There is none so blind as he who will not see.
You should read that over and over.

Quote
They aren't MY experts, Helios.  They were quoted by Ostanes.  It was obvious he didn't understand the papers, so I contacted the authors of said papers, who have confirmed that the Antarctic has never been ice free.
It's not my fault if the authors don't even agree with their own research.

Quote
The WATERS of the S. ATLANTIC have been ice free at times, but not Antarctica.
LOL.  They said ice-free.  Ice-free is their words.

Quote
And yes, the core samples, thousands of them, do show that the ice has been there for hundreds of thousands of years.
The core samples don't show it; your interpretation of the core samples is that they show it.

Quote
Ostanes, you can quote those same quotes over and over and over.  It doesn't change a thing.
I know. Fundamentalists such as yourself can't be persuaded by peer-reviewed science.

Quote
I've already pointed out that even with an error margin of 75%, which is totally ridiculous to even contemplate, that the Antarctic would still have been covered in ice or 3 million years.
LOL.  What if the error is 100%?
 
Quote
The one person you quote, Sean D. Pitman,  is merely a doctor who has no experience in geology, or archaeology or any other ology.  Get a grip.  Do some research.
LOL  you claim doctors don't study any ologys?  I suggest you get an education because you really need it.

Quote
The Antarctic is not lost, we know perfectly well where it is
Well since Antarctica was never lost then I guess you believe Homer, Hellanicus, Herdotus, etc., all knew exactly where it is.


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Qoais on September 15, 2010, 11:49:58 am
Quote
It's not my fault if the authors don't even agree with their own research.

They do agree.  It's your understanding of the info that's at fault.  Do you honestly believe that all those scientists are 100% wrong and you're the only one who is right?

Quote
Quote
The WATERS of the S. ATLANTIC have been ice free at times, but not Antarctica.
Quote
LOL.  They said ice-free.  Ice-free is their words.

I didn't know the continent of Antarctica was made of water  I'm sure it's been discovered with all our new technology, that under all that ice, there's land.  The WATERS were ice free, not the land.  

Quote
The core samples don't show it; your interpretation of the core samples is that they show it.

It's got nothing to do with me.  It's what science has proven.

Quote
LOL.  What if the error is 100%?

LOL is right.  That IS hilarious.  Imagine - all those scientists being totally wrong. :D :D :D

Quote
LOL  you claim doctors don't study any ologys?

Where did I claim that?  I said Sean D. Pitman, the Dr. you keep quoting as evidence or proof of your theory, is not a geologist nor is he an archaeologist.  He's a Geneticist.
 
This is what you said:
Quote
FYI Antarctica is in the Atlantic and furthermore it is a lost island continent in the "navel of the sea"

If it's lost, how come you know where it is?  Kind of a contradiction isn't it?


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Qoais on September 15, 2010, 01:18:27 pm
Here is a map showing how to interpret the Piri Reis map, showing that he turned S. America to get it to fit on his parchment.  Everybody makes such a big deal about the bottom of the map, but you'll notice, he also turned the top to make it fit.

(http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t267/Qoais/PiriReismapdoesntshowAntarctic.jpg)

Here is a link to another map by Piri Reis that he did later, and he does not show the Antarctic. 

http://art.thewalters.org/viewchild.aspx?parentid=19195&childid=78325


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: nikas on September 15, 2010, 08:47:16 pm
deleted!


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Qoais on September 15, 2010, 09:30:54 pm
Thanks very much Nikas. 


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Helios on September 15, 2010, 11:27:55 pm
Qoais,

I have read your debates with Greg Little, Jim Allen and, simply put, they weren't friendly ones.  They go very much like this one has, a lot of berating on your part, the other party takes it personally, then we don't here from them again. You aren't a believer in Atlantis, I get that.  But surely there is a better way to make your points other than to make things personal (as you constantly do).  Essan, for instance, isn't a believer either, but you won't catch him making character attacks on people he doesn't agree with, he presents his facts, then takes things in stride.  You aren't the same person you were when you started on these forums, you've actually gotten a bit mean-spirited.

I remember the last conversation you had with Bianca, that was when she left.  I don't blame you entirely for that, since Bianca always had a bit of a temper, but, as the old saying goes, it does take two to tango.

Finally, you aren't going to convince many people to believe as you do.  Some of us are simply in it for "the quest."  We don't need to have all the answers now, immediately, for us to believe that Atlantis did or didn't exist. It is a mystery that will perhaps never be solved in any of our lifetimes, we are simply looking for "clues."  I am fairly certain that Atlantis did exist, however I am not looking for the same Atlantis as the rest of you.  I am looking for a Neolithic ocean-spanning culture that made war in the Med between 10,000 bc and 2,000 bc.  I am not looking for a high tech culture with spaceships.  I imagine that would be rather unremarkable for some of you, however, I am fairly certain that my Atlantis existed, I am simply looking for it's home base, which should resemble Plato's capital city.

And now, getting to this:

Quote
Quote
It's hard to find good relevant information on Atlantis, there is so much New Age/channeling stuff on Atlantis.  Strictly speaking, I try to stay away from the mystics and stay with science.

So really, you don't believe in science then?

I do believe in science, however, I have also found that the science dealing with archaeology and even climatology tends to be agenda-driven, and I really don't believe that they know as much about the world as they pretend to. In any event, all it takes is for one unexpected discovery to realign what we think we know of science.  It's not perfect, nor should we place as much faith in it as you apparently do.  Any profession run by human beings is bound to have some errors. You tend to forget that.

Quote
You mean the ones still pretending Atlantis exists, so they can make money from it?
I am a researcher too.  I don't dive, I don't crawl around in caves, but I search out the truth.  But I guess the truth does hurt, in more ways than one. 

The only one it seems to be hurting is you, who seem to be a bit embittered by this search.  Incidentally, I haven't made a dime from Atlantis research, and yet I imagine I have put more time into studying this topic than most here. 

It did exist.  There was a Neolithic invasion from the Atlantic into the Med at exactly the time that Plato set Atlantis in and flints and arrowheads have been found in abundance dating back to that time, depicting a widespread war throughout the area.  The only questions are where these people came from and  who exactly the enemies were.  It is depicted in the book, "Plato Prehistorian" in great detail, which I highly recommend to anyone in search of Plato's Atlantis, and not Edgar Cayce's. 

As I said, a little skepticism is a healthy thing, but most skeptics I have come across (yourself, Erick Wright, as well) get so wrapped up in your agenda, that it becomes less about the truth than about being "right." 



Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Essan on September 16, 2010, 02:18:06 pm
Antarctica didn't need to be ice free for long, only for a period warm enough for a civilization to flourish there.

An ice free coastal strip does not mean a temperate climate.  And why would humans go there?  No vegetation. No soil.  No trees.  Dark for half the year .  Still, maybe that's why those who moved there then decided to invade the Med?  Seriously, it's wholly illogically to presume that even if West Antarctica was ice free people would move there and develop a civilisation they did not previously have.

Quote
The history of the British Isles is about two thousand years old.

10,000 years.  We were building stone circles over 5,000 years ago.


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Levia Komis on September 26, 2010, 04:21:05 pm
Antarctic Mountains Prove Pole Shift?
March 9th, 2009 by Rob | Posted under Pole Shift.

I’ve been puzzled by this for a long time. On the one hand Charles Hapgood (endorsed by Einstein) gave us the crustal displacement theory (aka pole shift), and found some ancient maps that showed an Antarctica without ice. On the other hand, orthodox science tells us there is plenty of evidence (such as ice cores) that tell us the ice has been there a very long time. And that the trees found buried there were from millions of years ago.

Now we have this from Discover magazine, regarding a recently discovered mountain range deep beneath the ice:

    …researchers expected to see a plateau formation, indicating that the peaks had been worn down over millennia. Instead, says researcher Robin Bell: “They are incredibly rough mountains — they look like alligators’ teeth”.

    “The surprising thing was that not only is this mountain range the size of the Alps, but it looks quite similar to the (European) Alps, with high peaks and valleys,” said Fausto Ferraccioli, a geophysicist at the British Antarctic Survey…. He told Reuters that the mountains would probably have been ground down almost flat if the ice sheet had formed slowly. But the presence of jagged peaks might mean the ice formed quickly, burying a landscape under up to 4 km (2.5 miles) of ice . Researchers say that understanding the behavior of polar ice sheets is crucial to scientists trying to predict the impacts of global warming.

    Another mystery is the age of the mountains. Mountain ranges like the Alps and the Himalayas formed when continental plates collided, but this range sits in the middle of an ancient chunk of crust, where geologists had thought there had been no major tectonic activity for at least 540 million years…. If the range is indeed at least 540 million years old, then it is remarkably well preserved for its age. Another possibility is that the Gamburtsevs formed much more recently, as a result of volcanic activity. But preliminary results from the expedition don’t show the large magnetic anomalies that would typically be expected when flying over volcanic terrain, says Ferraccioli

Is this evidence for a pole shift?


http://survive2012.com/news/2009/03/antarctic-mountains-prove-pole-shift.html


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: Levia Komis on September 26, 2010, 04:28:31 pm
Armed With Data, Scientists Still Mystified by Antarctica’s Hidden Mountains

(http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/files/2009/02/antarctica-plane.jpg)

Antarctica plane

Antarctic researchers have succeeded in mapping a mountain range that is as tall and impressive as the Alps and yet invisible to the naked eye, since the entire range is hidden beneath miles of ice. The international expedition (which 80beats covered when it set off in October) used radar, gravity sensors, and other instruments mounted on airplanes to chart the contours of the mighty Gamburtsev mountains, but say the results mostly revealed new mysteries. For example, researchers expected to see a plateau formation, indicating that the peaks had been worn down over millennia. Instead, says researcher Robin Bell: “They are incredibly rough mountains — they look like alligators’ teeth” [Nature News].

“The surprising thing was that not only is this mountain range the size of the Alps, but it looks quite similar to the (European) Alps, with high peaks and valleys,” said Fausto Ferraccioli, a geophysicist at the British Antarctic Survey…. He told Reuters that the mountains would probably have been ground down almost flat if the ice sheet had formed slowly. But the presence of jagged peaks might mean the ice formed quickly, burying a landscape under up to 4 km (2.5 miles) of ice [Reuters]. Researchers say that understanding the behavior of polar ice sheets is crucial to scientists trying to predict the impacts of global warming.

Another mystery is the age of the mountains. Mountain ranges like the Alps and the Himalayas formed when continental plates collided, but this range sits in the middle of an ancient chunk of crust, where geologists had thought there had been no major tectonic activity for at least 540 million years…. If the range is indeed at least 540 million years old, then it is remarkably well preserved for its age. Another possibility is that the Gamburtsevs formed much more recently, as a result of volcanic activity. But preliminary results from the expedition don’t show the large magnetic anomalies that would typically be expected when flying over volcanic terrain, says Ferraccioli [Nature News].

To conduct the study, researchers flew aircraft 75,000 miles over six weeks braving average temperatures of -30 Celsius mapping the ancient Gamburtsev range [Telegraph].

Related Content:
80beats: Expedition Sets Off for Antarctic Mountains That “Shouldn’t Be There”
80beats: Antarctic Ice Melt Would Shift Earth’s Axis, Further Changing Sea Level
80beats: Antarctica Is Definitely Feeling the Heat From Global Warming
DISCOVER: The Ground Zero of Climate Change explains the threat to Antarctica’s Whillans Ice Stream

Image: Robin Bell / Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory
.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2009/02/24/armed-with-data-scientists-still-mystified-by-antarcticas-hidden-mountains/


Title: Re: Ice Free Antarctica Until 3,000 B.C.
Post by: nikas on September 13, 2015, 08:33:17 pm
deleted!