Dear Doug Fisher,
Indeed the two maps are very similar! South America, as portrayed by Ortelius (in relation to Kircher's map), is more identical than anything... i have read your well explained theory on your site and can only congratulate you for the fine work accomplished.
Nevertheless, there are a few questions on my mind that i would like to ask:
- How do you explain the passage in Critias relating to the region of Gades within a South American Atlantis "universe"?
To his twin brother, who was born after him, and obtained as his lot the extremity of the island towards the Pillars of Heracles, facing the country which is now called the region of Gades in that part of the world, he gave the name which in the Hellenic language is Eumelus, in the language of the country which is named after him, Gadeirus
- How do you explain (from a "motionless" point of view) the fact that North America is in fact in front of Gibraltar and not the South American Continent?
But all the preceding points are only valid if we overlook one very glaring issue: South America is not actually an island.
- On the contrary, in my opinion, the huge distance between South America and the Mediterrenean is perhaps the most obvious element against your theory, how could such long distance be feasible from a Mediterrenean or anywhere else location? (it took me a week to travel from Lisbon to Cape Verde nonstop on a cargo ship)
For because of the greatness of their empire many things were brought to them from foreign countries,
- How do you explain the non existence of elephants in South America?
- Do you know why is there another Ortelius map with considerable differences regarding South America's shape?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6f/OrteliusWorldMap.jpegAlthough i have different ideas, i once more reiterate my astonishment concerning your theory, it really has a strong verisimilitude with Plato's Atlantis, even disregarding Kircher's map !!!
Regards,
Mario Dantas