Atlantis Online
September 15, 2019, 01:40:20 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Remains of ancient civilisation discovered on the bottom of a lake
http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20071227/94372640.html
 
  Home Help Arcade Gallery Links Staff List Calendar Login Register  

ATLANTIS & the Atlantic Ocean 1 (ORIGINAL)

Pages: 1 ... 25 26 27 28 29 30 [31] 32 33 34 35 36 37 ... 64   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: ATLANTIS & the Atlantic Ocean 1 (ORIGINAL)  (Read 7573 times)
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #450 on: December 29, 2007, 11:47:22 am »




nekozuki

Member
Member # 2762

Member Rated:
   posted 04-10-2006 12:05 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Jaime have you ever read or at least read parts of the Egyptian Book of the Dead?

--------------------



" Om Vasudevaya Namaha!"
With loving reverence, I bow to Lord Vishnu!

"Man is made by his belief. As he believes, so he is." - Lord Krishna, Bhagavad Gita
 
Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #451 on: December 29, 2007, 11:48:29 am »

Jaime Manuschevich

Member
Member # 3005

Rate Member   posted 04-10-2006 01:11 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No, I have not read it. I know the book only reference.

According to Manuel Soto de la Vega, Egyptology, "it is a text collection of innovations, magic charm, spells, orations, hymns, magical litanies and formulas, written generally in rolls of papyrus with illustrations or vignettes. They were placed in the tombs of the Egyptians that could allow such luxury from the New Empire.

There is something in this book that helps us to clarify this debate?

 
Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #452 on: December 29, 2007, 11:49:55 am »

Jaime Manuschevich

Member
Member # 3005

Rate Member   posted 04-10-2006 02:41 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Desiree:
I hope you're not really asking where a flooded area of the Atlantic is, it's an ocean, how can anyone talk about flooding?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As I am ingenuous, I will avoid seeing here a mockery, taking advantage of that I am not English speaking and will give an explanation:

In Spanish, "empantantado" (full of mud) e "inundado" (full of water) is "flooded" in English. For me, "marshing" or "muding" or "marshed" or "muded" is more correct, but I did not invent the English...
 
Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #453 on: December 29, 2007, 11:51:13 am »

nekozuki

Member
Member # 2762

Member Rated:
   posted 04-10-2006 05:20 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Jaime Manuschevich:
No, I have not read it. I know the book only reference.

According to Manuel Soto de la Vega, Egyptology, "it is a text collection of innovations, magic charm, spells, orations, hymns, magical litanies and formulas, written generally in rolls of papyrus with illustrations or vignettes. They were placed in the tombs of the Egyptians that could allow such luxury from the New Empire.

There is something in this book that helps us to clarify this debate?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Also in the Egyptian Book of Dead is the tale of the flood, there are theories that Osiris, Isis, and Horus were Atlantean royalty. They talk about their home in the West that sank. Not too mention another common story in ancient cultures is a war in heaven, it's in there too. The Egyptian Book of the Dead might be a history book too.

 
Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #454 on: December 29, 2007, 11:52:10 am »

Jaime Manuschevich

Member
Member # 3005

Rate Member   posted 04-10-2006 07:19 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by nekozuki:
Also in the Egyptian Book of Dead is the tale of the flood, there are theories that Osiris, Isis, and Horus were Atlantean royalty. They talk about their home in the West that sank. Not too mention another common story in ancient cultures is a war in heaven, it's in there too. The Egyptian Book of the Dead might be a history book too.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The subject of the east in old mythologies has to do rather with decline of the sun... not necessarily with a real territory... Of course that I do not discard the idea that it can be a real address, but not of the cardinal points as we to them understand. It is a reference to the sky... has to do with the concept of Tree of the Life, with a stellar cross...

I explain it. The cardinal points of this old culture defined the sky, not the terrestrial plane, as we used it today. North is the sky, the south is the infraworld... Sphinx was the departure point for the alignments, and she is watching the east, towards where the sun is born. Its South is the celestial infraworld, is to say what is under the horizon, its north the sky, its left, its west, is our north and its right, this, is our south. If we applied the present way, that is to say, we watched towards the north, we rotated 90º in relation of the 360 degrees. That is to say, we changed the old Egyptian west by our north. Product of that old system still we associated the north with above and the south with down. That also explains the disorientation of Plato and modern Egyptian priests. And Canaan this is exactly to the north of the first civilized centres Egyptian.

The one of the war in the sky is a real event, but not of Gods, but that it has to do with the precession of the equinoxes, the change of the positions of stars and the climatic Earth changes. The Atlantian were expert in the subject. East mythology event is called to him in general "deluge"... The war in the sky is in several inheriting cultures of that first civilization. Also it is in the myth of Atlantis... This war is called, among the Greeks, Battles de Zeus or the fight by Mount Olympus. This word in Hebrew is well interesting: Olam ko. The world of God. Now, I do not believe that the book of the Dead has said specifically that these three Gods of Egypt were Atlantes... They are not real; represent planets and the sun... and the complex process of the precession. There are many numbers related to the phenomenon: 5, 7, 12, 36, 72, etc...

Although it I have not read it and the subject seems to me interesting, I do not see where it contributes to us to establish if Atlantis were or not in the Atlantic Ocean. He would be interesting that you indicated paragraph to me that could have relation.

 
Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #455 on: December 29, 2007, 11:53:54 am »

Desiree

Member
Member # 2991

Member Rated:
   posted 04-10-2006 11:37 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We are like Greek and Egyptian. I say a thing and you understand another thing. I want to summarize here on these 15 pages of writings about if Atlantis were in "your Atlantic Ocean" or no.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I haven't read all 15 pages, so I don't know what's there, but yes, I'd have to say it was in the Atlantic Ocean, as either a sunken island, city or part of an island. Where was it? Either the Caribbean, Azores, Mid-Atlantic, Eastern Atlantic, or off the coast of Spain of Morocco. Evidence has turned up in each of those places.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What the text says is clear: for Egyptian the Atlantic sea it was a no navigable sea, small and flooded. They do not say that a part of him was no navigable and flooded, as you it says. It does not say either that this happened only by a period of time. It does not say either that he was small in a portion. It does not say either that there were seaweed, as you maintain.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jamie, for someone who wants to totally disregard just where Plato even places Atlantis (the whole point of the dialogue where it even gets it's name from), you're awfully picky about the mud. Point is, the Greeks or Egyptians probably didn't even have a word for seeweed.

Ja, ja, ja.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is clear that the present Atlantic Ocean is the gigantic ocean that does not have any of those characteristics. It is not the same sea . To maintain that it is the same sea is to be simply blind. In general, nobody confuses a dwarf with a giant.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The mud is described by Plato as an aftermath of the landmass "settling down into the ocean," and Aristotle, too, mentions the mudoutside the Pillars of Hercules.. That was 2400 years ago, one would think it would stop settling eventually.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The other clear thing that I maintain and who you do not want to understand and that you have not been able to prove nothing in opposite, is that although the Egyptian could know that sea or the ocean, it is no only a document that proves that they called "the Atlantic Ocean" or that they knew its real characteristics, subject that is very far from being irrelevant as you say. It is a test of himself speak of that sea or no.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jamie, I don't have to prove it. You're the only one here that even questions whether the Egyptians knew the Atlantic and the Red Sea and the difference. Anyone who has even looked into this at all can see that they did. Apparently, you're only doing it because it blows apart your theory. Well, good luck, cause you're going to run into it everytime you present your theory to someone educated in ancient history and, believe me, it's not going away.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now, as far as which the Egyptians know America indeed, as you indicate, and that they talked about to that continent like the located territory the front of Atlantis, you have contributed no test either. Only conjectures.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

They got it from the Phoenicians, who the Pharoah Necho II commissioned to SAIL around Africa, from the Red Sea to the Atlantic. You're going to get so sick of hearing his name by the time I'm done talking to you! I'm going to help you learn more about him.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I do not deny that the Canaanites or the Phoenicians or the Carthaginians knew that continent. On the contrary. I say that they yes knew it and that his ancestors, colonized the continent. Soon, they dealt with those new peoples, extracted copper, iron, tobacco, **** and perhaps many other products. But never they presented his secret. Either there is no test that another old western culture knew such secret. Without a doubt, there are rumours and commentaries on the Island of the Iron (present Brazil) or Hasperides Island, (Western Islands)... or about the route to them through Cabo Verde (Green Cape??) Island or Gorgadas Islands.

This starting point for the passage is not irrelevant, because it is the shorter nautical route between Africa and America, 800 leagues. Also from sea currents and winds are generated there that shorten the trip almost to half.

Columbus exactly crossed all the islands of the Eastern Atlantic looking for these islands to use this route. It finally discovered only the return way, with favourable tides and winds that the return way shortened to him to Europe. Also there is story mythical of this trip, like the one of Gilgamesh, who apparently travelled until The Andes in America. That old connection was, for millennia and until now, only in the scope of stories and legend. In any case, like data, I add this:


quote:

GARDEN OF the HESPÉRIDES
The Hesperides Islands are called thus by the city of Hespéride, that was in the borders of Mauritania. They are beyond the Gorgadas, in the limit of the Atlantic, towards where the marine abysses begin. In its gardens - according to they count the legend was a dragoon that watched gold apples. One says that there a so rough estuary by his trimmed borders is originated of the sea that who contemplate it from distant spot create to see the spirals of a serpent.

S. Isidoro of Seville, Etimologías, XIV, 6, 10
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

These are all good points, Jamie! So I won't say anything about them.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now, about the existence of a island of 300 by 600 kilometers in tehe center of the Atlantic that undergo a collapse geologic, sink at heart of the ocean, between 9,500 BC and the 600 BC, either have no test. You present only small findings that not have the scientific recognition and which its have much of speculation.

This, for me is clear and evident yet that Plato was mistaken, who he interpreted bad to the Egyptians or Solon, and that Atlantis never was in the present Atlantic Ocean. I also conclude, who any rational and dispassionate analysis, based on the multiple already existing solid evidences, will conclude the same. This solid conclusion has already taken to many investigators to look for Atlantis in the Mediterranean and other places.

Now, if the analysis does not surpass the most basic test, it makes no sense to continue looking for in the Atlantic the other characteristics of the mythical island: bulls, elephants, channels, marine civilization, ring, etc.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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. 
Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #456 on: December 29, 2007, 11:55:01 am »

Desiree

Member
Member # 2991

Member Rated:
   posted 04-10-2006 11:44 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I want to post Greg Little's response to someone about his scientific method here today because I thought it gave some valuable information in it and I know not everyone goes to both forums:


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Greg Little:
1. I have my own side-scan equipment, underwater remote cam equipment, and virtually everything else we need and use except for boats and planes we charter. But the scheduled high-tech work at Bimini that is about to be done won't be done by me nor do I plan on being there during it. I have no idea how anyone can make a "profit" from such research. It is a never-ending money pit that an individual does because he or she is devoted to it and can afford it. I don't know anyone who makes any money from such research with the exception of Graham Hancock, at least when his TV doc series came out.

2. The ARE already has the funds set aside for the sub-bottom profiling and side-scan that will be done this summer. It is a special project decided on during the Feb-March 2006 excursion there based on the results we found. That work is all being done by one of the elite oceanic research organizations on their fully equipped research ship and the interpretations will all be theirs. The ECF, a branch of ARE, is funding that work.

3. The question Des asked about J-shaped harbors is really interesting. Yes, there are several virtually identical ancient harbors in the Mediterranean--same total size, made from cut beachrock slabs, have the same J-shape, the block layers are identical, etc. If you want to peruse these, go to:

http://www.rgzm.de/Navis2/Home/Frames.htm

Click on "English" and be ready to spend some amazing time. It's a massive website with hundreds of photos and illustrations and compilations of research. Look at "Harbors" or "Countries" in the menu and follow all the links. You'll notice the term "kurkar" in the text from time-to-time. The word "kurkar" means "carbonate beachrock" that forms in the Mediterranean. There it is sandstone, in the Atlantic, beachrock is limestone. Eugene Shinn's bachelors degree was in "biology" not geology. He was totally unaware of the existance of ANY ancient harbors in the world when we interacted in late 2005. He said they were probably all natural, like the Bimini formation. Shinn's actual research results, shoddy as they were, actually showed the Bimini formation was not in its natural place. He and archaeologist Marshall McKusick perpetrated a hoax in altering the results in their 1980 article and again in 1984 and 2004. I've dubbed it the "Shinn-McKusic Hoax" and yes, it is being evaluated by some of the influential people in archaeology. I doubt they like the result but I have no idea what their conclusions will be. It depends on their honesty.

4. There is an update on the "update" at:

http://www.i-newswire.com/pr61185.html

Since that press release, I've had more information emerge. The cut stone we removed from an underwater tier of stone blocks at Cay Sal was moved from a land source showing that it had to be physically placed where it was recovered. The large anchor removed at Bimini was very old, not at all like the more recent smaller one we pulled from the bottom.

5. The Bimini area is strewn with lots of stone anchors. The formation area itself has many, many cut rectangular slabs of stone there under the massive blocks see from the surface. The huge blocks are the "beachrock" as they are so-often termed, the most important evidence is UNDER the huge blocks. Because they knew nothing whatsoever about harbors, anchors, and were careless and shoddy, the main skeptics never thought to look under the big blocks. It is destined to become a textbook example of "Bad Science" and will gradually be recognized as such and used to show how preconceived bias and reactions to "unpopular speculations" can lead to scientific misconduct and incompetence. I'm patient and persistent and busy, so precisely when this happens doesn't matter. What matters is the truth and usually, eventually, the truth emerges. As to employing accepted scientific standards, I can say that we did more than the prior researchers. We basically started with a careful "surface examination" that included looking under everythig we could and looking at the whole area. That led to several discoveries including the many anchors and cut slabs of stone. The collection of samples was done under constant filming and all lab tests were run by independent labs. Archaeologist Bill Donato, who has a valid archaeological permit for the Bahamas, supervised the work. When others don't like our findings, they attack the credentials of Donato or question other things. Donato has a masters degree in archaeology from Cal State-Fullerton. He has the credentials. As to the rest, the cards will all fall in place over time.

6. We do not speculate at all that the Bimini site has anything to do with Atlantis. The media will continue to do so, the skeptics will do it because it serves their purpose, and a lot of the public will jump on the Atlantis bandwagon. Based on the dates of Atlantis, as given by Plato, the Bimini formation that is the point of contention is not Atlantis. Given the controversy and the link Cayce made between Bimini and part of Atlantis being found there in 1968 and 1969, I do not expect the linking of Bimini to Atlantis to dissipate, but ... as the saying goes ... it is what it is.

7. The entire controvery is intriguing from a psychological perspective and that quite honestly, is one of my driving motivations in persuing it. The fabrication of evidence is considered very serious in most scientific research, especially so in medical research. Archaeology is an area that has had its share of fabrications and coverups, including many by mainstreamers. But it is generally tolerated unless it goes against what the mainstream believes. Despite what anybody may assert or believe, this paragraph represents my major motivation.

8. If you want to hear from "the other side" of the argument, listen to Eugene Shinn's 2005 talk. It can be found here:
http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2005AM/finalprogram/abstract_96768.htm

Click on the "listen" link. There is a software download that probably has to occur befor you can listen. To the skeptics among you, please listen to your hero, for that is who is speaking.

Greg Little 
Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #457 on: December 29, 2007, 11:56:01 am »

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.
 
Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #458 on: December 29, 2007, 11:57:01 am »

Jaime Manuschevich

Member
Member # 3005

Rate Member   posted 04-11-2006 02:08 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Very interesting the material of Greg Little.

I read the note of press about Cay Sal. The data and the objects collected by Greg and Lora Little must to confirm plus my hypothesis on the American colonization, synthetically written above, than the theory of Atlantis in the Atlantic. This subject it treatment in extensive in chapters XI and XII of my book. There I expose the process of the colonization of America by Semitic peoples (the "atlantean") and, later, the commercial relation of Canaanites and his descendants with the "New Continent".


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 We do not speculate at all that the Bimini site has anything to do with Atlantis. The media will continue to do so, the skeptics will do it because it serves their purpose, and a lot of the public will jump on the Atlantis bandwagon. Based on the dates of Atlantis, as given by Plato, the Bimini formation that is the point of contention is not Atlantis. Given the controversy and the link Cayce made between Bimini and part of Atlantis being found there in 1968 and 1969, I do not expect the linking of Bimini to Atlantis to dissipate, but ... as the saying goes ... it is what it is.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also, reason why it says, Greg Little seems that it thinks that there is no connection between Bimini and Atlantis...

 
Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #459 on: December 29, 2007, 11:57:56 am »

Jaime Manuschevich

Member
Member # 3005

Rate Member   posted 04-11-2006 04:52 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jamie, I don't have to prove it. You're the only one here that even questions whether the Egyptians knew the Atlantic and the Red Sea and the difference. Anyone who has even looked into this at all can see that they did. Apparently, you're only doing it because it blows apart your theory. Well, good luck, cause you're going to run into it everytime you present your theory to someone educated in ancient history and, believe me, it's not going away.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My glance does not have to do with small or personal interests or because it goes against my theory. It is because really it is not it thus. And in this investigation, that is so complex, each small details can move far away or approach to us to the truth. In this theory many events like certain have occurred without meticulously analyzing them from many angles different. I go several years investigating the myth line through line. Each one of that lines I verified them with thousands of data of many fields: history, archaeology, genetics, botany, geology, paleo climatology, paleo astronomy, old mythology, religions, anthropology, linguistic, etc. I only accepted it until there was convincing me the solid tests. Believe me you that it is not easy to do a complete return to human history in your own head.

I assure to you that it was a slow and complex process to understand that it was what the myth really said.

 
Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #460 on: December 29, 2007, 11:58:57 am »

Desiree

Member
Member # 2991

Member Rated:
   posted 04-11-2006 09:59 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 they 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.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What that statement fails to take into account, Jamie, is that you're the one who has no science, evidence, artifacts, archaeology, geography or even geology to support your point of view. You make loose correlations based on Bible stories, of all things, nothing more, and disregard all of Plato to try and make your case which is, at best, a little weak. Sorry, but it is. Not only that, each time I put evidence up supporting it, you ignore it, rather than deal with it. You keep trying to assume the mantle of a scientist, but you're not really applying any science to any of this. You're making loose associations based on science that someone else has already done and trying to link them to things that Plato didn't even say. You're not even doing any field work into any of this, that I know of anyway. Is there even a specific site in Israel that you've picked out to be Plato's capital city? Cause I sure haven't seen any, and yet you dismiss all the traditional Atlantic hypothesis for something you haven't even uncovered yourself.

As for "angels, extraterrestrial, dragoons, mutants, magicians," since you're citing the Bible as your chief source, I can only assume that you believe in most of those things, since they're all in the Bible, in one version or another. I can only imagine how long it will be before you begin referring to references to the parting of the Red Sea or Noah's Ark as part of the Atlantis myth as part of your "scientific proof." The Bible is a complex web of myth, allegory, morality lessons and some history. It was probably never even meant to be taken literally.

Not buying it, I don't expect many else to either, either in or out of the scientific community you seem so eager to try and impress.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Of course, Plato could have been mistaken in other things, but you're basically throwing out the account to the point of not even using it at all. There's nothing even resembling the place that Plato spoke of in your selection: no circular city, not an island, no flat rectangular plain, not in the Atlantic, no concentric circles, I could go on, but what's the point? We basically keep going over the same ground here, and since you've admitted you only believe Israel to be Atlantis because of your belief in the Bible, that pretty much shows you're not using any science to support your claim, but simply religious faith.

Fine, but once again, the Bible has nothing to do with Atlantis.

As for Atlantis being smaller, that's only common sense. Of course, if something sunk in the ocean, it would have to be something smaller: islands and cities can sink, continents can't. 
Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #461 on: December 29, 2007, 12:01:00 pm »

nekozuki

Member
Member # 2762

Member Rated:
   posted 04-11-2006 10:04 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Clap, clap Desiree. Bravo!

--------------------


" Om Vasudevaya Namaha!"
With loving reverence, I bow to Lord Vishnu!

 
Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #462 on: December 29, 2007, 12:02:50 pm »

Desiree

Member
Member # 2991

Member Rated:
   posted 04-11-2006 10:08 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Very interesting the material of Greg Little.

I read the note of press about Cay Sal. The data and the objects collected by Greg and Lora Little must to confirm plus my hypothesis on the American colonization, synthetically written above, than the theory of Atlantis in the Atlantic. This subject it treatment in extensive in chapters XI and XII of my book. There I expose the process of the colonization of America by Semitic peoples (the "atlantean") and, later, the commercial relation of Canaanites and his descendants with the "New Continent".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You should compare notes with Greg, he's found a lot of evidence of a civilization in that part of the world of a pre-Phoenician civilization that built harbors in the same manner as the Phoencians, or places we currently credit to the Phoenicians.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also, reason why it says, Greg Little seems that it thinks that there is no connection between Bimini and Atlantis...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

He says that cause the carbon 14 dates don't match Plato's. That's the only reason. 
Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #463 on: December 29, 2007, 12:03:35 pm »

Desiree

Member
Member # 2991

Member Rated:
   posted 04-11-2006 10:10 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by nekozuki:
Clap, clap Desiree. Bravo! 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks, Neko!
 
Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Bianca
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 41646



« Reply #464 on: December 29, 2007, 12:07:57 pm »

Desiree

Member
Member # 2991

Member Rated:
   posted 04-11-2006 10:20 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My glance does not have to do with small or personal interests or because it goes against my theory. It is because really it is not it thus. And in this investigation, that is so complex, each small details can move far away or approach to us to the truth. In this theory many events like certain have occurred without meticulously analyzing them from many angles different. I go several years investigating the myth line through line. Each one of that lines I verified them with thousands of data of many fields: history, archaeology, genetics, botany, geology, paleo climatology, paleo astronomy, old mythology, religions, anthropology, linguistic, etc. I only accepted it until there was convincing me the solid tests. Believe me you that it is not easy to do a complete return to human history in your own head.

I assure to you that it was a slow and complex process to understand that it was what the myth really said.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A lot of people say that they do that, Jamie, but, once again, sorry, but I haven't seen evidence of any of the sciences in your work. I get the feeling you didn't even know about the Pharoah Necho II's trip around Africa until I told you about it, and your ideas about Atlantis reference Ignatius Donnelley's more than Plato's. I'm actually not all that sure you even read Plato, at least until recently. 
Report Spam   Logged

Your mind understands what you have been taught; your heart what is true.
Pages: 1 ... 25 26 27 28 29 30 [31] 32 33 34 35 36 37 ... 64   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

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