Message #11365

[cleasterwood]

I'd be the first one to jump on the Egypt being Atlantis theory, IF I thought it had merit. The first thing this author needed to do was run a spell check on his work before printing it for the world to see.    Secondly, you can't presume Arabic was the tongue of Ancient Khem.  Arabic may have been derived from the Khemetic language, but to make such the "presumption" that Arabic was Khemetic when trying to sound scientific just shows the author's ignorance.

Achieving this second task will be based on showing the method of pronouncing the hieroglyphic texts, particularly the names of kings and places, based on the presumption that Arabic was the tongue of the ancient Egyptian.

The researchers in the filed of Egyptology thought that the ancient Egyptian used only the cubit.

Give me a break, please!  Is this guy just making stuff up now? 

There is a lost paradise in Egypt as told by the Koran, but it has nothing to do with Atlantis and is buried under the sand.  Besides all the assumptions in this guy's work, Critias and Timeaus also state that Egypt was not part of the Atlantean's territories. This in itself debunks any idea that Egypt was Atlantis.

I know there are still remains of the lighthouse at Alexandria under the water. Who knows what else is down there.

The rest of Alexandria. 

Blessed be,
Lynn