Atlantis On The Internet (in Cuba, Spartel and Antarctica) - ORIGINAL

[Bianca]

Andre
Member
Member # 661

Member Rated:
   posted 03-30-2004 12:49 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



dhill,

btw do you have a nicer (nick)name to be addressed as.

Please forget about Cayce. Scientific hypotheses that mention Cayce are certain to be neglected.

The stone on the picture is assumed to some 8-10 feet long. The dimensions of the pyramid have not been mentioned but regarding the resolution and the visibility a same rough order of magnitude is not unlikely.

So far these are the only two pictures that seem to have been released, I'm afraid.

[Bianca]

dhill757

Member
Member # 1890

Member Rated:
   posted 03-30-2004 01:46 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Andre,

Where did you get the dimensions from?

(Name is Dale, by the way)

You're right, any scientific discussion of Atlantis probably shouldn't include Cayce.

I think that the main reason that archaeologists are reluctant to investigate Atlantis is because it
has become this icon for new age philosophy. That wouldn't be all bad except for the fact that it
has probably interfered with a lot more serious excavation work.
Do you think the Cuba site is Atlantis..? Where else do you think it would be if not there..?

I take Plato literally when he says beyond the Pillars of Hercules, in the Atlantic.

I'm re-reading Timaeus and Critias and he's very specific, there isn't that much room for error.

Also, the story does have the "feel" of something he is trying to remember the details of as opposed
to invent.

[Bianca]

Andre
Member
Member # 661

Member Rated:
   posted 03-30-2004 03:03 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dale,

Paulina Zelilsky mentioned the dimensions in an interview but the link is gone I'm afraid.

Indeed the Atlantis case is very loaded. PhD's and Atlantis don't mix very well usually although there are several exceptions and all of them are posting here, it seems.

No, I don't think that this is Atlantis. You can ponder about every word of the Critias and Timaeus but you are pondering about English words, (subjective) translations of latin words that have been greek words earlier. The originals of Plato have been long gone and we have no clue about the imagination levels of medieval translators, modifying it.

Exeptional good work has been done both by Erick Wright and Georgeos Diaz (both posters here) about reconstructing the original intention of Plato. Although both followed original paths and definitely disagree (and quarrel) about the results but whoever is right, apparantly Atlantis is very near the Pillars of Hercules.

There may or may not have been many more dissapeared civilisations and Cuba may be one of them, whilst not being Atlantis

[Bianca]

dhill757

Member
Member # 1890

Member Rated:
   posted 03-30-2004 09:53 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Andre,

Maybe you have some information I don't on the history of how Timaeus and Critias were discovered and first translated, and by whom.

As I understand it, the story of Atlantis has been around since Plato first spoke of it, twenty-four hundred years ago.

We have heard that Aristotle didn't believe in it and also that the Greek scholar Crastor visited Egypt after Plato's death and saw the original Sais stone the account was written on, verifying it's existence.

 Now, Latin translations aside, the story had to exist somewhat in it's present form to what we know it as today or else, in my opinion at least, the Atlantis legend would not be considered as special as it is and probably wouldn't have endured for as long as it has.

The errors I've seen that people attribute to the text have to do with the measurements and the time involved. Plato makes Atlantis into a huge place (especially the rectangular plain and the depth and width of the canal) and also places it too far in the past for the taste of some scholars.

I've read some of the posts by Georges and Erick and both make some very good points, but as far as
I know, the name "Atlantis" isn't even a Greek word, it had to have come from someplace else.

Yes, it's good that so many learned people have joined this forum. My one complaint would be that I wish we cold find out how the actual research is going into some of the areas we've been talking about, but I suppose that would be the complaint of anyone looking for Atlantis.

You said that Atlantis existed beyond the Pillars of Hercules, what is your opinion of where exactly would it be in the Atlantic..?

Do you place it 11,000 years ago or more recently..?

Do you have any other particular site in mind if you discount Cuba..?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Bianca]

Andre
Member
Member # 661

Member Rated:
   posted 03-31-2004 06:13 AM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Well Dale,

If you dig down deep in the threads, about two years you can find a comprehensive overview of
both Erick and Georgeos work. The latter giving a complete elaboration of the early whereabouts
of the Plato books.


My research is more geologic, trying to solve the mystery of the ice ages and being well underway.

So I was struck by the extreme accurate coincidence of the alleged timing of the Atlantis happening 9000 years before Solon, placing it at about 11,550 years or so before past, whereas the Pleistocene Ice age ended suddenly and perhaps even catastrophically around 11,670 years ago within a few years. Too close perhaps to be coincidence. No wonder that I was trying to connect myth, history and hard geologic data.

However, there is no evidence for a continuous civilisation that could be capable of passing historic data accurately.

Georgeos contends with an extensive elaboration that most likely the "9000" was in error due to a mistake of Solon and it should have been 900. (this is also used in the Thera Santori Volcano scenario, however that would still fail by some 300 years)

Erick has some clear ideas about the translation and he proposes that the "9000" is not about years but about people..I believe 9000 citizens.

Both have very plausible explanations, placing Atlantis in the environment of the "pillars of Hercules". There are a couple more ideas that also point towards the Spain - Morocco region and I see no reasons why other explanations would be better. The merit of Ericks work is that it compares to other ancient history (the sea people) but Georgeos claims thing likewise.

Either way, the 9000 years seems highly unlikely, cancelling my connexion with the ice age research.

BTW My prediction for the sinking of the Cuban megalithic site is some 25,000 - 15,000 years ago. The dating (of exposure) would be possible when we would only have a small sample of those rocks.

[Bianca]

Tom Hebert
Member
Member # 999

  posted 03-31-2004 08:13 AM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dale,

Here is the thread that discusses the survival of Plato's works.
http://forums.atlantisrising.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000428.html

Tom

[Bianca]

dhill757

Member
Member # 1890

Member Rated:
   posted 03-31-2004 08:35 AM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Andre,

I would think that the evidence for a civilization happening 9,000 years before the age of Plato seems to be mounting rather than disappearing. Not only did the Ice Age end (suddenly, from the looks of it), mammoths were found frozen in place in Siberia dated from that time, as if they died suddenly, and the book "Cataclysm" postulates that an event from space is what brought the Ice Age to an end. If your own estimation of the city near Cuba puts it at around 15,000 bc., I would imagine that would be further proof of an ancient civilization rather than less proof, right..?

I don't know what you think of the research being done in Egypt. Of course, it's sketchy at best to include it here, but Robert Bauval links the pyramids of Giza to the alignment of the stars of the Orion belt in the year 10,500 b.c. And of course you already know that the geologist Robert Schoch dates the Sphinx to around 10,000 b.c. as well. Bauval's theory may just be a coincidence. On the other hand, it is odd that both happen in the same time. The article on this website "How Old Are the Pyramids?" puts a lot of the Egyptian research in perspective.

Taken together, all these things don't necessarily have to add up to being "Atlantis" (in fact, Bauval and Schoch are careful not to even mention the name), but the only account we have of an ancient civilization dated in that time (at least, as far as I know), happens to be Atlantis.

I used to think that the "Sea People" did have something to do with Atlantis, too. It's an obvious connection, but if we're thinking of a civilization as old as we think it is, either there is the error in the date for the translation, or the Sea People would have to be some kind of descendents of Atlantis. Ramses mentions them and the Egyptians and the Hittites agreed to an alliance against them. Does anyone know what the ancient Minoans actually called themselves..? That might be interesting.

Minoan culture probably flourished on it's own. On the other hand, the Guanche tribe that inhabited the Canary Islands claimed to have descended from a civilization that sounded a lot like the one we're talking about. Also, the Basques of Spain (who have been in the news of late), also claim to be descendents of Atlantis. Several of the ancient cultures on the other side of the Atlantic - the Aztecs and the Mayans among them also claim to have come from a submerged land, now in the sea. I've heard that the Hindu word for disaster is "Atlantika."

Now, all this might be some kind of coincidence, but I don't think so. I'll try and look through the old forums to see how the Plato dialogues were discovered. It is my opinion, though, that often times modern scholars don't give the ancients enough credit for the things they are writing about. We think, because we have the benefit of hindsight, we're somehow smarter than them. I don't think that. We can do the research, dig and verify accounts, but it could be that things are also the way they said they were, and I've never heard anyone dispute Plato's use of the word "true" in his dialogues.

[Bianca]

dhill757

Member
Member # 1890

Member Rated:
   posted 03-31-2004 09:02 AM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Tom,

Thanks for the link, that was some of the best reading I've seen on the forum!

"Aristotle was jealous of Plato and attempted to oppose him at every turn; he claimed that Plato had created the legend of Atlantis. Aristotle was also the teacher of Alexander the Great. Alexander and his friend and successor, Ptolemy, founded Alexandria. It does not take too much to figure that anything that would have corroborated Plato's legend of Atlantis would have gotten "lost" (as in "it just fell off the truck, officer") in the shuffle."

I didn't know how bad the relationship was between Plato and Aristotle. I suppose I always assumed that he had a fatherly relationship to him, like Socrates did with Plato.

Does anyone know how the Arabic version of Timaeus differed from the one in Greek? Measurements would be a lot different, I think, since Arabic measurements are known to be a lot greater than those of the west at the time.

"Critias" might not have ended in mid-sentence like we think. It could have either been edited by Aristotle or the christian church. The Vatican has a lot of secret records, what harm would there be in keeping another Atlantis account among them..?



Andre,
 
Another point about the geologic evidence. What kind of shape would something be in after eleven thousand years, even if it was made of stone, especially if it was at the bottom of the sea..? I'm no expert, but I would think it would be hard to distinguish it from a natural or manmade formation.

[Bianca]

Andre
Member
Member # 661

Member Rated:
   posted 03-31-2004 12:59 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dale,

I have a couple of links that should take a few weeks to study. Point by point:

1. Evidence is indeed mounting about older cilivilations. How about this one:
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200403/26/eng20040326_138617.shtml

Anybody has any indications of even older artifacts?

2. "mammoths were found frozen in place in Siberia dated from that time, as if they died suddenly,"

No, most certainly not. Check the mammoth discussion in this thread:

http://forums.atlantisrising.com/ubb/Forum12/HTML/000133-2.html

3. "If your own estimation of the city near Cuba puts it at around 15,000 bc., I would imagine that would be further proof of an ancient civilization rather than less proof, right..? "

Most probably a bit older but please note that I never declared this to be a city just a megalithic site that should have formed somehow above the water surface. But a city is tempting  and it would certainly not interfere with my ideas.

3. I have taken note of the Egyptian discussion but until now I have not formed an opinion. I have seen reasonable articles raising some doubt about the various claims. I wonder why there is not an unambigeous scientific exposure dating of the pyramid and sphinx stones, yet. Recently this had become possible by the so called 10Be/26Al method and/or thermo-opto-illuminicence method.

About the connexion with Ericks sea people or Georgeos line of thinking, I'm afraid that the oldest threads have been erased. But this may help:

http://forums.atlantisrising.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000429.html

and about Georgeos ideas I happened to have copied and pasted a lot of his work in these forums and it is available here:

http://home.wanadoo.nl/bijkerk/georgeos.doc

But in the end, science works with ideas that must have supporting proof and predictions forfilled and some hindsight speculation may be fun and it is, but it's not science.

[Bianca]

dhill757

Member
Member # 1890

Member Rated:
   posted 03-31-2004 01:43 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Andre,

Thanks for all the links, as you can imagine, I am still studying them.

It sounds like you have the mammoth argument pretty well covered. I probably shouldn't go near that again, but I will. You're right when you say that, if there was some great calamity, more of them would have been found flash frozen than the small number that have been found in Siberia and elsewhere...unless their population had already been hunted to near extinction and the catastrophe was more local than global.

Personally, I think it's amazing that even any of them have been found, this is a prehistoric beast we're talking about. Imagine how it would be if we had found a dinoaur intact..?

As for the ancient civilization, I have a proposed settlement that might be even older than the Chinese phoenix: Malta. Some researchers have dated the ruins upon Malta to 7,000 and 8,000 b.c. and they show signs of a lot of water damage. There are paths that lead off to the sea which make one believe that there was once more land. I'm sure you probably heard that the theory that the Mediterranean was once a valley, with Malta a high peak in it. In fact, some researchers have said that the it has emptied and been flooded many times, with the last flooding being the origin of the flood story behind Noah's ark. If that's really the case, there might be a lot of other ruins in the sea there dated around the same era as Malta.

It is awfully hard to date a block of stone anyway. Carbon 14 dating is unreliable anyway (from what I have heard it has a two hundred year window of error), and I don't know what other methods scientists use to date a block of stone. I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of the sites we have identified from a certain time turn out to be much older than they are theorized now once a more accurate dating system comes out.

Egypt is a whole different story. If there is more ancient civilization there (and Egyptians, not Egyptologists, claim that their civilization is much older than it is given credit for), there could be all sorts of evidence buried beneath the sands. I really think evidence of Atlantis as an actual place will be found there someday. Solon originally saw the information on a stone, does anyone have any information on what temple the stone was in and where that temple was..? I don't remember hearing if the site was ever identified. (Was that ever covered in any of the forums..?)

I'm sure that a lot of people on the forum can read Egyptian hieroglyphics. Wouldn't it be great to have our own translation of the story told to Solon so that there would be no dispute as to the size, location and era of Atlantis...? If anyone has any information as to the detals of this stone, I hope they'll come forward. The original Egyptian account would be even more important than finding Plato's original work.

[Bianca]

docyabut
Member
Member # 117

Rate Member   posted 03-31-2004 06:37 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



The phoenix bird symbolizes immortality, resurrection and life after death. In ancient Greek and Egyptian mythology, it is associated with the sun god.

According to the Greeks, the bird lives in Arabia, near a cool well. Every morning at dawn, the sun god would stop his chariot to listen to the bird sing a beautiful song while it bathed in the well.

Only one phoenix exists at a time. When the bird felt its death was near, every 500 to 1,461 years, it would build a nest of aromatic wood and set it on fire. The bird then was consumed by the flames.

A new phoenix sprang forth from the pyre. It embalmed the ashes of its predecessor in an egg of myrrh and flew with it to Heliopolis, "city of the sun," where the egg was deposited on the altar of the sun god. In Egypt, it was usually depicted as a heron, but in the classic literature as a peacock or an eagle.

[Bianca]

Andre
Member
Member # 661

Member Rated:
   posted 04-01-2004 02:47 AM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dale

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It sounds like you have the mammoth argument pretty well covered.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, perhaps I may indeed. Yes the extinction of Mammoths, Mastodonts, Woolly Rhino's and some 20 more big species etc etc is highly puzzling.

Libraries have been filled with the "ill", "chill" or "kill" ideas. Concerning the diversity of species, "kill" and "ill" are highly unlikely. The kill is focussing on North American Mammoths only due some dozen of spearheads found in Mammoth burial sites. However there were many more Mammoths in North Siberia and there is no trace of "kill" over there. "Ill" to get multiple species extinct due to migration and infectious diseases cannot be proven duplicated by models.

Remains "chill" but the end of the Ice age was about warming, not cooling

There are multiple signs of instantaneous, dramatic precipitation increase, almost world wide (some 5 fold observed in the ice cores of Greenland). This killed the steppe biotope and turned it into a peat swamp. NO NO NO not a global flood. It was the "clathrate gun" that killed the Mammoths.

[Bianca]

dhill757

Member
Member # 1890

Member Rated:
   posted 04-01-2004 08:04 AM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Thanks for the information on the phoenix, docyabut.

Andre, it sounds like there is no clear concensus what happened to the mammoth. I did hear that more recent mammoth remains, dated to 5000 and 4000 b.c. were found on an island in the arctic (although I can't remember the source at the moment), so it they may not have been extinct after all.

Do you know anything more about the Egyptian stone that the Atlantis information was found..? Are there any other references to it other than the ones dealing with Solon and later Crastor..? Seems like that would be at the heart of the Atlantis mystery.

I also wonder if anyone knows what happened to the theory of Troy as Atlantis. It was pretty popular about ten years ago because they found the evidence of concentric rings dug around the city, but it just seems to have faded away now.

[Bianca]

NileQueen
Member
Member # 675

Member Rated:
   posted 04-01-2004 08:49 AM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Wrangel Island is the island where mammoth fossils where found which date to about 4,000 y.a. http://packrat.aml.arizona.edu/Journal/v37n1/vartanyan.html

It is quite a mystery as to why the Siberian mammoths became extinct, but the isolated Wrangel Island mammoths lived on another 6,000 years or so, and in what is today an extremely cold place, home to polar bears, tundra geese, and breeding Pacific walrus.

Wrangel has a greater concentration of polar bears and walruses than anywhere else. Musk oxen and reindeer thrive inland.

 

[Bianca]

dhill757

Member
Member # 1890

Member Rated:
   posted 04-01-2004 10:53 AM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Thanks, Nilequeen, I couldn't remember the name of the island either.


Prehistoric times were probably a lot more interesting than scholars give them credit for with
creatures like this still walking around.

The era, 4000 b.c., is just before Egyptian civilization is given credit with started, to put things
in perspective!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------