Atlantis Online
March 28, 2024, 01:38:52 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: 'Europe's oldest city' found in Cadiz
http://mathaba.net/rss/?x=566660
 
  Home Help Arcade Gallery Links Staff List Calendar Login Register  

What if the continent of Atlantis didn’t sink?

Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: What if the continent of Atlantis didn’t sink?  (Read 739 times)
0 Members and 78 Guests are viewing this topic.
denoos
Full Member
***
Posts: 2


« on: July 17, 2009, 12:57:02 pm »

There are only two places in Plato’s writings that mention Atlantis sinking. It seems that both of those statements are based on hearsay.  Would they stand up in todays courtroom.  I would say no. Read them over and look for the fallacy. Remember that at the time both the words “island” and “continent” meant the same thing.

Plato: (1) “But afterwards there occurred violent earthquakes and floods; and in a single day and night of misfortune all your warlike men in a body sank into the earth, and the island (continent) of Atlantis in like manner disappeared in the depths of the sea. For which reason the sea in those parts is impassable and impenetrable, because there is a shoal of mud in the way; and this was caused by the subsidence of the (continent) island.”  (2)“...the combatants on the other side were commanded by the kings of Atlantis, which, as was saying, was (a continent) an  island  greater in extent than Libya and Asia, and when afterwards sunk by an earthquake, became an impassable barrier of mud to voyagers sailing from hence to any part of the ocean.”

Sailors who were trying to find Atlantis after the floods and devastation came upon a shoal of mud and thought it was the debris left over from Atlantis. You can see from their description that they assumed the continent had sunk. They did not go around the shoal of mud to investigate further. They simply turned around and went back home. Their report that Atlantis had sunk was only an assumption. They had no proof. Plato also thought their story was true. He only recorded what he was told.

We now know that a tsunami will sweep tons and tons of debris back out into the ocean, which is probably what they ran into on their way back to Atlantis. There could have been miles of debris scattered over the ocean. When we look at it from this point of view, the Americas would be a likely source of Atlantis if the rest of the story is true.

 If you were a judge in a court of law, how would you view the evidence? Circumstantial? Would there be a shadow of doubt in your mind? Would you throw out the rest of the story? What would you do?

Denoos
Report Spam   Logged

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter

Mario Dantas
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1376


WWW
« Reply #1 on: July 17, 2009, 01:43:30 pm »

Dear denoos,

Welcome to the forum! Regarding your question, it must be at least 2000 years old, nevertheless, only he who correctly understood the implications of such global transformation can tell what really happened... Atlantis exists today and is still underwater.
http://lh5.ggpht.com/_OkWaN8Xfhhw/SHvGvLgxrlI/AAAAAAAABAE/NNfe67ZfePE/s512/city%20center34_Ulf_Richter.png

regards,
M
« Last Edit: July 17, 2009, 06:30:33 pm by Mario Dantas » Report Spam   Logged

Horus
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 461



« Reply #2 on: July 17, 2009, 01:59:54 pm »

Sailors who were trying to find Atlantis after the floods and devastation came upon a shoal of mud and thought it was the debris left over from Atlantis. You can see from their description that they assumed the continent had sunk. They did not go around the shoal of mud to investigate further. They simply turned around and went back home. Their report that Atlantis had sunk was only an assumption. They had no proof.

And neither do you.  These are alot of assumptions and imaginative suppositions on your part as well!

The more likely scenarios are that the sailors encountered the huge Sargasso Sea and it's dense, proliferation of seaweed which "appeared" to be growing in shallow water, but they had no way of knowing that it was situated over the Abyssal Plains three miles deep!

Alternatively, and more favorably, the shoal of mud refers to the Grand Bahama Bank which takes its name from the Spanish Baja Mar or "shallow sea" and it posed a hazardous, enormous barrier to Spanish shipping.  The Bank is 15-30 ft. deep, is "oblong" as Plato said and is 375 x 225 miles compared to Plato's approximate dimensions of 345 x 230 miles.  The ruins of a city 90-200 ft. deep have been discovered near Bimini.  No other prospect for Atlantis in the world has evidence this strong!


Report Spam   Logged

"For the greater individual is the one who is the servant of all. And to conquer self is greater than taking cities."

Reading 3253-2
Qoais
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 3423



« Reply #3 on: July 17, 2009, 02:53:05 pm »

Actually, this line of reasoning is quite logical.  Actually, I think back in my thread somewhere, I posted a theory that showed the land had actually rose a great deal, so that when the ships approached what used to be land level with the eye, was now towering way above them, and they thought then, that the land they knew must have sunk, since they didn't believe the land could be thrown up.  No proof for any of it, but a logical deduction, just the same.  Not that I'd agree that the Americas were the right location, since that is one huge ocean between, that would have had to fill with debris.  It couldn't have been the whole Atlantic that filled with debris.
Report Spam   Logged

An open-minded view of the past allows for an unprejudiced glimpse into the future.

Logic rules.

"Intellectual brilliance is no guarantee against being dead wrong."
Tom Hebert
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1370


« Reply #4 on: July 17, 2009, 03:01:41 pm »

Is it true that in Plato's time "island" and "continent" meant the same thing?  I suspect that the answer is a little more complex than that.
Report Spam   Logged
Qoais
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 3423



« Reply #5 on: July 17, 2009, 05:49:47 pm »

Actually, I don't think he said island OR continent, because later on he does mention continent by name when he says that the real ocean is surrounded by the true continent.

What he said was Nesos - which apparently - can mean any number of things.  ie:  island, peninsula, marshlands, alluvial land.
Report Spam   Logged

An open-minded view of the past allows for an unprejudiced glimpse into the future.

Logic rules.

"Intellectual brilliance is no guarantee against being dead wrong."
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #6 on: July 17, 2009, 06:22:07 pm »









Timaeus 24e:


                           "The island was the way to other islands, and from these

                             you might pass to the whole of the opposite continent

                                            which surrounded the true ocean."
Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Qoais
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 3423



« Reply #7 on: July 17, 2009, 08:49:39 pm »

Thank you Bianca, I was too hot and tired to look that up.  I've had this conversation somewhere before!  If we say "the nesos was the way to other nesos' and from these etc." it sounds pretty silly.  Especially if we substitute the other meanings.

For instance:  "the peninsula was the way to other peninsulas and from these you might pass to the whole of the opposite continent...."

or - "the alluvial land was the way to other alluvial land anf from these ....."

or - "the continent was the way to other continents and from these you might pass to the whole of the opposite continent which surrounded the true ocean".

Which one makes the most sense?  Using the word island works best in this context.  Having said that however, I believe they used the same word in the same sentence even sometimes, making the reader take the meaning from context as to which meaning was intended.  Nesos, means nose or a part of the land that looks like a nose, like a peninsula sticking out from the land.
« Last Edit: July 17, 2009, 08:52:58 pm by Qoais » Report Spam   Logged

An open-minded view of the past allows for an unprejudiced glimpse into the future.

Logic rules.

"Intellectual brilliance is no guarantee against being dead wrong."
Mario Dantas
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1376


WWW
« Reply #8 on: July 18, 2009, 04:33:18 am »

Quote
What if the continent of Atlantis didn’t sink?

It did not sink... it only moved! whether you call it a Continent or Island... If it existed and did not sink then the vanishement of the island could only be explained by a movement to somewhere "unseen". It is quite easy if you think of how ships disappear beyond the horizon. Ships become invisible after a few hundred Km in a straight line. Atlantis became "invisible" because it moved across our Planet to a cold and desert place, the Arctic...

24h of free Continental boyancy resulted in a considerable Earth crustal "refurbishment" of which, maybe, Plato´s Atlantis is the best indication so far... huge Earthquakes and Waves... the end of the Ice Age, fast climatic changes, and scattered groups of people and animals and plants everywhere... If Atlantis did not sink (or whatever) and existed somehow before prehistory, maybe for a long time, will change completely the preconceived idea that Man didn´t exist in a Civilized state or that Man wasn´t smart enough to do whatever we think we are doing...

This Civilization could be the tip of the "human" iceberg and we fooled ourselves all the time. What would someone say to something that suddenly disappeared at sea, leaving an impassible mud barrier to any navigation?

now you see me, now you don´t...

regards,
M
Report Spam   Logged

Desiree
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 3882



« Reply #9 on: July 18, 2009, 11:57:58 pm »

Quote
Sailors who were trying to find Atlantis after the floods and devastation came upon a shoal of mud and thought it was the debris left over from Atlantis. You can see from their description that they assumed the continent had sunk. They did not go around the shoal of mud to investigate further. They simply turned around and went back home. Their report that Atlantis had sunk was only an assumption. They had no proof. Plato also thought their story was true. He only recorded what he was told.

Well, not exactly.  The fact that Plato cites the mud might also make someone believe that they actually knew where Atlantis was.

Strabo mentions five islands in the Atlantic that are no longer there or misidentified.  Maybe one of the islands was Atlantis.  Aristotle also mentions the mud, though apparent;ly didn't believe in Atlantis.
Report Spam   Logged

This power came forth out of the Atlantic Ocean. But afterwards there occurred violent earthquakes and floods; and in a single day and night of misfortune all your warlike men in a body sank into the earth, and the island of Atlantis in like manner disappeared in the depths of the sea.
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy