Atlantis Online
September 22, 2018, 05:20:21 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Has the Location of the Center City of Atlantis Been Identified?
http://www.mysterious-america.net/hasatlantisbeenf.html
 
  Home Help Arcade Gallery Links Staff List Calendar Login Register  

Geology of Atlantis

Pages: [1] 2 3 4   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Geology of Atlantis  (Read 1013 times)
LoneStar77
Full Member
***
Posts: 47


Carl Martin - Writer, Artist and Software Engineer


WWW
« on: July 22, 2010, 10:59:00 am »

In any serious discussion of Atlantis, the subject of geology is critical. Why? Without a plausible explanation for how Atlantis was created and then destroyed, any theory about Plato's Atlantis is little more than a pleasant fiction.

Plato was very specific about the location of Atlantis, yet many researchers have chosen to ignore some or all of his clues because a number of skeptics said that there is nothing in the geology of the North Atlantic which would allow for the past existence of a large island which ultimately subsided.

I have spent several years studying the location given to us by Plato, and there is plenty in that region to support the past existence of Atlantis. The most important aspect is the Africa-Eurasia tectonic plate boundary which runs through the Strait of Gibraltar to the Azores and the mid-Atlantic ridge. Most mountains and a great many islands are created at tectonic plate boundaries from plate subduction (one plate sliding underneath the other) or plate compression (one plate colliding with another and crumpling [crustal folding]).

I have a new video coming out on Monday, July 26, 2010, "Why the Philippines will Not be the Next Atlantis." The title of the video makes a good point, because... well, I currently live in the Philippines. More importantly for the Atlantis subject, the comparison between the similarities between the Philippines and Atlantis show how the geology of Atlantis might have worked.

I would love to get your feedback on these ideas, both before the video and after. You can find directions to the video at my Mission: Atlantis website.

I'm also working on a book called, "Mission: Atlantis" under the pen name, Rod Martin, Jr.

LoneStar77
New Atlantis Video Blog
Report Spam   Logged

LoneStar77
(Carl Martin)
"Now we have proof that something BIG happened right when Plato's Atlantis subdided. We have the 'smoking gun.'"
www.MissionAtlantis.com

Social Buttons

Helios
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1819



« Reply #1 on: July 22, 2010, 06:37:43 pm »

Hello Carl, I am still perusing your website, nice work.  If you don't place it in the Phillipines, and place it out in the Atlantic, how do you account for this presumably sunken landmass?  And just how big do you think it was?
Report Spam   Logged

"This power came forth out of the Atlantic Ocean, for in those days the Atlantic was navigable; and there was an island situated in front of the straits called the Pillars of Heracles; the island was larger than Libya and Asia put together..."
Ian Nottingham
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 3441



« Reply #2 on: July 22, 2010, 06:43:08 pm »

Atlantis Book
Mission: Atlantis
by Rod Martin, Jr.

The story of Atlantis is a complicated and controversial one. It starts with Plato, but it includes German Nazis, a United States congressman, clairvoyants, charlatans, creative scientists and proof that something very, very big happened when Atlantis sank. These are some of the highlights of this upcoming book.

    * Plato's Atlantis
    * The controversy
    * The location of Atlantis
    * Proof that something big happened 9620 BCE
    * Genetic links across the Atlantic
    * Clues to an Atlantean matriarchy
    * Atlantis in myths around the world
    * The possibility that dragons were real, but mechanical artifacts of Atlantis
    * The geology of Atlantis
    * A biblical connection
    * The children of Atlantis
    * The Great Dark Age — 6,000 years without civilization
    * The foundations of civilization
    * The search for clues
    * Finding proof of Atlantis
    * Performing the mission — what would it take?

http://www.ancientsuns.com/fwd/mia/atlantis-book.php
Report Spam   Logged
Ian Nottingham
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 3441



« Reply #3 on: July 22, 2010, 06:45:49 pm »

"6,000 years without civilization"

I guess you are talking from 9000 bc to 3000 bc? Where does Egypt place in all of this?  And what time frame are you setting Plato's Athens?
Report Spam   Logged
Qoais
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 3423



« Reply #4 on: July 22, 2010, 09:02:12 pm »

Here's a copy of a post from my thread that I made, asking some questions.  Maybe your theory can answer them??

In the polling thread, Atlantis Polls and News there is the question, Was Atlantis Real?

It was suggested that the first criteria would be to agree where Atlantis was located in the first place.

It seems most people are of the mind that it WAS out in the Atlantic and there are different opinions about which flood Plato is referring to.

It doesn't matter which flood WE are trying to apply to the story because there was no flood.  Plato did not say the ocean rose up and flooded Atlantis.  He said she SUNK.  There is quite a difference.  He also said the Athenian warriors went down as well.  The history of Greece had been lost several times due to weather conditions and flooding from the rains that came down from the skies, but Egypt stays dry because her water is supplied from underground.  Still is. The floods of Greece are common enough occurrences it seems, for the times in history for them to have happened,  to be named after someone famous and remembered in the histories (Deucalion for example).

So - let's pretend Atlantis was out in the ocean. We would have to accept that there was a major tectonic movement of some sort that caused the bottom of the ocean to open up and swallow an island the size of a continent.  Science has shown that didn't happen.  Atlantis supposedly had super high mountains.  Yet Plato says that all that is left, is shoals of mud.  Meaning Atlantis had to sink at least a mile (if we're comparing her superior mountains to say something like Kilimanjaro which is over a mile hight at 5898 feet)  Science says this didn't happen.  Plato did not say that there were islands still existing after she sunk, he said shoals of mud.

And again, how did the Athenians of 11,500 years ago, GET to Atlantis to sink with her?

OR

If Atlantis attacked the Athenians, which is the way Plato writes it, that she attacked Athens, Egypt and Asia "at a blow" (all at once), then how did the Athenian warriors die when Atlantis sunk out in the middle of the ocean?  It can not be both ways.

If the Athenian warriors who were winning this war, sunk with Atlantis, then they had to be IN Atlantis.  If Atlantis was out in the ocean, how did they get there?  And since there were allegedly no organized armies in that time period, what army is Plato talking about?


I think I've figured it out!!  They SKATED to Atlantis on the ice!!    The world WAS in the grip of an ice age during the time line for the supposed existence of Atlantis.  She sunk, 1500 years before the end of the ice age.  So that's got to be it.  The Athenians skated to Atlantis and by gum and begorra, she went and sunk just when the soldiers were about to celebrate their success.  Cheesy Cheesy
« Last Edit: July 22, 2010, 10:21:05 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."
Qoais
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 3423



« Reply #5 on: July 22, 2010, 10:30:43 pm »

Hi Lonestar
I was recently in conversation with a geologist about this plate tectonic business because I too, wondered if the Azores could be a remnant, even though Plato said that all that remain was shoals of mud.  Now he also said the mountains were the most high and beautiful of anywhere, so comparing them to some of the tallest mountains, they would be a mile high.  They had to sink at least a mile then, to leave only shoals of mud.

Anyway, I thought you might be interested in my conversation with the geologist so I'll paste our chat here for your perusal Cheesy

Me:
We have the Azores islands in the Atlantic and we have Iceland which is an island in the Atlantic, and we supposedly have the mid Atlantic ridge continually expanding.

So - how does this expanding ridge affect these islands?

I've been reading where some mountains have "roots", so would some islands have roots, since they have mountains on, and hold steady, and some don't have roots and would be pulled apart or pushed about, by the expanding ridge?

The way I see it, in my own mind, and I know most think I'm a few bricks short a load, is that the earth is like an washing machine. One of the ones with an agitator in them. Have you watched a load of clothes being washed in one? At the centre, closest to the agitator, the clothes are pulled down into the water, and a short time later, they come up again along the outer edges of the tub. The washing machine stays the same size, but the movement of the agitator causes this subduction at the centre.

So what I'd like to know is, if the ridge is continually expanding, it must have done so from the beginning of earth, since she was always hot in the middle and hasn't cooled yet, and so if that's the case, there couldn't have been a pangea, but, if there WAS a pangea, and the land mass broke up, and a bit was left as an island in the Atlantic, what would happen to that island? Would she be split apart by the ever expanding ridge, or would she be pushed in the direction of expansion on whichever side of the ridge she was located in the first place? Like if say, an island was located to the East of the ridge originally, would it get pushed toward Europe and Africa? Or, ...........what?

Him:

Your "washing machine" analogy is not entirely incorrect, but remember that this activity (subduction, etc.) occurs within the comparatively thin crust.

It so happens that the two examples mentioned (Azores, Iceland) are the result of magma (volcanic) eruptions from the "cracks" in tectonic plates. The Azores lie at the juncture of the North American, Eurasian, and African plates and actually form a "micro-plate". Iceland lies on the Mid-Atlantic Ridge (juncture of the Eurasian and North American plates).
They are not in motion per se, but are eruptions resulting from plate collision/subduction/separation. Not unlike Hawaii, etc. Volcanic islands forming over "hot spots".

In the case of the Azores, the oldest island (Santa Maria) dates back some 7 million, sank, and reappeared. The newest island dates back some 300 thousand. Note time-line.

It regards to time-line - Plate movement in the North Atlantic is measured to be ~ 1 cm/yr (2.54 cm = 1 inch). In other areas of the planet, movement has been measured at ~1-10 cm/yr. You know how I am about time-lines. These factors truly need to be put into perspective, i.e., human time frame as opposed to geologic.

It should also be noted that current research indicates that there may have been at least two super-continents prior to Pangea (Rodinea and Gondwana).

Link to some excellent info:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/09/080905-pangaea-suction.html

Me:

 If there HAD been a large island in the Atlantic, could it have disappeared without a trace through the movement of the plates? It seems to me, it would have to be in a major subduction zone, and the whole island would have to be sucked down without a trace, or it was pushed up so high, when the plates collided, there would be huge mountains where the island used to be.

We DO have the Azores and of course there are those who are arguing that they ARE the remnants of Alantis, but if there are, they have to be sitting on an area that would become the biggest sink hole in history, that the rest of the island fell into. Because to me, if they are on a spot where the plates meet, the land would be pushed up and there would be something more than islands there.

Him:

Anyone taking the time (and computer power) to pull up bathymetric maps of the Atlantic will find that there is no indication of a submerged continent. Sorry, just isn't there.

Him:

Any large "island" in the Atlantic would be the result of the known plate separation and volcanic "eruption" from the "crack", resulting in the formation of such land-forms as the Azores. As the North American plate moves westward and collides with the Pacific plate, we have subduction. This does not appear to be the case with the mid-Atlantic Ridge. Basically, the North American plate is moving west, colliding with the Pacific plate, which is again colliding with the Eurasian plate, hence the Pacific "Ring of Fire". This results in the volcanism/earthquakes along the west coast (your neck of the woods). This is admittedly simplified and does not fully encompass more broadly global movements. For a qualified brief on the mid-Atlantic ridge;

http://www.whoi.edu/...4&archives=true

To get back to the Azores; The Azores are of totally volcanic origin and do have quite a "violent" history.

http://www.volcano.s...n.cfm?rnum=1802
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."
Nicole Jimmelson
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 4259



« Reply #6 on: July 22, 2010, 11:38:54 pm »

Quote
If the Athenian warriors who were winning this war, sunk with Atlantis, then they had to be IN Atlantis.  If Atlantis was out in the ocean, how did they get there?  And since there were allegedly no organized armies in that time period, what army is Plato talking about?


I think I've figured it out!!  They SKATED to Atlantis on the ice!!    The world WAS in the grip of an ice age during the time line for the supposed existence of Atlantis.  She sunk, 1500 years before the end of the ice age.  So that's got to be it.  The Athenians skated to Atlantis and by gum and begorra, she went and sunk just when the soldiers were about to celebrate their success. 

That's classy.  Since you don't believe in Atlantis, you apparently now have to resort to trashing the whole story, and, apparently making light of anyone who still believes in it. You are so cool!

For your information, the Athenians didn't have to go to Atlantis to die in the same calamity. They could have easily died in the same calamity if an object from space had hit the Atlantic, which would have also caused killer tsunamis in the Med.  You were told this before in the forum, but of course, blew it off because you thought it was more fun to stay in the skeptic camp.

However, the text doesn't even say that the Athenians DIED in the same calamity.  Read it again, it says "in a like manner" Atlantis sunk.

Doesn't say that it happened at the same time.

Only says that it happened "in a like manner." For all you know, the war and the sinking of Atlantis happened thousands of years apart. The only point that Plato makes is that neither were around by his time. Of course, you probably won't bother to read the text again, because, like most skeptics, you like to trash things before you have all the facts.   Wink
Report Spam   Logged
Qoais
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 3423



« Reply #7 on: July 23, 2010, 12:54:16 am »

I'm surprised at your attitude Nicole.  I thought you had more class.  Thought you were more mature as well.

I am aware that Plato said "in like manner".   I am aware that a Tsunami can travel around the world several times without losing much of it's intensity.  However, Plato didn't mention any other damage, to any other culture, happening with this sinking of Atlantis and the warriors. He only mentions those two, and mentions them in the same sentence, so it's fairly reasonable to assume he's saying it was one event.  If the "impact event" took place outside the Med., it would not have been as serious inside the Med. as the narrow entrance would have reduced the shock impact.  To say that a tsunami created in the Atlantic, would drown the warriors in Athens, is a bit of a stretch.  Not only is the Strait of Gibraltar narrow, but the tsunami would have lost a lot more energy by hitting Sicily and Malta and the other islands in the Med.  There would have been some wave action in the Eastern end of the Med., but no more than what any storm would cause.

What's with this attitude?
Quote
You were told this before in the forum, but of course, blew it off because you thought it was more fun to stay in the skeptic camp.

Do you think that just because someone in a forum TELLS me something, I take it as gospel and don't research it?  I have researched the impact theory long before it was ever mentioned in this forum.  I have discussed the idea with those who actually study these things.  If you pay attention to what I actually say, you would realize I'm not "trashing" the story, I'm showing that the facts don't fit.  I DO have the facts, but you and others don't want to hear them.  That's the whole point.  I HAVE done the research.  You haven't.

I'll ask again.  What civilization, 11,500 years ago, had the technology to sail the ocean, breaking the ice as they went; and had an organized army with war chariots pulled by horses, so large that they could attack Greece, Egypt and Asia all at the same time?

Let's go back to the beginning.  Who was Poseidon?  Supposedly a god that could live in the sea.  How then, did he mate with a human and beget these 10 children?  According to Paulo Riven,
Quote
Poseidon or properly Neptune is simply the God of the Ocean. You know as well as I that the term of Poseidon founding the island of Atlantis is simply identifying her birth in the Atlantic Ocean as an island.
Much like we could say a God named Vulcan creates islands in oceans or seas, meaning Volcanos.
So are we to assume then, that an ISLAND was born in the ocean and that the ISLAND bred with a human?

If you can answer these questions Nicole, and link us to any information that validates there WAS such an advanced civilization during that time periond, I'd appreciate it.

 
Quote
like most skeptics, you like to trash things before you have all the facts.

Nope.  Most skeptics do have the facts.  They don't go out of their way to "trash" anything.  They simply try to show that with the science and knowledge we have today, SOME proposed theories are just not true.  I'm not a skeptic per se.  I've said it before, and I'll say it again.  I love the story of Atlantis.  I started checking it out to see if it was true and found that, as far as we know to date, with all our modern technology, it was a fabrication.  Then I posted WHY it's a fabrication, and you think I've just "trashed" it for fun.

I like the Harry Potter books too, but thankfully, we live in the same era as the author and she can verify that it's a fabrication!!  We don't have to check and see when flying brooms were invented Cheesy
« Last Edit: July 23, 2010, 01:24:05 am 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."
Qoais
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 3423



« Reply #8 on: July 23, 2010, 01:40:15 am »

Lonestar - you said:

Atlantis and Genetics
Our Atlantis Quest takes us to the science of biology. The citizens of Atlantis, and the refugees who escaped, may have had a high prevalence of type "O" and Rh-negative blood. Other clues, such as mitochondrial DNA link the Basques with the Finns and some of the Native North American tribes. In fact, the mtDNA haplogroup X linking Basques with Native Americans show a genetic separation of at least 12,000 years. The latest date of separation is the date of Plato's destruction of Atlantis.

I've been chatting with a geneticist because I'd read an article by Dr. Greg Little and wanted to check a few facts.  Here are snippets from our conversation:

Quote
There is NO evidence that the Basque are related to the Native North Americans, particularly since those Native North American tribes would have been X2a or X2g and (very few) Basques would have been (at best) either X1 or a sub-clade thereof.  Your "dates of separation" are called "coalescence estimates", when two haplogroups or sub-clades can be estimated to have split from each other. There is, however, no evidence that the parent haplogroup X ever split to form sub-clades responsible for both Atlantis (since it doesn't exist) or the northern Native Americans which were X2a/X2g.
Quote
Haplogroup X, as such, DID NOT get to America. The sub-clade X2a however has been here since circa 12,800 BC. You'll notice this IS NOT 50,000 years ago. Lastly to add that X2a is predominantly located in northern North America.

 
Quote
There is no evidence currently that peoples of the South Pacific migrated to the Americas from c.50,000 BC. Also, Cayce's "findings" are not corroborated by genetics.

My question:
Do you believe in the Solutrean theory or do you think it came over with traveling Altaians from Siberia?

His response:

Quote
While an interesting theory, it's not corroborated by genetics. Altaians are, AFAIK, X2e which is NOT one of the sub-clades that migrated to the Americas. Those being X2a and the rare X2g.

My question:

Sorry - forgot to ask you - when DID X arrive in the Americas? Has that been determined?

His response:

As I mentioned above, circa 12,800 BC.
A good, current article on the subject can be found here:

Distinctive Paleo-Indian Migration Routes from Beringia Marked by Two Rare mtDNA Haplogroups
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6VRT-4VB62H7-2&_user=10&_coverDate=01/13/2009&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=31ed7efaa50182e43a8cdc8dda992d47

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."
LoneStar77
Full Member
***
Posts: 47


Carl Martin - Writer, Artist and Software Engineer


WWW
« Reply #9 on: July 23, 2010, 07:03:19 am »

If you don't place it in the Phillipines, and place it out in the Atlantic, how do you account for this presumably sunken landmass?  And just how big do you think it was?

Yikes! Atlantis in the Philippines? No way! How do I account for the sunken landmass? See the video (July 26,  2010). I'm only going by what Plato said -- and you seem  to have this in your signature line.

In the final analysis, Atlantis may have been purely Plato's imagination. I happen to think there was a lot more to it. After all, we have evidence that there was a massive event 9620 BC. Three items from separate scientific disciplines match Plato's date. An abrupt change in climate worldwide, a moderately large volcanic event, and a 2-meter drop in sea levels worldwide.
Report Spam   Logged

LoneStar77
(Carl Martin)
"Now we have proof that something BIG happened right when Plato's Atlantis subdided. We have the 'smoking gun.'"
www.MissionAtlantis.com
LoneStar77
Full Member
***
Posts: 47


Carl Martin - Writer, Artist and Software Engineer


WWW
« Reply #10 on: July 23, 2010, 08:36:50 am »


It was suggested that the first criteria would be to agree where Atlantis was located in the first place.

It seems most people are of the mind that it WAS out in the Atlantic and there are different opinions about which flood Plato is referring to.

My take on it is that if Atlantis existed at all, it will follow Plato's description. If Atlantis did not exist, then all other locations are only a possible "inspiration" for Atlantis, at best. I don't want to get into the "Flood" aspect. I personally think Noah was much earlier (say 27,970 BC), at least according to a new Genesis timeline I uncovered, but that's an unrelated subject.

... but Egypt stays dry because her water is supplied from underground.

I disagree. Egypt stays dry because it receives very little rain, but receives most of its water from the Nile (not from underground).

The floods of Greece are common enough occurrences it seems, for the times in history for them to have happened,  to be named after someone famous and remembered in the histories (Deucalion for example).

The Egyptian priest said that there were catastrophes of two types involving either fire or water. Could Deucalion be related to the Thera tsunami?

We would have to accept that there was a major tectonic movement of some sort that caused the bottom of the ocean to open up and swallow an island the size of a continent.  Science has shown that didn't happen.

Plato never said Atlantis was a continent. He was quite clear on this. Atlantis was a large island between two continents Eurasia (+Africa) in the East and another, unnamed continent in the West. This characterization of tectonic opening up and swallowing an island is not something science has ever addressed, to my knowledge. If scientists ever thought this of the Atlantis story, then their imaginations on the subject of geology must be pretty flat. Tectonic collapse, or subsidence, or crustal slumping does not involve any tectonic split and something falling into a chasm. Subsidence is a standard geological concept. The idea of a subsidence occurring on such a large scale is unheard of in historical times, but one needs look only a few million miles away, on Mars, to see signs of large scale crustal slumping, in the Tharsis Highlands.

Atlantis had to sink at least a mile

Actually, closer to three kilometers at the Azores underwater plateau, and deeper between the plateau and Gibraltar. It is very likely that a subsidence of this type would have been extremely uneven across the entire landmass.

Plato did not say that there were islands still existing after she sunk, he said shoals of mud.

I'm certain Plato did not have a complete inventory at his disposal pertaining to every square kilometer of the former Atlantis. He said that the Atlantic was impassible because of shoals of mud, but did he have a survey of the entire Atlantic? All it takes is a few miles of shallows to convince someone (someone easily frustrated) that the entire ocean might be the same. If Atlantis had possessed very tall mountains, it is likely no one lived near the peaks of those mountains. If Atlantis existed, and those peaks remained above water after the subsidence, then one could plausibly claim that all of Atlantis had been "swallowed" by the sea. A few measly, uninhabited mountain tops still sticking up could easily be overlooked or discounted.

And again, how did the Athenians of 11,500 years ago, GET to Atlantis to sink with her?

I have no idea where you get this. Plato was quite clear that prehistoric Greece suffered about the same time that Atlantis did. They suffered from earthquakes and flooding.

If the Athenian warriors who were winning this war, sunk with Atlantis, then they had to be IN Atlantis.

Oh, but according to Plato, they were not IN Atlantis. They were in their own homeland.

They SKATED to Atlantis on the ice!!

I like that you still have a sense of humor, but can we keep on topic, please? Wink

I think you broach the subject of a tsunami in a later post, but I'll cover the subject here. If we can take the tsunami of 2004 as a guide, a major Indian Ocean earthquake resulted in a powerful, but fairly small tsunami. Imagine the size of a tsunami from a tectonic collapse up to 300 times as far. The tsunami at landfall could have been as high as 1-3 kilometers. Would such a wave get past Gibraltar? More than likely, yes. Would it get past Sardinia and Sicily? I can see that happening. In fact, I don't doubt that such a wave could have been a couple hundred meters high by the time it reached Greece.

And if such a massive collapse were to occur right next to the tectonic plate boundary, would it be possible for other areas adjacent to that plate boundary to receive some of the force of earthquakes? Greece happens to be not far from the Africa-Eurasia tectonic plate boundary. When the magnitude of earth shaking passes a certain point, other forces start to come into play. Regions that were years away from having their next earthquake may have become jarred loose, receiving a far earlier jolt than they would otherwise have received. Look at the tectonic plate boundaries in the Eastern Med, and you'll see what I'm talking about.

And you mention something about no other nation receiving the flooding and earthquakes? Plato doesn't mention anyone else getting them, but who else was there at that date? We have the recently dated ruins at Gobekli Tepe, at about 9500 BC, but were these related to the ancient, proto-Greeks? There were the Egyptians, but what other nations were there on Earth? I suspect that most of the planet was still primitive hunter-gatherer. The Egyptians had been attacked by Atlantis, but the "history" of the Egyptian priest who talked to Solon began 1,000 years after the demise of Atlantis (if the war and the demise were close in years). What was Egypt doing during that 1,000 years? Very possibly they were recovering from the same shaking and flooding that Greece received. Greece took roughly 9,000 years to regain a good measure of civilization. Egypt took only 1,000 years.

Thanks, Qoais for keeping this challenging, but please don't go overboard with the sarcasm. I'd like to keep this fun and intellectual. You game?  Smiley

Report Spam   Logged

LoneStar77
(Carl Martin)
"Now we have proof that something BIG happened right when Plato's Atlantis subdided. We have the 'smoking gun.'"
www.MissionAtlantis.com
LoneStar77
Full Member
***
Posts: 47


Carl Martin - Writer, Artist and Software Engineer


WWW
« Reply #11 on: July 23, 2010, 09:06:49 am »

"6,000 years without civilization"

I guess you are talking from 9000 bc to 3000 bc? Where does Egypt place in all of this?  And what time frame are you setting Plato's Athens?

Actually, more like 9600 to 3500 BC. I've seen some dates for Egyptian history going that early, based on the Scorpion King and Narmer plates, etc. I know that's pushing the definition of "history" a bit, though.

I can only go by what historians and Plato tell us. It seems that some of Egyptian history has been lost to us, at least temporarily. According to the elderly Egyptian priest who talked to Solon, then-current Egyptian history started 1,000 years after the Atlantis-Greece-Egypt war and subsequent demise of Atlantis and prehistoric Greece. Perhaps, the prior Egyptian civilization was wiped out by the same mega-tsunami that might have innundated prehistoric Greece, washed away its topsoil and perhaps all of its manmade structures, as well. According to the king lists of Egypt, their histories may have go back to 30,000+ BC. So, Atlantis might merely have been a young upstart to far more ancient Kemet (Egypt).
Report Spam   Logged

LoneStar77
(Carl Martin)
"Now we have proof that something BIG happened right when Plato's Atlantis subdided. We have the 'smoking gun.'"
www.MissionAtlantis.com
LoneStar77
Full Member
***
Posts: 47


Carl Martin - Writer, Artist and Software Engineer


WWW
« Reply #12 on: July 23, 2010, 10:45:25 am »

Plato didn't mention any other damage, to any other culture, happening with this sinking of Atlantis and the warriors. He only mentions those two, and mentions them in the same sentence, so it's fairly reasonable to assume he's saying it was one event.

As I already mentioned, Plato didn't say a lot of things. And there may not have been much more than one other civilization then Egypt. But Egypt may have spent a thousand years recovering from the same disaster which destroyed Attica and removed its far richer topsoil. And don't be too quick to assume anything. A little imagination can picture more than your narrow interpretation. Be skeptical of your own skepticism, at times. It helps one to see more, though I think you already know that. Your ability to ask tough questions shows me your talent.

To say that a tsunami created in the Atlantic, would drown the warriors in Athens, is a bit of a stretch.

Why? Is it possible you're not thinking large enough? What's the largest tsunami that could have happened? A large meteor could have created waves hundreds of kilometers high. The overnight tectonic collapse of Atlantis could have created a mega-tsunami 1-3 kilometers high at landfall. If it was 3 kilometers, it might have been at least several hundred meters high at Attica (Athens). If the December, 2004, tsunami could create such damage at only a few meters high, just think what a 300 meter wave could have done at pre-historic Greece.

I'm not "trashing" the story, I'm showing that the facts don't fit.

Qoais, you mention some beautiful facts, but you also bring a bit of sarcasm to the discussion. Ice skating Greeks? Is that "trashy" talk? I guess it's a matter of opinion. Frankly, I like your hard-nosed, show-me-the-facts attitude. A few times, though, you jump to unfounded conclusions, as I've already pointed out. And I've never been guilty of that [joke]!  Embarrassed

I'll ask again.  What civilization, 11,500 years ago, had the technology to sail the ocean, breaking the ice as they went; and had an organized army with war chariots pulled by horses, so large that they could attack Greece, Egypt and Asia all at the same time?

I think Atlantis is the answer. Isn't that what we're talking about? Wink If the place existed, then it would have been the culprit. Now, as far as breaking ice, I think you're carrying the Ice Age thing too far. I don't think the ice pack went as far south as Gibraltar, not so close to the end of the Ice Age, at least. Even at the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM), I don't think Gibraltar was blocked by ice.

Who was Poseidon?  Supposedly a god that could live in the sea.  How then, did he mate with a human and beget these 10 children?

And what were the "gods" of old? Some of the stories sound completely weird, like Athena born from her father's head, and Zeus swallowing Metis whole. When Egyptian Horus was battling Seth, each as hippopotami, and Isis showed mercy for Seth, Horus got angry and cut off his mother's head and hid it from Isis in the mountains. Later, Ra retrieved her head and returned it to Isis.

If we look at these gods as individuals, these stories don't make sense. They sound like some kind of supernatural fantasy. But if we look at these gods as groups, things change. Say Poseidon was early, patriarchal Atlantis, and Metis was late, matriarchal Atlantis.

Metis was the wisest individual of all time (and this is really where Athena got her wisdom, not from her father, Zeus). And Atlantis was the most advanced civilization of all time.

Metis was swallowed whole by Zeus. Atlantis was swallowed whole by the sea.

Athena was born from her father's head. Some of the refugees no doubt left the head (capital) city.

Athena was born full grown. No doubt, the refugees carried with them a mature society, with full knowledge of government and other things of civilization.

Athena was born fully armed. The new refugee society was likely fully capable of protecting itself.

Even though Atlantis as a story was a fairly recent import from Egypt, it's entirely possible that the story of Atlantis, in Metis and Athena, was already there in a different form, for thousands of years.

There is evidence that the children of Atlantis were matriarchal.

Most skeptics do have the facts.

Really? I've seen a lot of skeptical websites, and found almost none of them very educated on the facts. A few are educated, to a degree, but possess too little imagination to use anything other than ad hominem attacks. That's why I find your brand of "no nonsense," digging for facts, so refreshing.

I love the story of Atlantis.

So do I, though I have to admit that it could still be a fabrication. The jury is still out on that one, contrary to what some supposed "experts" say.

I started checking it out to see if it was true and found that, as far as we know to date, with all our modern technology, it was a fabrication.

Now, I think you're going too far. You're drawing a conclusion based on some data. And that's okay, but it's not all the data. I'm looking forward to your input on my video. I say that it might have been a fabrication, but personally, I think it might not have been, too. This is based on my own investigations and scientific data. Like Einstein (a guy far smarter than I), I think imagination is more important than knowledge. Some scientists seem to have too little imagination. And too much skepticism tends to clog one's ability to see with imaginative eyes. I much prefer self restraint to skepticism. Skepticism has too much "doubt" in it, and doubt is a bias. A scientist should be unbiased.
Report Spam   Logged

LoneStar77
(Carl Martin)
"Now we have proof that something BIG happened right when Plato's Atlantis subdided. We have the 'smoking gun.'"
www.MissionAtlantis.com
Qoais
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 3423



« Reply #13 on: July 23, 2010, 10:48:44 am »

Sigh.  I thought I was being fun and intellectual.  My little joke about skating was made because no one is addressing the fact that Atlantis supposedly existed in a time frame when most of the earth was covered in ice.

Quote
My take on it is that if Atlantis existed at all, it will follow Plato's description. If Atlantis did not exist, then all other locations are only a possible "inspiration" for Atlantis, at best.

I have always agreed with this, and never said otherwise.  It just happens that I believe other locations ARE the inspiration for Atlantis as well as events he knew or heard of.

Quote
I disagree. Egypt stays dry because it receives very little rain, but receives most of its water from the Nile (not from underground).


Yes.  From underground aquafiers and rivers.  In other words, from water that is already on the ground, not from rains, making the point that Greece was inundated many times by rain storms and Egypt wasn't.  
Plato -  
Quote
Whereas in this land, neither then nor at any other time, does the water come down from above on the fields, having always a tendency to come up from below; for which reason the traditions preserved here are the most ancient.

Quote
Plato never said Atlantis was a continent. He was quite clear on this. Atlantis was a large island between two continents

I was making the point that Atlantis was a very LARGE island.  The size of Libya and Asia put together.  Some people say the Egyptian priest wouldn't have known how big Libya and Asia were, but by their own admission, they wrote down anything of import they heard tell of, whether in their own country or someplace else, and we know from modern research, that Egypt traded far and wide, so I think it's reasonable to assume they had a pretty good idea of the size of Libya and Asia.  

Quote
This characterization of tectonic opening up and swallowing an island is not something science has ever addressed, to my knowledge. If scientists ever thought this of the Atlantis story, then their imaginations on the subject of geology must be pretty flat. Tectonic collapse, or subsidence, or crustal slumping does not involve any tectonic split and something falling into a chasm. Subsidence is a standard geological concept.

This was my own characterization that I used when asking the geologist how an island with mountains a mile high, could sink and only leave "shoals of mud".  

Quote
Subsidence is a standard geological concept.

Yes, that can cause huge "sinkholes", so I was wondering how big a sinkhole would be needed to sink Atlantis.

Subsidence frequently occurs in karst terrains, where dissolution of limestone by fluid flow in the subsurface causes the creation of voids (i.e. caves). If the roof of these voids becomes too weak, it can collapse and the overlying rock and earth will fall into the space, causing subsidence at the surface. This type of subsidence can result in sinkholes which can be many hundreds of meters deep.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsidence

Quote
A few measly, uninhabited mountain tops still sticking up could easily be overlooked or discounted.

Possibly.

Quote
I have no idea where you get this. Plato was quite clear that prehistoric Greece suffered about the same time that Atlantis did. They suffered from earthquakes and flooding.

I've not heard that theory presented before.  That prehistoric Greece was suffering the same time that Atlantis was.  The priest told of storms that had ruined Greece before and eroded the top soil and destroyed civilization except for those living high in the mountains, like shepherds.  

Quote
Oh, but according to Plato, they were not IN Atlantis. They were in their own homeland.

Right.  So going on the assumption, which a lot of people do, that Plato IS talking about the same event - Atlantis sinking and the warlike men meeting the same fate - these two events are 3000 miles apart.  How would the Egyptians even know that the Athenian men had met such a fate at the same time?  Supposedly Egypt herself, according to your theory, was a thousand years recovering from the same incident, and yet she had a record of these details?

I think there was something major that happened in the past and word of mouth kept the story alive, but no one that survived such a catastrophe would know that the warlike men and Atlantis met their end at the same time.  There would be no one who knew there had been a war, 9000 years after the fact.

 
Quote
And you mention something about no other nation receiving the flooding and earthquakes? Plato doesn't mention anyone else getting them, but who else was there at that date?

Exactly.  Who else was there?  Who is Plato referring to here?

This vast power, gathered into one, endeavoured to subdue at a blow our country and yours and the whole of the region within the straits; and then, Solon, your country shone forth, in the excellence of her virtue and strength, among all mankind. She was pre-eminent in courage and military skill, and was the leader of the Hellenes. And when the rest fell off from her, being compelled to stand alone, after having undergone the very extremity of danger, she defeated and triumphed over the invaders, and preserved from slavery those who were not yet subjugated, and generously liberated all the rest of us who dwell within the pillars.

Quote
There were the Egyptians, but what other nations were there on Earth? I suspect that most of the planet was still primitive hunter-gatherer.

Exactly.  What other nations were there on earth, at that time?  According to those who study these things, most of the planet WAS still primitive hunter-gatherer types.  There were no armies, no ocean going ships that could fill the harbors of Atlantis out in the ocean.

I have always said the time lines need to be pushed back for when man developed certain technologies, and this has been happening more and more, as further finds are made, but as I've said before and no one seems inclined to address this problem,  that Atlantis supposedly existed during the ice age.  How does one sail through the ice?  One would have to put their ships on skids and slide them.  How does one explain that there were supposedly a people so advanced they already had ship building technology, statistical knowledge for the deployment of organized troops, with horse drawn chariots that weren't invented yet?

A bit about Egypt:

The Nile Civilizations



   This is where the great Nile civilizations were fostered and grew: Egypt, Nubia, Meroe. From the desperate human communities forced by the growing desert to live on the banks of the Nile grew one of the first great urban cultures of human history. However, we know almost nothing of these early pre-Egyptian communities. What did they think? What gods did they worship? How did these communities evolve into the great urban centers of the Nilotic kingdoms? Like the grass and trees swallowed by the desert, we'll never know, for they left only graves, tools, knives, pots, and garbage. No words and no speech. We do know that around 5000 BC, people began to live in villages up and down the Nile Valley, and one thousand years later these people were burying their dead with great care and ornamentation (belief in an afterlife?). Around 3800 BC, Nile culture began to flourish. Egyptians discovered the world and began to interact and trade with other cultures as far away as Mesopotamia. Egyptians became master craftspeople; they buried their dead in coffins in lavishly equipped graves; they began to develop sophisticated technologies.

   This was the template on which Egyptian civilization would emerge, for out of this crucible would rise The Two Lands, the first states in human history.
http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/EGYPT/PREHIST.HTM





« Last Edit: July 23, 2010, 10:53:04 am 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."
Qoais
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 3423



« Reply #14 on: July 23, 2010, 01:49:35 pm »

I'm having difficulty in keeping AO up and running and if I go out and try to come back in, it won't load, so hopefully it'll stay up and running while I try to compose some answers!!

I would like to say first of all, that I am not normally sarcastic although I realize my "straight-on" approach may seem like sarcasm.  No one should take what I say personally, since I'm just stating things.  Unless of course, someone insults me, or talks down to me, or comes at me with "attitude".  THEN I will retaliate.  No, the comment about skating on the frozen ocean was not "shabby" talk.  It was merely a joke, and was not a personal jab at anyone in particular regarding their attitude or their actions.  I find the comment by Nicole "shabby" talk because it is directed at me personally and she has no idea whether or not I have read Plato once or a hundred times, nor does she know if I will read it again.  THAT kind of attitude and comment is not necessary to an intelligent debate.  

My conclusion is not based on SOME data, it is based on a lot of data.  I cannot say for a fact, that a major impact event in the Atlantic would send 300 foot waves to Greece but I have discussed this before and I was told that the size of the material impacting the earth that would be needed to sink an island the alleged size of Atlantis, would not only sink the island, but we would not be here to talk about it.  The after effects would basically, sterilize the planet.  Most of the major impact events are recorded as happening millions of years ago. Those events almost did sterilize the earth, and life was considerably changed.   The most recent event, small in comparison to the event that allegedly wiped out the dinosaurs 65 million years ago,  was in the Carolina Bays area, affecting the human populations in the Americas.

 
Quote
We propose that one or more large, low-density ET objects exploded over northern North America, partially destabilizing the Laurentide Ice Sheet and triggering YD cooling. The shock wave, thermal pulse, and event-related environmental effects (e.g., extensive biomass burning and food limitations) contributed to end-Pleistocene megafaunal extinctions and adaptive shifts among PaleoAmericans in North America.
http://www.pnas.org/content/104/41/16016.full

Quote
And don't be too quick to assume anything. A little imagination can picture more than your narrow interpretation. Be skeptical of your own skepticism, at times. It helps one to see more, though I think you already know that. Your ability to ask tough questions shows me your talent.

I USED to be quick to assume things.  Until I got roasted by those who had more knowledge than me; by skeptics that DO know the facts.   This taught me not to assume anything - so I don't - but to research everything.  Imagination cannot verify facts and it's facts that are required for proof of a theory.  I don't feel my interpretation is narrow at all.  I spent three years chasing down the details, I looked at the story from every angle I could think of.  No, my interpretation is definitely not narrow.  I was given trouble by Boreas for even considering that Plato might have gleaned his information from psychic means.  I was most definitely broad minded and tried to conceive of anything "imaginable" to explain the discrepancies in Plato's story, but was defeated by facts.  

Regarding the myths of olde, we can't even begin to pretend we understand what they were talking about.  It may have been a change of religious beliefs, a new form of government, etc.  Perhaps refugees did leave a main city and settle elsewhere, but that is an assumption as to what the myths actually mean.  I've been in conversations about the beginnings of religions where it was hypothesized that religions actually started when people consumed mind altering substances accidentally and came out with visions of faeries and sugar plums and an intimate relationship with the universe.  Personally, I found that quite logical.  I've always wondered who these "gods" were and where people got the idea even that there WERE such things as gods and that they should be "worshiped".



Quote
There is evidence that the children of Atlantis were matriarchal

Is this not putting the cart before the horse?  There is no evidence of Atlantis yet.

Lonestar - there are a lot of areas that required research to determine if Plato's story was feasible.  Not only are you insulting my intelligence by saying I'm basing by conclusion on SOME evidence, you are insulting your own intelligence by ignoring what science has to say in a number of different fields, as well as insulting the scientists who have worked hard to give us all the scientific data we now have access to.  

Chatting with an acquaintance who has twenty years of studying Egyptian history, here is what he has to say:

Quote
There is no evidence that any civilization stretches back 30,000 years, which is deep in Neolithic history at a time when people all over the world were hunter-gatherers  Historians know without question that there were no kings or a dynastic civilization in the Nile Valley 8,000 years ago.  (my note - using the standard interpretation of the term "civilization")

This was about when prehistoric Egyptians were domesticating cattle; they had yet to delve fully into agriculture, many of the domesticates of which probably came down from the Levant and perhaps southern Mesopotamia shortly thereafter (relatively speaking). Plato speaks of Atlantis and Athens in terms of more than 9,000 years back in time. The truth is, there is simply no evidence anywhere outside of Plato's writings that Atlantis even existed, and the people we call Greeks did not even reside in the region that far back; they were part of the waves of Indo-European migrations coming from the north sometime around the late third or early second millennium BCE

Regarding the King Lists:

Quote
As for king lists, the problem is there are quite a few that have survived and come down to us. Based on what two centuries of archaeology has revealed to us, some of these king lists are better than others. Not a single one is complete. Most break off or are in other ways only fragmentary. It is a combination of archaeology and textual sources by which we must abide in framing a proper understanding--not the writings of a Hellene who did not possess a working understanding of Egyptian history. That said, probably the two best textual sources for the purposes of your debate are the Palermo Stone and the Turin King List:Palermo StoneTurin King ListAn additional problem is the ancient Egyptian penchant for mixing mythology with factual history, something most Near Eastern cultures typically did. This is very evident on the Sumerian King List, for example. And so it is with the Turin King List in particular, which begins with a fragmentary recording of the time of the gods and the reigns of mytho-historical kings, many of whom probably are based largely on fable. But in their own recording of mortal history the Egyptians list Meni (Menes) as the first living, mortal king. We're still not clear on who Meni was or if the name was just another appellation for Narmer or Aha, but archaeology has demonstrated quite solidly that the Egyptian state was born around 3100 BCE.There are in fact stretches of time in pharaonic Egypt that are murky to us to some degree, particularly in the three intermediate periods when rival, concurrent dynasties existed. There is still more we need to learn about Early Dynastic Egypt and some of the regional "kings" leading up to state formation. But a time span of a thousand years that is lost to us? No, of course not. That's not factually sound.

I am looking forward to seeing your video Lonestar.
  





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."
Pages: [1] 2 3 4   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

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