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]!
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?
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.
