Atlantis Online
June 18, 2019, 11:55:00 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Ruins of 7,000-year-old city found in Egypt oasis
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080129/wl_mideast_afp/egyptarchaeology
 
  Home Help Arcade Gallery Links Staff List Calendar Login Register  

Atlantis Tiahuanaco

Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Atlantis Tiahuanaco  (Read 1740 times)
senator Bam
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 99



WWW
« on: January 06, 2015, 01:22:57 pm »

(I saw that there is already 2 South America Atlantis topics/threads by Morrision, but they are dozens of pages so started a new thread/topic. Sorry i didn't search first to see if is already Tiahuanaco/Tiwanaku topic/thread here.)

Hello, my theory/thesis is that Atlantis city is Tiahuanaco/Tiwanaku, and the continent is South America (or Americas), and that the "sinking" was continental shift (or else crust displacement), and was ca 1400s bc (900 years before, ca 12th dynasty, ca Moses/Joshua). Atlantipedia have just posted an entry on us ( http://atlantipedia.ie/samples/bambrough-sean-n/ ) which contains some challenges/criticisms which we wish to answer here (though they are actually already answered in the 37 pages paper). (They said that they do not want to debate it.) [I'm not at all bitter, their post on me/my thesis was mild and not unfair. I just want to answer the points.] I won't answer them all in their order though because some are much easier to answer than others.
(But please note i can't totally adequitely answer here and now, people need to refer to the answers given in my paper.)

1. They say Plato never called Atlantis a continent.
We show in our paper that the "large island" of Atlantis must be a large continental land-mass not just a small island. The Account says larger than Asia and Libya. (Some say "between" not "lrager than" but the majority of last 2500 years say former. We gave quotes from Herodotus and Theopompus to illustrate/support this.) Many species of animals. 10 kings regions. Large plain. Self-sufficient. Mountains. Etc etc. Other accounts also say/imply large island/continent. Plus spurious Kirchir's map?

(2.) Like some others have also said, they say that Atlantis "sinking" can't match Andes uplifted, and (3) they also say how can this cause muddy shoal sea.
Firstly Atlantis is not just the Andes or Tiahuanaco but the whole continent.
The continent "sank" not part of it.
Atlantis [(South) America] must have appeared to have "sunk"/"submerged" or been "swallowed-up by the sea/ocean" [and "vanished/disappered without trace (except mud)"] in "terrible quake/s and flood/s".
There are only 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 possibilities for this. Either:
- continental shift, or
- earth crust displacement, or
- near pass-by of celestial body, or
- rising sealevels increasing trans-Atlantis distance.
The last is ruled out for various reasons (no quakes, no raise Andes, etc etc).
Shift would have caused Atlantis/America to appear to have sunk/been swallowed/disappeared, and caused quake/s, and "flood/s", sea slosh/tidal waves/"tsunamis", and would have pushed up the Andes, and would have caused muddy sea.
Displacement would maybe cause quakes?, sea slosh, and change of directions/bearings, and possibly push up Andes?
Near pass-by might cause pulling up of Andes (according to some theorists), and cause tidal bulge/sea slosh, and quakes?
In our paper we gave plenty of evidences that the Andes & Tiahuanaco have been pushed up within lifetime of "modern" ancient humans and civilisation. Other scholars also give many/more such evidences.
If Atlantologists disconsider locations because of reason like that then no wonder they not found the site.
Peruvian "Indian" traditions also seem to support such a catastrophe in circa 1400s bc.
There is also evidence of flooding at Tiahuanaco, and flood in Tiahuanaco "myths"/traditions.
(* See David Fasold, HS Bellamy, Jim Allen, Ivar Lissner, I Velikovsky, Darwin, C Berlitz, E Sykes, etc.)



(4.) Kirchir's map:
Kirchir's map shows Atlantis roughly "between" only-one of the Americas (prob North) and Spain/Africa. To our view, if the map is not just spurious, his map seems to show one of the Americas (probably South) closer to the Old World than the other one of the Americas (probably North). His Atlantis is very similar to South America in its few rivers/etc details, and even in the placement of the city (compared with our Tiahuanaco in South America).

5. opposite continent & Herodotus:
It has been a common mistake of Atlantologists to assumer that the opposite continent is America(s). There is nothing in the Atlantic between America and Old World, so Opposite Continent can't be both Americas only maybe one.
I thought that Herodotus (or another classical writer) actually said that they were wrong to say the world was only those 3 continents? Herodotus said it was possible there are Hypernotians. Others like Eratosthenes had balancing opposite/southern continent.
(3 Pyramids of Giza may be 3 land masses (& 3 world ages)?)
Atlantis was outside/beyond/opposite/facing the Pillars of Hercules (Gibraltar/Gades/Huelva ones). In the real ocean.
Atlantis and opposite continent of the account are seemingly separate land-masses to Asia/Europe/"Libya". It was a large island / continent and "sunk"/"swallowed-up".
Even if the late Greeks only knew 3 continents, what about the earlier Egyptians etc? (+ Atlantis had "sunk" so was unknown.)

6. the biggest challenge is "the idea of an invasion of the eastern Mediterranean by an army from the west side of South America is untenable".
We gave some possible answers in our paper, and we will give some here:
- if our shift theory is right then S America was once closer to Old World ((Sth) Atlantic upto half the current distance), plus the north/west coast would have been closer/shorter distance. Or there are other theories/scenarios that might have seas less formidible then than now.
- evidences that the Amazon was used as cross-continent.
- "the seas were highways not barriers". "Sea power came before land power".
- modern Atlantic crossing records.
- the invasion was over time and space from the 10 regions of Atlantis to Italy & Libya.
- the criticism is not dis/proof just a challenge/disbelief/negative.
- Noah's Ark similar to reed-boats did pretty well. Swan & dragon ships. Celts had a fleet of high-prowed/high sea-faring ships in Roman times. Vikings. Polynesians. Heyerdahl.
 - See Bacon's quote about sefaring being greater in ancient times than contemporary times. Popul Vuh says the 1st race explored the world & knew the 4 corners of the earth. Ancient maps of the sea-kings (Piri Reis, Hapgood).
- and just to be a bit "fringe" some suggest evidence that they may even have had ancient air/space ships???

7. the only one i can't give much of a good answer to at present yet is the small Athens versus Atlantis/S America. But there are possible answers to that.


8. "repetitious".
I am often accused of this. It is true i am a little bit repetitious. But it is not entirely true. It is also not fair because not easy to write so many complicated interconnections. We are forced to repeat things because archsceptics/academics are so demanding in having to excessively prove every jot and tiddle. Besides, it is clear they didn't read my whole paper anyway.

9. i did not "develop the Tiahuanaco theory since 1999". The finding of the actual city site was the last discovery only made in the last 2 or so years. I developed the theory that Atlantis was one or both of the Americas and "sinking" was shift in/during & from/since 1999, but wasn't able to narrow-down or locate the plain and city (from east N America &/or west S America) until recent years.

I would like to add that there were only criticisms but none of our evidences given. So we will just also give this not very good quick list of some matches between Atlantis and our site, and this Inca picture from the Coricancha which proves Tiahuanaco is the city.

12 major Atlantis detail ~ Peru match highlights:
* concentric circles city ~ yes (2x in Coricancha picture, in Posnansky diagrams of Tiahauanco, in Silustani inscription, in other inscriptions given by Allan (from Pumapunku?), in lots of other Peru inscriptions/drawings, Chalco glyph, plus maybe shown in head of in Crespi figure)
* great plain with ditch & channels ~ yes (atliplano & geoglyphs, shown in Coricancha picture, Peruvian agriculture system)
* Atlas motif, Atlas mountains ~ yes (the prominent spade symbol above Peruvian masks/heads/faces, the high Andes which parallel Atlas mountains, mountains shown in Coricancha picture?)
* in Western/Atlantic/real ocean (not in Mediterranean) ~ yes (Atlantic/Pacific/Antarctic)
* date 900(0) yrs ~ yes (we showed the date is 900 not 9000, Tiahuanaco date is disputed and ranges from 10000s bc (Posnansky/etc) to 1400s (Inca) to ad (orthodox), Inca king lists date ca 1400bc match)
* "sunk/submerged" / swallowed-up / vanished/disappeared in quake(s) & flood(s) ~ yes there is evidence/matches if not obvious/"geologically possible" to antis/archsceptics (Inca king list says catastrophe about time of Joshua, flood evidence & "myth" at Tiahuanaco, continental shift & evidence Andes/Tiahuanaco pushed up suddenly within human/civilisation lifetime)
* small hill dwelling of (Poseidon and) Clito in centre of city ~ yes (Akapana in diagrams of Tiahuanaco, also looks like is shown in Coricancha picture).
* 2 crops a year ~ yes (Peruvian summer & winter agriculture systems, also shown in the Coricancha picture).
* a large island/continent (10 regions etc) ~ yes (South America or Americas)
* near sea ~ yes (exact same distance from Tiahuanaco to Titicaca (which has evidences of connection with salt sea/ocean), shown in Coricancha picture, &/or other possible matches).
* Atlantis/Tiahuanaco city & Titicaca is (inverse) analogy of Eridu/etc city & Persian Gulf.
* Atlantis can only be in Americas (incl/excl Antarctica) or Armorica plate, and (Titicaca &) Tiahuanaco is only place in the whole Americas & in Peru & around Titicaca that it can be and that fits/matches.

Things in the Atlantis account that are depicted in this Inca picture from the Coricancha:
2 crops a year ("sun/star & moon/clouds = summer & winter"); great plain and surrounding ditch and criss-cross-cutting channels (altiplano); Poseidon & Clito (or parents of Clito, or  twins?); concentric rings city (2x, 1 on left and 1 on right in lake/sea); cliffs?; mountains?; woods/forest (or crop)?; the sea (lake Titicaca)?; canal/river; the small hill / dwelling of (Poseidon &) Clito (= Akapana)?; [7 cities/islands?]; beyond the north wind (the 4 directions  cross?).


« Last Edit: January 06, 2015, 01:28:47 pm by senator Bam » Report Spam   Logged

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



« Reply #1 on: January 06, 2015, 11:11:47 pm »

Wow, well, there is a lot to chew on, thanks for sharing. I like Tiahuanaco, too, but I am not sure it was Atlantis. Jim Allen used to come here and added quite a bit to Morrison's threads and, of course, makes a pretty good case for Bolivia as Atlantis.

Well, Tiahuanaco is way on the west in South America, and, even though they had reed boats, you have to wonder why they would even be interested in the Mediterranean when they had all that expansive territory to explore. Also, what route did they take? They sure didn't sail around the southern tip of South America (all that ice and snow) and, from what I heard, the tributaries that lead from the northern tip of Bolivia to the Amazon and the Atlantic are mighty treacherous..! Hard enough for one boat, let alone a fleet like Atlantis was supposed to have.

So, I'm thinking that, though South America was a part of Atlantis, the capital was actually elsewhere, someplace in the Caribbean, and it was the part that "sunk."

The Altiplano makes a great flat plain, though, and the orichalcum process that Jim Allen shows on his website vividly resembles what Plato describes. I'm also not so sure that it was so recent as you suggest, new discoveries are pushing back the date that the Americas were inhabited all the time.
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.
senator Bam
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 99



WWW
« Reply #2 on: January 07, 2015, 11:49:05 am »


Thanks. What about all the strong evidences? The Coricancha picture i posted says viewed zero times!? Not very objective/openminded!

What about the Inca picture from the Coricancha with half a dozen to a dozen matches of details from the Atlantis account?

What about the concentric circles in Posnansky's and others diagrams of Tiahuanaco?
And shown in Coricancha picture 2 times? and in lots of other Peruvian pictures?

What about the Atlas motif above Inca/Peruvian masks/head/faces?
What about that Andes parallel/mirror/analogous to Atlas?

What about that the altiplano matches the great plain, and is also certainly seen/confirmed in that Coricancha picture with the surrounding ditch and criss-crossing channels?

What about the 2 crops a year matching Peruvian agriculture picture (as well as seen in the Coricancha picture?

What about the distance from Tiwanaku to Titicaca is the same distance as in the Account?

What about the small hill dwelling of (Poseidon &) Clito seemingly matching the Akapana?

What about that the Atlantis/Tiahuanaco sizes and temple/palace seem to match?

And many other evidences including the oreichalc, the 'red, white and black', *bull sacrifice*, etc given in my paper and/or in Allen's publishings?

How come one or a few mere challenging disbelief (not disproof) criticisms like about distance from west coast to Mediterranean outrules all the strong evidences? Besides which we have already given some possible answers to that disbelief criticism in first post here and in our blog paper.
Re the ice. Antarctica was partly ice free in Piri Reis. FlemAth said the orthodox date for ice had been drastically reduced.
They had a few possible routes: up around west and north coast, across Amazon, around southern tip, etc. (The upper Amazon would have been different before Andes pushed further up.) The statue in Azores? says/points "this way"? (Also, they may not even have invaded from the capital city?)

There are many possible reasons why would be interest between Mediterranean and Atlantis/America. There are tons of evidences of contacts between the 2 ancient worlds.

It can't (just) be "part of Atlantis". It either was Atlantis the continent/city or it wasn't. Sure they would have had colonies, survivors etc. But the matches between Peru and Atlantis are too strong to just be "from Atlantis but not Atlantis".
Atlantis the continent can only be one or both Americas (including/excluding lesser Antartica) or Armorica plate. And there is only one city & plain etc there that matches.
I searched as many places around Americas (and elsewhere) as i could including the Caribbean and there is no match for the plain and city etc anywhere except Peru/Titicaca/Altiplano/Tiahuanaco.

Plato's account seems to impy the whole large island/continent/landmass was swallowed up not just small island/city/plain "sunk".

Jim Allen was right except not Pampa Aullagus. He deserves most of the credit. Though he maybe got the idea from David Fasold.

Orthodox "dates" are all/alot wrong. I would rather trust traditional historical sources than modern theories based on unreliable dating methods which rely on uniformitarianism.

Look i didn't like it or want it to be Tiahuanaco myself (and before seeing all the evidences i didn't see much match there). I prefered off Florida coast, or in the Uros/Urus area, etc. But the concentric circles and akapana and other things, and the not being able to find match anywhere else (and from narrowing it down) forced me to accept it.

Look at the Coricancha picture i posted.
Also look up Posnansky's (& Alford's & Sitchin's (& Daniken's)) diagrams of Tiahuanaco and see the concentric circles and prominent Akapana.
Read Sitchins 'Lost Realms' chapters on Tiahuanaco.
Look at Jim Allen's Atlantis in Bolivia site.
Read my blog Atlantis paper.
Look at Peruvian masks and see the spade symbol above their heads that may be the Atlas motif.
Look at pictures/animations of the continental "shift".
Look at Kirchir's map (and compare with S America).
Read the Atlantis account.
See lots of sources with evidences of greater ancient seafaring/sea power (Bacon, Hapgood, Hancock, Plato's account, Heyerdahl, etc).
« Last Edit: January 07, 2015, 12:26:56 pm by senator Bam » Report Spam   Logged
Robert0326
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1156



« Reply #3 on: January 07, 2015, 01:30:50 pm »

There's a few things I find wrong with Tiawanacu being Atlantis.  First, South America is not an "island continent" as Plato describes. Second, the city of Tiawanacu did not sink, but actually rose above sea level. And if you have read the mythology of the region, you would find that Tiawanacu was built by Viracocha after he and his followers arrived after a great cataclysm. Perhaps after the end of the last ice age. And I believe they came from the south, if I'm not mistaken.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2015, 01:48:47 pm by Robert0326 » Report Spam   Logged

Blasphemy is a victimless crime.
"The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the Supreme Being as His father, in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter."     Letter to John Adams, April 11, 1823 -Thomas Jefferson
senator Bam
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 99



WWW
« Reply #4 on: January 07, 2015, 05:49:26 pm »

Thanks Robert. I may as well just reply/answer.

I have already answered the "sinking Atlantis versus raised Andes" above and in the paper.
The whole continent appeared to have "sunk" or rather been swallowed up, not the city or part of the large island. (Tiahuanaco has flood evidences and traditions too anyway.)

"Atlantis" the large island was (South) America not just Tiahuanaco/Tiwanaku. Tiahuanaco/Tiwanaku was only the royal city "Atlantis"

I have already answered giving evience that Plato's Atlantis was a large island/continent. (South) America / Americas is a large island/continent/landmass/"world". Some versions speak of 3 large islands in the western ocean which might be N & S America and Antarctica. (Also, if there was a continental shift then South America may have been more of an island before shift. Kirhir's map shows Sth America/Atlantis as an island.) The Old World is called the world island.

Viracocha is not the only person in the Tiwanaku origins mythology and kinglists, and even so he could be the Poseidon.
The mythology says the city was built before a cataclysm not just after one. It was built after the Great Flood (and Babel?). The Atlantis cataclysm was later.

The route of Viracocha route starts from Tiahauanco. Where/what direction they came from to S America before that is another issue, doesn't prove/disprove anything re the Atlantis account, as it stands at present.

The orthodox dates for ice age/s is wrong. Job in bible may mention ice. Thor drinks sea. Shifts may cause ice ages. Sphinx rain marks. Antartica date drastically revised. Siberia mammoths. Hopis mention the ice age. Lots other evidences.

How people can judge without even looking at the picture i posted (still zeros views).

Well i have given my evidence here and in the paper and on forums. If people don't accept it or if people prefer their own theories fine by me. I have other things i need/want to do now (like tracing the 70 nations of Genesis).

ps to Desiree: one could say it is hard to believe many things like say how they built the pyramids or stonehenge, does that mean they don't exist? (Though yes they do have reckoned routes for the stonehenge stones.)
Report Spam   Logged
Desiree
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 3882



« Reply #5 on: January 08, 2015, 01:49:25 am »

I am not saying your theory is without merit, Sean, I always thought South America had some connection to Atlantis. There are lots of problems with it, though:

1. Reed Boats, not a good ship for invasion, I don't even know if they can cross the Atlantic.

2. Tiahuanaco is very far away from the Med. It would be like the city of Portland, OR trying to invade Europe, and these were in ancient times!

3. It didn't sink, as has already been mentioned, it has been rising:

http://atlantipedia.ie/samples/bambrough-sean-n/

So, as I said earlier, some of the features were in South America, the capital was probably elsewhere.
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.
senator Bam
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 99



WWW
« Reply #6 on: January 09, 2015, 04:58:39 pm »

Thank-you Desiree,

"Sinking":
I have tried to explain a number of times here and elsewhere about the "sinking" versus rising.
1 the Atlantis account doesn't say sank/sunk or submerged but swallowed up.
2a the whole large island "sunk" not just a part of it.
2b the whole continent of Atlantis must have genuinely appeared to have sunk/submerged or been swallowed-up (and/or vanished).
2c (S) America must have appeared to have sunk/submerged or swallowed up (&/or vanished)
2d all of S America "sank"/swallowed not just part (though it is even possible that only part appeared to have suffered?)
3. (The land or/and water must have moved either up/down or sideways, either part or all.) The possible scenarios for the "sinking" are either
- continental shift
- pole shift (crust displacment or axis tilt)
(- near pass by of celestial body?)
(- rising sealevels. But this last one is ruled out.)
My paper gave plenty of possible evidence/s for shift. Others have also given plenty of evidences for crust displacment/pole shift.
4. it hasn't "has been rising". We and others have given evidences of sudden uplifting (either pushed from below/beside, or pulled from above).
5. The shift and one or two other of the scenarios would have caused Andes to be pushed up further, and 6. they would have caused either the island to appear to have "sunk/sank" or caused it to appear to be swallowed up. (It didn't literally sink only genuinely/relatively appeared to have "sunk" (or been swallowed up). The sinking/swallowing was either the land or/& sea moving sideways not up/down.)

Boats:
For reed boats. The reed boats seem similar to Noah's ark so they are not so flimsy. There have also been other types of boats in ancient history (including Peruivian), like the Vikings ones, the Celts fleet of high sea ships mentioned in Roman times in classical source.
Maybe the boats on Medinet Habu and/or other inscriptions (Bohuslan?) around those "prehistorical" & ancient times? They had boats/ships then, i just didn't think of that that i should have recorded and published all the ones i have seen over the years. Some of them look like the Ark.


I can't totally adequitely answer one or a few things like the distance other than what i have tried to here and in my paper. But i only see it as one or few challenge/disbelief that doesn't out weigh all the evidence i have seen and tried to show/say in paper and (some) here. I am in not any much doubt myself (though always try to stay objective) but i can sort of see/understand why other are doubtful. I can accept there are some things that need better proof/answer to be accepted as found/proven, but with all the strong evidences it should be accepted as an equal candidate at least.


Distance/invasion: Apart from what i already replied and already wrote in paper: They had colonies or contacts in Atlantic Europe & Atlantic Africa, and upto Tyrrhenia and Libya.
If there was a shift then Atlantic was once upto half the current distance then. Or in other scenarios there are possible explanations (different size/contours/depth, currents/temperature/emf, etc then?). And the evidence that ancients were better seafarers then has been thought.
Ancients are not inferior to modern. Linear progressive evolution is wrong. Ancients were even superior in some things.


S America/Tiwanaku doesn't just have some features they have lots and strong features. Can't just be a part or survivors etc.
What evidence would convince you/people?
They are finding things we didn't know about all the time. That recent "Atlantis metal" find in Mediterranean someone just emailed me about.
Anyway, thanks, i don't mind if you don't see enough evidence on some points yet.


Our find synthesises alot of sources: Jim Allen, Posnansky, Sithcin, ours, Fasold, Morrison, Mattievich, the inca coricancha picture, etc.
« Last Edit: January 09, 2015, 06:48:21 pm by senator Bam » Report Spam   Logged
Desiree
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 3882



« Reply #7 on: January 09, 2015, 08:33:24 pm »

Hi Sean,

About the Pole shift/Displacement, anyone who has researched Atlantis ends up doing a lot of reading about that, and everything I have heard on the subject, it doesn't happen overnight. It happens over hundreds and even thousands of years. It would be an immense cataclysm! I don't see the geology pointing to that in 9600 BC, let alone in the more recent time frame you set it in. How do you explain that?

Reed boats, well, Jim Allen devotes a whole webpage to them:

http://www.atlantisbolivia.org/areedboathistory.htm

But this is the only one I can see that Bolivia ever had:








Once again, probably good for negotiating treacherous rivers, but I don't they could deal with the Atlantic, let alone mount an invasion. Do you have any evidence that they ever had anything else?  They had to have something more advanced than the Egyptians, right? Especially, if they were said to have conquered the Egyptians.

There is evidence of contacts between the Egyptians and the Americas having contact with one another, in the form of coca leaves found in the Egyptian mummies, and the date that the Americas was first settled is being pushed back all the time, well before Plato sets Atlantis. There are also many evidences of large populations in South America, for thousands of years, something that most of the other theories don't even take into account.

Where did you get this, by the way?

http://atlantisonline.smfforfree2.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=33831.0;attach=278;image

The orichalcum find is exciting, isn't it..? I'm just wondering if it bears much resemblance to Allen's website page on orichalcum where he says how it was made.

http://www.atlantisbolivia.org/orichalcum.htm

Plato does not actually ever say that Atlantis was a continent, he says:

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 which are by you called the Pillars of Heracles; the island was larger than Libya and Asia put together, and was the way to other islands, and from these you might pass to the whole of the opposite continent which surrounded the true ocean; for this sea which is within the Straits of Heracles is only a harbour, having a narrow entrance, but that other is a real sea, and the surrounding land may be most truly called a boundless continent. Now in this island of Atlantis there was a great and wonderful empire which had rule over the whole island and several others, and over parts of the continent, and, furthermore, the men of Atlantis had subjected the parts of Libya within the columns of Heracles as far as Egypt, and of Europe as far as Tyrrhenia. 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. 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. 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 island.

So even though he says it was large (bigger than Libya and Asia combined), no one in the story had ever been there and are each relaying the story third hand. They also refer to it many times as an "island."  We also know that continents can't sink, only fragments from them, while geology tells us that many times islands have sunk beneath the sea. So common sense does tell us it is an island. For what it is worth, I put the capital in the Caribbean area, which admittedly, has even less to offer it so far than South America. I have corresponded with Greg Little quite a bit over the last few years and believe the two areas are related.

You asked what it would it take to convince everyone, well, everyone is looking for the capital city, which should resemble Plato's description. I don't think it will be found above sea level, as Plato said it "sunk."
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.
senator Bam
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 99



WWW
« Reply #8 on: January 10, 2015, 05:31:01 pm »

Thanks Desiree.

(sorry i don't have any pictures at hand to post, but see some of my old Atlantis search pictures at http://picasaweb.google.com/seanbam2/Antipodean (though the link may have changed since i joint google plus?))

The picture in first post here: the photo on left is Inca picture from the Coricancha temple at [Cuzco?]; the drawing of it on right is from Sitchin's 'Lost Realms'. For matches with Atlantis account in the photo/picture see the list i gave in first post just above the attachment.

My main theory until recently was continental shift not pole shift, but i have had to admit possibility that it wasn't continental shift but pole shift.
I think Pole Shift could have happened suddenly not over ages, though it could perhaps happen slowly with some sudden cumulative effects?
There is plenty of evidences for catastrophism/shifts in ancient history & "myths", i listed quite a few in my blog paper. Velikovsky has a whole book full. Many ancient high cultures spoke of 4 or so world ages each ending in catastrophe. The Atlantis account does too. The bible has a few possible catastrophes (Babel, rain of fire, exodus, sun standing still). Atlantis "sinking" seems to have been about the time of the exodus or Joshua's sun standing still which latter is also in Peruvian about same date.
Ancient "myths" do speak of moving poles/axis/world tree/world pillar and ice shifts/ages. Alignments of monuments like Stonehenge and ziggurats etc may reflect changes. Herodotus and some papyri mention sun changing where set/rose 2 x 2 times.

On the reed boats see David Fasold's 'Discovery of Noah's Ark' and see that at least one/some of your pictures are similar (the shape/type/design not exact same in all the way built/made). I have already answered that there were also other boats known in "prehistory" and ancient history inscriptions etc (Bohuslan? Medinet Habu?). Maybe an example is the boat/s on predynastic Egyptian drawings. Hatshepsut Punt voyage? Great pyramid boat (pit)? I think Spanuth gives some pictures of stone age/bronze age boats.
Vikings. Polynesians. Phoenicians. Noah's Ark. "First seafarers". "Maps of the ancient sea kings". Heyerdahl.
There are quite a few boats in stone age Atlantic Europe inscriptions if i remember correctly. (I lost 15 years notes/resources in a crisis 5 or so years ago and have never been able to recover much dues to situation/condition. Might have been Berlitz or Zehren that mentions some?)
Yes i have seen some other Peruvian boats, have to see if i can find or remember where pictures/details are. I listed some brief boats info in my blog paper: "Peruvians had "sea-worthy rafts".  Dragon-boat racing Puno? raft of Taycanamo myth? (10 ships Paraiba inscription?)".
Chimu (Chan chan) pottery figure of "reed boat" titled "life on the ocean wave"?
"the seas were highways not barriers". "Sea power came before land power".

I already answered in first post/s and in blog paper about Atlantis being a continent or large island. To repeat/repost some: it was larger than Asia & Libya; had large plain; many species of animals; was self-suffiecient; large population/army; had (high) mountains; 10 kings regions; etc.
Island in ancient and modern can mean island, continent, world island/old world, peninsula, etc.
Ancients said 3 large islands in western ocean/sea and seven smaller ones. Another source says Atlantis was a much larger island that ruled over the other small islands of Atlantic. Kirchir's map if not spurious seems similar to S America.
It doesn't matter if they hadn't been there, there are many details in the account from someone.
There are no large sunken/sumbermed islands in the right area/direction/distance/ocean. Continents/plates can/do shift sideways if not sink downwards.

I also had thought it was in Caribbean/Florida shelf area but there is not anything much there. There is possible match for plain and ditch either off Florida or in Caribbean south of Cuba/Hisapniola. But just can't match/fit all the details. I had favoured an anomaly just out from Orinoco mouth but doesn't fit either. Raleigh's Eldorado in Parima was also interestingly similar to the plain, but could find no match. I had thought the great Plains might match the great plain. But ended up no match. There is only one place in Americas that matches the plain and city etc.
See some of my old Atlantis search pictures at that picasa page i gave link to.   
The matches with Peru are too many and too strong to only/just be "related/part".

I have already said the continent didn't "sink" down, the land (&/or water) "sank"/shifted/sloshed sideways. (The land &/or water shifted sideways, either continental shift or pole shift).

On the capital city we have found/shown it. I can't go dig up Tiwanaku/Tiahuanaco but the evidences i have are pretty certain enough.
The Inca picture from the Coricancha that i posted in the first post shows the concentric circles city 2 times (on left and on right). Posnanskies (and/or Alfords and Sitchin's) diagrams of Tiwanaku show some concentric circles. There are lots of incsriptions from Peru/Bolivia with concentric circles including at Pumapunku (on Jim Allen's site) and Silustani (wiki?). The distance from city to sea is exact same distance as Tiahuanaco to Titicaca. The temple/palace also seems to match. The akapana seems to be the small hill dwelling of (Poseidon and) Clito (and it is prominent in the Tiahuanaco diagrams/drawings & descriptions, and also seems to be shown in the city shown on left in the Coricancha picture).  The plain is there, and is shown in the Inca picture i posted (with surrounding ditch and crossing channels) (confirming it).
People can't rule out just because above sea level. He said the whole large island was swallowed up not just a part of it. Tiahuanaco also has physical evidences of "flood", and the Peru "myth"/traditions also say Tiahuanaco had flood.
So is it just the (supposedly) "isn't sunken" and "too far" (and boats) (and the "island" dispute) not "resemble Plato's description" that is reason it isn't accepted?

The "Atlantis metal" find is not Atlantis orichalcum. The date is too late, long after Atlantis. Orichalc may be either brass(-like) or gold-copper. Their Mediterranean find is like brass but not like gold-copper. (There are a few similar metals: ormulu, corinthian, etc.) The interesting part of the article was actually  the Mattievich/American part/bits not the Mediterranean parts. Orichalc as either/both brass &/or gold-copper has match/es with Peru eg Allen's tumbaga (gold-copper), gilded-copper (Sipan), the Peruvian gold of Conquistadores/Eldorado/etc, and Crespi collection,  Mattievich's Chavin AuAgCu , etc. Sitchin give evidence in 'Lost Realms' for Tiwanaku/Titicaca/Andes/Peru being a copper/tin/zinc centre. Andes is one of world's major deposits in my atlas. There are [sheet metal] nail holes in blocks at Tiahuanaco. [Celtic findrine is similar (or/tho maybe not as Atlantipedia says), as is a Chinese one, and a Hittite one i lost, and Jesus feet in Revelation are "brass".]
How can that be exicting and our Tiwanaku/Tiahuanaco find is not?

Orthodox dates/dating methods are not right as i already said, but either way they can match Atlantis date (9000 yrs/bc, or 900 yrs/c 1400s bc). Atlantis was 900 years not 9000 years. Hyperboreans lived a 1000 years = 100 years.
Peruvian is the oldest in Americas in lots of books.

Yes there are lots of evidences for contacts between Americas and Old World. Not just **** but also murex (SC Compton), and maybe South America fan palm in Assyrian depictions of Toakkari seapeoples (Fitzgerald-Lee), etc. The pictures of the 3 Sipan pyramids seem similar to 3 Giza pyramids to my eyes.

They didn't conquer the Egyptians they were beaten by Athens/"Hercules". They (also) invaded by land not (necessarily/just) by sea?

The large populations you mentioned is interesting thanks. I think i may have seen/heard some bits about large populations.

(perhaps i should have posted the link to my blog rough "paper" (though it is given in the Atlantipedia page) : http://2rbetterthan1.wordpress.com/atlantis-city-tiahuanaco . I know it is not written well but i give/list alot of evidences in there.)

(ps I won't be able to post much soon because i have other things i need/want to do once this hollow/clicking throat (sinus trouble?) goes away. I just wanted to try show there are answers to Atlantipedia's (and others') criticisms.)
Report Spam   Logged
Desiree
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 3882



« Reply #9 on: January 12, 2015, 12:59:23 am »

Quote
I already answered in first post/s and in blog paper about Atlantis being a continent or large island. To repeat/repost some: it was larger than Asia & Libya; had large plain; many species of animals; was self-suffiecient; large population/army; had (high) mountains; 10 kings regions; etc.
Island in ancient and modern can mean island, continent, world island/old world, peninsula, etc.

Well, gee, Sean, if you are fudging the date (Plato says it happened in 9650 BC, not 1400 BC), you shouldn't have any problem appreciating that some of the other details may have been off.

We know that continents can't sink, therefore, the reference of Atlantean territory probably was referring to the empire, not the total amount of the land. Atlantis probably was an island empire, which controlled areas of the Bahamas and both Central and South America.

Quote
They didn't conquer the Egyptians they were beaten by Athens/"Hercules". They (also) invaded by land not (necessarily/just) by sea?

That's not exactly true, as Plato says:

Now in this island of Atlantis there was a great and wonderful empire which had rule over the whole island and several others, and over parts of the continent, and, furthermore, the men of Atlantis had subjected the parts of Libya within the columns of Heracles as far as Egypt, and of Europe as far as Tyrrhenia.

Later, he says:

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.

That leads me to believe that, since the Egyptians were enslaved and had to be freed, the Atlanteans controlled them, too. Makes sense then why cocoa would be found in Egyptian mummies.

Quote
I also had thought it was in Caribbean/Florida shelf area but there is not anything much there. There is possible match for plain and ditch either off Florida or in Caribbean south of Cuba/Hisapniola. But just can't match/fit all the details. I had favoured an anomaly just out from Orinoco mouth but doesn't fit either. Raleigh's Eldorado in Parima was also interestingly similar to the plain, but could find no match. I had thought the great Plains might match the great plain. But ended up no match. There is only one place in Americas that matches the plain and city etc.

You don't have to find the whole area of Atlantis in any specific place, right? The capital city could be underwater someplace, probably in the Bahamas while other features like the plain, the mountains could have been in South America. We are talking about the empire of Atlantis, not imagining it all as a continental landmass that sunk at once. As I said earlier, common sense tells us that it had to be just the capital city that sank and not the whole place.


Quote
How can that be exicting and our Tiwanaku/Tiahuanaco find is not?

Well, the Tiahuanaco is still speculative for the fact that it is very far away from the Mediterranean with no direct route to get there. Especially in reed boats, I don't see any evidence that the people of Bolivia ever had triremes.Today, we have the Panama Canal, but, of course it wasn't around then. The orichalcum is exciting because, gee, it is the first tangible proof that the Atlantis story was truth. Now if we could just find some written corroboration of the Atlantis story in Sais, Egypt, where it is supposed to be, we would finally have a second source.
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.
Desiree
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 3882



« Reply #10 on: January 12, 2015, 01:02:00 am »

I have to admit, all things considered, though, I have always liked the South American theory much better than any of the myriad number of researchers that come in here and want to set Atlantis in the Mediterranean.  Smiley
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.
senator Bam
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 99



WWW
« Reply #11 on: January 13, 2015, 08:56:15 pm »

The South America comment is cool/nice. I'll just post the reply i wrote anyway. Sorry it is not very good.

I am not fudging the date. It is not off, it is just that it is 900 not 9000 years. Plato's 900(0) years Atlantis = Herodotus' 900 years Moeris. Each detail is in/of itself each has to be dis/proven, not just assuming things "may" similarly not be literal. Do you say Hyperborea's other details could be fudged because Hyperboreans living a 1000 years is really only 100 years? Egyptians are well known for exagerating dates 900(0) years, 100(0) years, (1)1340/1130 years. We assume all details as they are, we only "fudge" ones if there is good evidence/proof.

The orichalc find is not the first tangible proof of the account. We have mentioned/shown others. Their find is only 600s bc.

Continents can't sink downwards but they can "sink"/shift sideways. (& he didn't necessarily say sink but swallowed-up.) "Probably" doesn't cut it (though i also use similar words (though have reasons)).
People have to consider all possiblilities for "sinking" not just literal sinking. These i listed in my paper and in posts above. Sinking, displacement, *shifting continents*, rising sealevels, eruption/explosion, etc.
The way i read the Atlantis account he is implying a large island/continent/landmass (for the reasons i already listed above and in paper: large plain, larger than Asia & Libya, 10 kings regions, (high) mountains, selfsufficient, etc) and that the whole landmass "sank/sunk" not just part of it.
Tony said how can tiny Athens defeat a continent, while you say a small island can control an empire?

South America can't just be a part of the empire / etc. The matches are too quality/quanity. There is no match for the city & plain etc anywhere else in Americas or Atlantic (though there are lesser connections). Atlantis can only be in Americas (incl/excld Antarctica) or Armorica plate, and only one place there matches.
There is nothing much in Bahamas from the satellite pics etc. There is just a few things like that Bimini wall, and Cuba city find.

I just can not understand how just those 3 distance and route and boats disbeliefs can be seen as equally or more important than all the many evidences/matches (concentric city, plain, (bull) sacrifice, orichalc, red/white/balck, many animals, large population, etc etc etc). There must be something that is unique that can only be Atlantis that people would accept as proof, since they reject all the evidence because of just a few disbelief reasons?

Ok the Egypt may or may not have been conquered/enslaved according to the account. Hard to say either way for certain. (The versions i had read said as far as Libya and Tyrrhenia. A pain having so many different inaccurate translations, have to refer to original Greek.) Exodus mentions enemies of Egypt. Traditions have things like Antaeus (Atlantis?) versus Hercules (Athens?).

The cocoa found in mummies is later after Atlantis sinking. Though i could be wrong. Orthodox Egyptian chronology is wrong, Herodotus said Moeris (12th dyn) was only 900 years before [Amasis 2] ie ca 1400s (not "1800s"). Josephus said 1300 years Menes to Shishak (900s); Herodotus said (1)1340 years Menes to Seti (19th dyn). Plato's 900(0) years Atlantis = Herodotus' 900 years for Moeris (12th dynasty) [and for Hercules (12th dynasty)]. The **** was from memory about 19th dynasty. The whole period between 12th and 19th/20th dynasty is abit uncertain though re Atlantis date. Spanuth/etc link the Sea Peoples (19th/20th dyn) with Atlanteans, and there may be a link but they seem to be later.  Sea Peoples may match the "Pelasgians" of Thalassocracies shortly after Trojan war (1100s). See my blog paper Atlantis page in the date section &/or my Egyptian chronology page there (search/find "900").

I don't agree that we can find the city and the plain and mountains etc in different places. Besides if we have found them in one place then that has preceedence over "don't have to find in one place" theory. I am often mis-accused of "oh that can fit any number of places", well how much more can splitting them up easily fit any number of places?
Why would he say the "whole island" if it was only 20 something km size?

People can't just assume/assert not one place/landmass or not one time/sinking etc. My approach has always been to objectively see if there is a real match for the Atlantis Account, Bible, Nennius/HB, etc matching the seeming meaning of the text, not just assume/assert suspect/etc.

The Andes were pushed up in ancient times. If Atlantis is not S America, if S America is opposite continent then how do we explain the Andes pushed up? Peru has many/stark Atlantis account matches that can't be explained by just part of empire / etc.

Common sense tells me that the Coricancha picture, and Posnansky's diagrams of Tiahuanaco, and the altiplano, and the Andes mirroring Atlas, and Peru being one of the world's biggest copper/tin/zinc areas, and the Atlas motif in Peruvian, and many other things in Peru/Bolivia match the Atlantis account. It is not speculative. The matches i gave here and in paper are pretty certain. Sure there are a few slightly difficult disbelief things to (better) answer but nothing that makes it seriously doubtful.

I have already tried to give some possible answers about boats/distance/route. Lots of sources agree that ancients had greater seafaring than we give them credit for. The reed boats Ark-like/high-sea-faring-ship-like shape shows they must have had seafaring boats what ever the actual material was.

They didn't the Panama canal, but Steven Compton in 'Exodus Lost' shows they had [Tehuapanec?] canal. Some also suggest a canal in the area of that river northwest Andes/Colombia? And there is the Amazon across the continent. But if there was a shift then the 2 Americas may not have been connected before shift, and would have been closer to Africa. "Seas were highways not barriers".

We have corroboration of Atlantis account. See the Coricancha picture i posted with half a dozen to a dozen details from the Account. See diagrams & pictures & descriptions of Tiahauanco. See the spade symbol in Peruvian art similar to world pillar (Atlas motif). Etc.  What if they find some other written/pictoral source that says Atlantis is South America/Tiahuanaco, people will still say it can't be it is too far and no direct route and no boats.

Sorry if i am repeating some (as i was accused on Historum of), it is because some things (and all the other evidences) seem to be not noticed/noted. I can't answer the distance/route/boats better at present than i already have here and in paper. Even if i find better answers I think that other evidences are more important & interesting. I'm not sure how else to prove it (i can't go there and only limited situation/condition & time/resources/etc), i am pretty positive myself from all i have seen and tried to show, but i accept it isn't enough for others. It would be nice to see Jim Allen credited (and a tiny bit for my extra Tiahuanaco/Coricancha proofs).

On the Mediterranean I asked Tony in an email if anyone could send me a copy of the Odyssey routes pdf which link is in Atlantipedia 'Mediterranean' page but haven't had a reply (tho I know he is busy). I can't get through to it on dialup, it is taking forever to load. Really would like to study that paper.
Report Spam   Logged
senator Bam
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 99



WWW
« Reply #12 on: January 15, 2015, 06:31:14 pm »


I have just realised that there was a partial answer to your route question/issue in my last reply to Tony of Atlantipedia a week or so ago.
It is said that the statue of man on horse that was once in Azores used to point (?sout-)westwards and was named or connected with the word/name Cates/cati which means "this way" in Quechuan (Incan/Peruvian).
The only possible problem is one source says westwards not as i thought that &/or other source/s had said south-westwards. (West from Azores is roughly Washington DC just below New York.)

Also it is possible that the stages of Urani/Amenti/Aaru are a map across South America to Tiahuanaco.

There are a number of possible routes. Through ancient canal/strait of Tehuantepec. Around north(west) corner and down west coast. (Through Magdalene river in Colombia?) Across Amazon/Madeira river/s. Through Entre Rios region.
All these routes would have been different geography then before the catastrophe/shift. (See maps / animations of stages of continental shift.)
Report Spam   Logged
Desiree
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 3882



« Reply #13 on: January 17, 2015, 03:24:50 am »

Quote
I am not fudging the date. It is not off, it is just that it is 900 not 9000 years. Plato's 900(0) years Atlantis = Herodotus' 900 years Moeris. Each detail is in/of itself each has to be dis/proven, not just assuming things "may" similarly not be literal. Do you say Hyperborea's other details could be fudged because Hyperboreans living a 1000 years is really only 100 years? Egyptians are well known for exagerating dates 900(0) years, 100(0) years, (1)1340/1130 years. We assume all details as they are, we only "fudge" ones if there is good evidence/proof.


I have my own reasons for maybe fudging the date. First off, there had to be an established system of measuring time at the time this all occurred and I don't  see any evidence of that. Having said that, you are fudging the date because all the translations measure the date as 9600 BC. That is the truth, no matter what the rationale.

The translations also say Atlantis lay before or in front of the Pillars of Hercules. Taken literally, that would put it in the East Atlantic. I don't take Plato perfectly literally on that (though people like Georgeos Diax Montexano and Jacques Collina Gerard do), for the simple reason that nobody involved with the story had ever been there.

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 which are by you called the Pillars of Heracles;

Quote
The orichalc find is not the first tangible proof of the account. We have mentioned/shown others. Their find is only 600s bc.

But you don't have the capital city surrounded by alternating rings of water and land and that is what will identify Atlantis!

Quote
Continents can't sink downwards but they can "sink"/shift sideways. (& he didn't necessarily say sink but swallowed-up.) "Probably" doesn't cut it (though i also use similar words (though have reasons)).

He actually does say it sunk into the sea and is very specific about that:

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.



Quote
Tony said how can tiny Athens defeat a continent, while you say a small island can control an empire?

That's an easy one..! Look at Great Britain. That small island managed to have  an empire that controlled the world at one point. I imagine something similar occurred with Atlantis. Remember, the Spartans beat the Persians just because they had bronze weapons and the Persians had wicker.  Smiley

Quote
There is no match for the city & plain etc anywhere else in Americas or Atlantic (though there are lesser connections). Atlantis can only be in Americas (incl/excld Antarctica) or Armorica plate, and only one place there matches.

For me, the geographic positions of the plain and the mountain have to be treated with a grain of salt because, again, no one had ever been there. If the story is to be believed at all, well, it happened nine thousand years ago! It would be like somebody alive today trying to describe the Colossus of Rhodes.

Quote
There is nothing much in Bahamas from the satellite pics etc. There is just a few things like that Bimini wall, and Cuba city find.

I can't tell you how many researchers have come here saying that the Caribbean has some sort of sunken city in it, and there is a circular anomaly off the shores of Cuba, per Greg Little and Andrew Collins. Of course, we'll know more if the Communists ever get out of power there! That is one of the places I think the sunken capital city might be.

Quote
They didn't the Panama canal, but Steven Compton in 'Exodus Lost' shows they had [Tehuapanec?] canal. Some also suggest a canal in the area of that river northwest Andes/Colombia? And there is the Amazon across the continent. But if there was a shift then the 2 Americas may not have been connected before shift, and would have been closer to Africa. "Seas were highways not barriers".

I'll have to look into more of the idea of the canal, but I don't remember Jim Allen having much of an answer for that either when he was here, and I also don't remember that much in his writings either. That is a big stumbling block why I think the city has to be someplace else, the distance.

Quote
It is said that the statue of man on horse that was once in Azores used to point (?sout-)westwards and was named or connected with the word/name Cates/cati which means "this way" in Quechuan (Incan/Peruvian).

But the statue no longer exists, so we don't even know what it looked like. You know when the Azores were first discovered, there were also said to be the remains of several stone buildings on Corso. The people of the Azores even believe they were once a part of Atlantis. And, if you take into account that the area has a history of pretty brutal earthquakes like Plato talks about, they have just as good of a case as some others and are much closer to the Med than either the Bahamas or South America.

Anyway, the statue was said to have been lost en route back to Portugal. Some even say it was made by Chinese explorers.
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.
senator Bam
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 99



WWW
« Reply #14 on: January 17, 2015, 11:13:53 pm »


This topic has only been read 50 times so i am wasting my time anyway.

Looks like i will just have to post alot of the date chapter from my paper here. He doesn't say 9600 bc. He says "9000 years".

--------

Date:

Can't be 9000 years because no Athens/Sais/etc then.
Evidence is that it was Bronze age & Minoan-Mycenaean.
The 3rd deluge (Deucalion).

Platos' 900(0) years Atlantis = Herodotus' 900 years Moeris (and Herodotus' 900 years Hercules). (Hercules and Moeris were 12th dynasty.)
Mavor's 9000 years = 900 years, and Spanuth's 9000 years = months both reconcile with a 10 month calendar year. (Compare 10/12 months, 10/12 plagues, 10/12 commandments, *10* kings Atlantis/12 kings Scheria, etc.) Eudoxus & others confirm Egyptians often called months "years". [Also compare Herodotus' (1)1340 years Menes to Seti matches Josephus' 1300 yrs Menes to Shishak.]
Hyperboreans lived a 1000 years = 100/110/120 years.
[The 9000 years may also connect with Ptah 9000 years. Our evidence is that 12th dynasty would fit 900 years before & 900 years after.]
800(0) years Sais fits Saites/Salitis/Hyksos after 900 years Moeris/12th dynasty.

Table (sorry would be better with 6 columns not just rows)
Egyptology: 1. 12th dyn, 2. Hyksos/Saites, 4. 19th/20th dyn, 5. Persians.
Plato: 1. 900(0) yrs Atlantis, 2. 800(0) yrs Sais [Saites/Salitis/Sethroite], 5. Persian
Herodotus: 1. 900 yrs Moeris, 2. 700 yrs Anysis
Herodotus 3 gods/grps: 0. 1600 yrs Pan, 1. 900 yrs Hercules, 2. 800 yrs Dionysos.
Herodotus: 1. [red sea], 2. Europa/Io/Argos/Phoenicians, Medea/Colchis, 3. Trojan, 5.Persian.
Bible: 1. Moses/Joshua 480+<490yrs, 2. Judges.
Tartessos: 2./3./4. 700(0) yrs.
rare source/s (J Allen): 1. Atlantis, 1 gen, 2. Argonauts, 1 gen, 3. Trojan.
Spanish (Hoeh): 1. Antaeus, 2. Apher, 3. Trojan, 4. thalassocracies/pelasgians
Greek (Aspin): 1. Atlantis/Deucalion betw Cecrops & Erechtheus, 2. Minoan/Theseus, 3. Trojan/Menestheus, 4. Heraclids/Dorians.
3 Hermes: 0. Set, 1. Shu/Num, 3./4. Thoth.
Egyptology 3 kdms: 0. Old Kdm, 1. Mid Kdm, 3./4. New Kdm.
Rohl: 1. Moses 12th-13th, 2. Inachus/Hyksos, 3. Trojan, 4. sea peoples.
Jerome: 1. Cecrops/Moses, 3. Trojan/Samson, 5. Persia.

Atlas = Shu = air = Amon = Zeus?
Shu is Middle Kingdom as in 3 Hermes and in el-Arish inscription (which matches exodus).

The shoal of Sesostris (12th or 19th dyn) might connect?

Moeris ca 1400s bc, Atlantis ca 1400s bc, exodus/Joshua ca 1400s bc, Peruvian long night ca 1400/1394 bc.
Philistines from Caphtor same time as Hebrews exodus from Egypt.

Atlantis was  between Cecrops (1556-1506) to Erechtheus (1397-1347).

-------

Yes we do have the city surrounded by concentric circles of land and water.
The Corincancha picture in first post shows it two times (1x on left and 1x on right).
Posnanskies (and Alford's/Sitchin's) diagrams of Tiwanaku/Tiahuanaco show concentric circles (of water).
Others descriptions of Tiahuanaco say is evidences that Tiahauanaco was connected with Titicaca.
Other inscriptions from Peru also show concentric circles. Jim Allen posted one on his site from Pumapunku (part of Tiahuanaco). Posnansky has ones from Tiahuanaco/gateway. I & wiki show one from Sillustani. Sitchin's 'Lost Realms' has quite a few others in his Peru/Tiahuanaco part/chapters.
I wish i could post the pictures but i only have dialup which is slower than used to be before the fibre optics broadband campaign/changes. I already posted the Coricancha picture. Sillustani one is in wiki i think.

The in front of/facing/opposite/etc the Pillar of Hercules can apply to either/both North and/or South America now/then on various maps projections. Some projections like the Piri Reis with Giza at centre have south America opposite/west while north America is north/not-opposite. Kirchir's map also fits/matches South America better-than / and-not north America. There is also dispute exactly were the pillars were.
There is nothing in the Atlantic except Americas (or Armorica plate). There is only one place in Americas that fits the city and plain and mountains etc.

He says in your translation "disappered into the depths of the sea" not "sank/sunk". As i have alrady said there are a number of possibilities all of which people have to consider. Literal sinking/sank; submergence/rising sea levels; continental shift; crust displacment; vlocanic eruption/explosion; tidal bulge; figurative; etc. We have shown that the "sinking" can/"must" fit either shift or displacement.
There is no large sunken landmasses in the Atlantic (or other oceans). (The only ones there are are too small or nothing there or etc.)
Violent quake(s) and flood(s) fits our shift very well as i said in the paper.

Atlantis was not just a small island or just an empire: "larger than Asia & Libya", large plain, (high) mountains; many species of animals (incl elephants); 10 kings regions; "large island"; "whole island"; large population/army; large river; etc etc.
Thanks for partly answering Tonys question.

Well i do not treat anything with a grain of salt without veyr good reasons. We have found the plain and city etc.
Someone described the city etc very well so someone had been there or had good memory/records/sources.
It was no 9000 years ago. Many scholars say it is not possible because Athens etc wasn't there. See my date above.

Yes Caribbean has a few possible things like the Bimin wall, and Cuba city, and Bermuda "pyramid/s", etc. But in my own scouring of the area in satellite and other sources there just doesn't seem to be much of a match there with all the details (plain, city, mountains, civilisation/culture, etc). Plus Perus matches are too stark/many to be just a part or just related. People need to objectively/openly consider all possible sites not just one/some. Whereas i have consdiered that area best as i can and no one has shown/told me any more there to make me change back to it. Meanwhile people seem to dismiss/ignore the Coricancha and  other stark evidences we have shown/said.

We have given some partial possible answers to the only few distance/route/boat and i can't see how those only one/two/few disbelief things can be more/equally important than all the evidences we said here and in the paper.

Nevertheless we do have the historical records of the Azores statue that was man on horse pointing [?south-]west with name/word cates "this way" [in Quechua].
There are other possible route sources too as i mentioned: 12 stages of Urani/Tuat/Amenti; Scheria/Phaeacia? Stonehenge damaged on southwest. Etc.
Azores can not be Atlantis or remaining part of Atlantis. Too small. The statue pointed west and said "this way". Atlantic is moving up and out not in/down. Etc. (Though there was some sand/continental rocks found near there i think?) It may possibly be Ogygia.

How can you say the distance (now/post-shift not necessarily then/pre-shift) is too hard to believe yet you don't think a small island ruling an empire is hard to believe?
Report Spam   Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3   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