ATLANTIS & the Atlantic Ocean 1 (ORIGINAL)

Jaime Manuschevich

Member
Member # 3005

Rate Member posted 04-11-2006 10:35 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Desiree

The problem with this rationale, Jamie, is that you act that, just because something hasn't been found in the Atlantic yet, you act like it will never be found. Well, we don't know that. There are several different possibilities for Atlantis in the Atlantic as I listed above. One of the main criteria about Atlantis is that it "sunk," so obviously it's not still above water. If we look at this scientifically, it's pretty clear that a huge land mass can't sink, so we have to be looking for something smaller, an island or city perhaps and that's what sunk. There are many candidates in the Atlantic.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The problem with yours position that it is speculative, philosophical or logically spoken. Perhaps that is good for the philosophy, but it is not sufficient for scientific research work. I cannot base science or the investigation in which its could happen, without concrete antecedents or data. The scientific research is based on data and the analysis and interpretation of them. A hypothesis based on data rises and its are to confirm. If not to confirm itself, the hypothesis is mistaken. I cannot interpret nothing on data that do not exist, on nonexistent antecedents. Into your concept, there would be angels, extraterrestrial, dragoons, mutants, magicians, because like it is not possible to be proven that they do not exist, is possible that they exist. But in the scientific work, the method is the other way around: what it does not exist, does not exist.

Now, when you opening to possibility that Atlantis is smaller of which said Plato, you are assuming that he was mistaken. Then, it was not possible to be mistaken Plato in other things? Why to criticize the idea that it can be elsewhere more logic or coherent with the civilization history that we know? So that we cannot think perhaps that we have the correct data, but badly interpreted? During a long time, the science of the medieval West badly processed the data of the turn of the sun and the Earth.