INTERNATIONAL MILOS CONFERENCE 2005 :ATLANTIS (Ulf Richter)

[Tina Walter]

Absonite

Member
Member # 1766

  posted 08-11-2005 06:08 PM                   
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
False.....
what is your belief about it respected ®iven? Would you like to discuss it? It is a most interesting topic and there are various opinions about it..
And Humans should no longer be lied to about their Origins.

[ 08-11-2005, 08:09 PM: Message edited by: Absonite ]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 2197 | Registered: Dec 2003   

[Tina Walter]

Ulf Richter

Member
Member # 1190

Member Rated:
   posted 08-12-2005 08:15 AM                   
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brig,

Certainly there was no consensus about the location and the time of Atlantis, because so many exponents of different theories were there, as you can see from the titles of the different lectures.
http://milos.conferences.gr/index.php?id=2826

The Greeks had also different ideas:
Professor Stavros Papamarinopoulos, a geologist, and his scholars (together 6 lectures, as I have earlier mentioned) seem to seek Atlantis outside Gibraltar, and also the island of Cadiz was mentioned as possible location of Hesiod´s "Erytheia" , which was connected by them with Plato´s Atlantis:

"Erytheia as "Atlantis" - a case prior to Plato"
by: Stavros Papamarinopoulos, Niki Drivaliari, Chara Coseyan. Stavros and Chara come from the University of Patras, Niki from the Aegean University in Rhodos.

Other Greeks were preferring the theory that the Minoans were the Atlanteans, and some also the theory that the whole archipelago of the "Cyclades" could have been Atlantis before the sea level rised or the bottom of the sea sank, leaving behind only the islands of today

[ 08-12-2005, 08:18 AM: Message edited by: Ulf Richter ]

--------------------
Ulf

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 782 | From: Schwabenheim, Germany | Registered: Sep 2002   

[Tina Walter]

Peter V

Member
Member # 71

Member Rated:
   posted 08-12-2005 08:20 AM                   
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Plato also says his story is fictional. He is confusing on whether or not he believed it.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is why Peter, that I like to think that there was something more to Lower Egypt than the records we have written today of 3000.bC with that of Memphis.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We don't have records telling of "3000 BC". We have mythologies, not histories, of an older time but the Egyptians didn't date it as we do. I worked in Lower Egypt for over two months, not fair from Sais (I basically worked in Bubastis) and we were unearthing materials dating to 3000-3500 BC. Let me tell you, there is no evidence, whatsoever, of any advanced culture here. Flint blades, basic pottery, and reed-wrapped burials. This was before mummifcation and long before the written language. There is no way records, at least textual, were in existance at this period. Granted, Dr. Dryer has found proto-hierglyphs in abydos dating to this period, but they are very primative. It isn't yet a developed language.

Sais is an ancient site, no doubt about that one, but I wouldn't push its occupation back to 8000 BC. I probably put it roughly at the same period as the site I worked on. I'm sorry, but here Plato falls flat against the archaeological evidence. I too wish his story was true, I just have not seen any real reasons to believe so. Wanting to isn't enough for me.

[/quote]Knowing then, that the Greeks were already around 1000 years before, gives them a lot of time to discover Crete, Malta and Lower Egypt such as Marea and the Alexandria coastline and into Sais where they found adequate living conditions.[/quote]

No, it doesn't. Just because people lived in Greece during this period, it doesn't mean their culture had developed to a technological level that would allow for such navigation, nor even a desire to leave their homeland. You're guessing, not using evidence.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
True or False, real Egyptians are BLACK.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

False. Real ancient Egyptians depict themselves the same as modern Egyptians.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meanwhile, Menes was on the move from the much older Upper Egypt and Thinis which he reached Memphis around 3000.bC.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You make it sound like a fact. FAR, FAR from the case here. The study of Menes is UBER interesting, but don't get ahead of yourself. The Osirian creation myth probably plays a role in the real history here too. Read into the history of the 1st and 2nd dynasties, especially the reigns of Aha and Peribsen. Super interesting period and you may really enjoy it.

Long story short, we don't know for sure yet who Menes was, or if he existed at all. His character may have served to symbolically link historical events.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The point I'm trying to make here Peter, was the fact that Lower Egypt was much different than Upper Egypt.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree, Upper Egypt was more advanced.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
True, as you stated, you do not know much about other world cultures which is precisely the point behind Tribes of Atlantis.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You're misquoting me. I said I don't know as much about other ancient cultures as I do Egypt, so I didn't want to speak on their behalf.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To know these other cultures and to distinguish who could or could not be Atlanteans.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

See, this is where your logic is flawed. You're assuming the Atlanteans existed to begin with.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 4445 | From: Canada | Registered: Dec 1999   

[Tina Walter]

Brig

Administrator
Member # 802

Rate Member   posted 08-12-2005 02:37 PM                   
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter: A point to clearify. Where did Plato refer to the Atlantis tale as fiction? I'm curious; I do not remember that; I should think I would; but it has been a while.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 9843 | From: Old Washington, Ohio , USA | Registered: Apr 2002   

[Tina Walter]

Peter V

Member
Member # 71

Member Rated:
   posted 08-12-2005 03:09 PM                   
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"And now, Socrates, to make an end my preface, I am ready to tell you the whole tale. I will give you not only the general heads, but the particulars, as they were told to me. The city and citizens, which you yesterday described to us in fiction, we will now transfer to the world of reality. It shall be the ancient city of Athens, and we will suppose that the citizens whom you imagined, were our veritable ancestors, of whom the priest spoke; they will perfectly harmonise, and there will be no inconsistency in saying that the citizens of your republic are these ancient Athenians. Let us divide the subject among us, and all endeavour according to our ability gracefully to execute the task which you have imposed upon us. Consider then, Socrates, if this narrative is suited to the purpose, or whether we should seek for some other instead."

http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/timaeus.html

[ 08-12-2005, 03:16 PM: Message edited by: Peter V ]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 4445 | From: Canada | Registered: Dec 1999   

[Tina Walter]

 
Riven

Member
Member # 1495

  posted 08-12-2005 03:35 PM                   
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For now I'll say this just to clarify the fiction part.

Critias when he was speaking to Socrates reflected that "THE DAY BEFORE" Socrates was telling fictional stories of Athenian cultures for the festival of the Goddess and for philosophical reasons of learning.

The day after, they "transferred their theme of Athenian citizenship into reality, no longer was the new story to arise about Athenians a fiction, but now a fact.

Soc. To be sure I will: the chief theme of my yesterday's discourse was the State-how constituted and of what citizens composed it would seem likely to be most perfect.

"and I should like to hear some one tell of our own city carrying on a struggle against her neighbours, and how she went out to war in a becoming manner, and when at war showed by the greatness of her actions and the magnanimity of her words in dealing with other cities a result worthy of her training and education. Now I, Critias and Hermocrates, am conscious that I myself should never be able to celebrate the city and her citizens in a befitting manner, and I am not surprised at my own incapacity;"

Socrates admits that he does not know of such great tales and legends of great battles gone by.


"Here is Timaeus, of Locris in Italy, a city which has admirable laws, and who is himself in wealth and rank the equal of any of his fellow-citizens; he has held the most important and honourable offices in his own state, and, as I believe, has scaled the heights of all philosophy; and here is Critias, whom every Athenian knows to be no novice in the matters of which we are speaking; and as to, Hermocrates, I am assured by many witnesses that his genius and education qualify him to take part in any speculation of the kind. And therefore yesterday when I saw that you wanted me to describe the formation of the State,"

Socrates admits the high intelligence of the 3 wise men.

Her. And we too, Socrates, as Timaeus says, will not be wanting in enthusiasm; and there is no excuse for not complying with your request. As soon as we arrived yesterday at the guest-chamber of Critias, with whom we are staying, or rather on our way thither, we talked the matter over, and he told us an ancient tradition, which I wish, Critias, that you would repeat to Socrates, so that he may help us to judge whether it will satisfy his requirements or not.

Socrates does not yet know of Atlantis.

Crit. Then listen, Socrates, to a tale which, though strange, is certainly true, having been attested by Solon, who was the wisest of the seven sages.

Critias, knowing that Socrates had told a fictional account of the state yesterday, remembered the true account of Atlantis.

Soc. Very good. And what is this ancient famous action of the Athenians, which Critias declared, on the authority of Solon, to be not a mere legend, but an actual fact?

Again, Socrates admits no knowledge of Atlantis and admits he is about to hear a factual story.

I have told you briefly, Socrates, what the aged Critias heard from Solon and related to us. And when you were speaking yesterday about your city and citizens, the tale which I have just been repeating to you came into my mind, and I remarked with astonishment how, by some mysterious coincidence, you agreed in almost every particular with the narrative of Solon; but I did not like to speak at the moment. For a long time had elapsed, and I had forgotten too much; I thought that I must first of all run over the narrative in my own mind, and then I would speak. And so I readily assented to your request yesterday, considering that in all such cases the chief difficulty is to find a tale suitable to our purpose, and that with such a tale we should be fairly well provided.

And therefore, as Hermocrates has told you, on my way home yesterday I at once communicated the tale to my companions as I remembered it; and after I left them, during the night by thinking I recovered nearly the whole it. Truly, as is often said, the lessons of our childhood make wonderful impression on our memories; for I am not sure that I could remember all the discourse of yesterday, but I should be much surprised if I forgot any of these things which I have heard very long ago. I listened at the time with childlike interest to the old man's narrative; he was very ready to teach me, and I asked him again and again to repeat his words, so that like an indelible picture they were branded into my mind.

Critias admits how he came to remember the legend.

The city and citizens, which you yesterday described to us in fiction, we will now transfer to the world of reality. It shall be the ancient city of Athens, and we will suppose that the citizens whom you imagined, were our veritable ancestors, of whom the priest spoke; they will perfectly harmonise, and there will be no inconsistency in saying that the citizens of your republic are these ancient Athenians

Critias admits that Socrates description of a perfect state YESTERDAY was FICTIONAL and IDEALISTIC.

Soc. And what other, Critias, can we find that will be better than this, which is natural and suitable to the festival of the goddess, and has the very great advantage of being a fact and not a fiction? How or where shall we find another if we abandon this?

Again, Socrates is curious to hear a FACTUAL account.

Crit. Let me proceed to explain to you, Socrates, the order in which we have arranged our entertainment. Our intention is, that Timaeus, who is the most of an astronomer amongst us, and has made the nature of the universe his special study, should speak first, beginning with the generation of the world and going down to the creation of man; next, I am to receive the men whom he has created of whom some will have profited by the excellent education which you have given them; and then, in accordance with the tale of Solon, and equally with his law, we will bring them into court and make them citizens, as if they were those very Athenians whom the sacred Egyptian record has recovered from oblivion, and thenceforward we will speak of them as Athenians and fellow-citizens.

So we see that the brilliant Astronomer Timaeus was to describe Genesis and the onset of lifeforms which Critias would then apply his recollected account of the factual legend of Atlantis and transfer the Athenians into the world of reality, although he knows they were originaly Hellenes and not Atheneans.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 4048 | From: Azores Atlantis Isles. | Registered: May 2003   
 

[Tina Walter]

Riven

Member
Member # 1495

  posted 08-12-2005 04:15 PM                   
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
True or False.

The known advent of man was from the Aethiopian Valleys in/around Nubia and the lake Victoria regions going back to about 4 million years ago and giving rise to the "Out of Africa" theories?

The cultures spread north along the Nile into upper Egypt around 700,000.bC which the Egyptian Pharaohs bit the hand that fed them around 1900.bC with subjugations of Nubia?

The primordial Egyptians (Khem > Black) came from the Nubian cultures (Kush > Black).

The Tomb 100 map shows ships sailing around the med in relation to the Tarxien Ships around 3500.bC as also depicted by the Gebel-el-Arak Knife and the Narmer Palette also shows a Ship thought to predate Menes.

The art of building temples,Ships and stone structures was pre conceived by the Tarxiens ahead of the Egyptians?

That may be fine Peter that the mixed up Archaeologists can't ascertain if Menes was Narmer, Aha, Scorpion or whoever, but they all teach us that he is the main Pharaoh which they set their Dynasty dates to around 3000.bC. Even though they also are dismissing Herodotus' account of Menes in 430.bC.

Now here's another interesting thought Peter which you said that no advanced technologies surfaced from your digs. (By the way, microlithic blades were an advancement)

In Timeaus, the Egyptian Priest said that in those times, they used Shields and Spears.

No mention of swords or anything as detailed as Critias which takes us into the Bronze Age.

The Atlantis legend spans 7500 years.
9000.bC to Deukalion's flood of 1500.bC

So we are talking not only of the advent of Atlantis, but also the evolution of Atlantis.

The Egyptians changed their calendar to Solar around 2700.bC from their lunar counts going back to the said advent of the calendar of 4142.bC.

Based on my research of Chaldean lunar cycles that the Greeks adapted and Egyptian Solar cycles,there was a difference of 345 years for every 1000 years gone by.

9 x 345 = 3105 years difference between Solar and Lunar calendars.

8000-3105=4895.bC.
9000-3105=5895.bC.

Egyptian priest says 8000 years ago from 570.bC. leaves 7430 years difference.

4142 (0 point to Egyptians) less 570 = 3572 years passed to Egyptian records of their calendar.

8000-3572=4428
9000-3572=5428


As I also believe, their are still about 16 Pharaohs to arise from Egypt since Menes that should take Egypt back also to around 5000.bC.

Also a main time when archaeologists believe that Humans reverted to organized Warrior/Army types from the evidence they gathered.

Archaeologists also believe that around 7000-6000.bC, their was a vast and sudden disappearance of cultures in Lower Egypt.

Most likely, something to do with the rise of the Eye of Ra myth.

[ 08-12-2005, 05:00 PM: Message edited by: Riven ]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 4048 | From: Azores Atlantis Isles. | Registered: May 2003   

[Tina Walter]

José María de la Rosa

Member
Member # 2614

Rate Member   posted 08-12-2005 05:13 PM                   
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Peter V...

Plato never said that the fictional history of Atlantis is, all the opposite, until in two occasions affirms that she was true (LOGON). You simply have misinterpreted a fragment that does not talk about the history of Atlantis.

Muthos: "originally, anything, delivered by word of mouth, word, speech; a tale, story, narrative; and at more delayed times, later to Homero, is a tale, legend, fiction".

One "tale" or "legend" does not imply necessarily that it is false, but in any case, in Plato the myth is like history or narration, type legend, that is, that is not real, whereas "historic truth" or "the historic narrative", is expressed like a LOGOS.

And same the Plato denominates the history of Atlantis like a ALHTHINON LOGON, that is to say, "historic truth".

The fragment of the Tim. 26c does not talk about to "historic truth" of Atlantis narrated in previous paragraphs and in the Critias, but to it tale or myth of "The Republic" and "The Laws", where Plato makes a test, that is to say, a "fictional narrative".

Trascriptions and translations:

"...tous de politas kai tên polin hên chthes hêmin hôs en muthôi diêieistha su..." (Tim. 26c).

"...And the city with its citizens which you described to us yesterday, as it were in a fable..." [W.R.M. Lamb. Cambridge, MA, Harvard, 1925.]

"...The city and citizens, which you yesterday described to us in fiction..." (Benjamîn Jowett, end of century XIX)

"...And the citizens with its city which you described to us yesterday, as it were in a myth..." (Georgeos Díaz-Montexano, 2000)

[ 08-12-2005, 05:15 PM: Message edited by: José María de la Rosa ]

--------------------
Greetings, José M. de la Rosa."had for his portion the extremity (ακρας) of the island nearer (προς) of the Pillars of Hercules (Gibraltar), in (on, upon) the part of the country now called Gadeira(Cadiz)"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 372 | Registered: Jul 2005

[Tina Walter]

Peter V

Member
Member # 71

Member Rated:
   posted 08-12-2005 05:51 PM                   
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jose,

I love how you retranslate to suit your needs. Georgeos does not know classical Greek.

Nice try.

Riven, thanks for putting thought into your post. I'll respond tomorrow, its 8pm on Friday and I'm going to go relax a bit.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 4445 | From: Canada | Registered: Dec 1999

[Tina Walter]

Ian Nottingham

Member
Member # 2232

Member Rated:
   posted 08-12-2005 07:12 PM                   
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter, that quote you cite comes from a conversation Socrates, Timaeus & Critias had the day before the discussion of Atlantis even started, so, in other words, it wasn’t even about Atlantis.

As for the quarry marks which we were talking about above, discovered by Col. Richard Howard-Vyse in 1837, well the Egyptians were still using the same red ochre paint in 1837 when Vyse supposedly “discovered them” as they were in ancient times. I don’t need to place him as a disgruntled employee, just one under pressure. At the time they were “discovered”, Vyse’s funding was running out, and he had to produce something of substance or else his dig would come to an end. Only two months before, Italian explorer Captain Caviglia, had found quarry inscriptions (hieroglyphs marked with the same red ochre paint in some of the tombs around the Great Pyramid. Vyse could have wanted to overshadow Caviglia by simply imitating these quarry inscriptions inside the Great Pyramid itself. Simple as that. It doesn’t mean that is exactly what happened, just that we should be open to that possibility.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
________________________________________
In other words, Egyptologists want to give him credit for something he never even claimed he did.
________________________________________
Why would he have? IT hasn't been disputed for 4000 years. Not one shred of evidence says someone else built it, and there is an enormous pile of it telling us he did. Move on. Find another "mystery".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The only source that says that Khufu actually built the Great Pyramid are Herodutus, and the inscriptions found by Vyse. Frankly, I don’t believe Herodutus either. I haven’t verified this yet, but I have heard that this account differs with whatever other Egyptian, Hebrew, Greek, Roman, Hermetic, Coptic and medieval Arabic scholarly sources that can be found which agree that the Great Pyramid was not constructed during the time frame of Pharaoh Khufu or Dynastic Egypt, but during "Age of the Gods" thousands of years earlier.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
________________________________________
Carbon 14 can't date ochre paint.
________________________________________
Actually, most of the time it can. It dates the organic binder, but the ochre paint from the Old Kingdom din't have an organic binder, so its not datable.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Even if it did, after two hundred years, it would have been too old, and by this time the organic binder would have worn out. Like I said, they were still using that same paint in 1837, though.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
________________________________________
It also can't date a block of stone, which means no one really knows how old the Great Pyramid is. Even the graves of the workers found there could have been workers doing simple repair work.
________________________________________
Comforting guesses for you, eh? No it can't date stone, but it can date the straw in the mortar.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Which was used in the repair work, just like it was said in the Inventory Stela.

By the way, I have read the Stela, seems pretty clear to me that Khufu simply discovered the Great Pyramid, didn’t build it. (Again, only you guys say he did  ), those small pyramids built beside the Giza pyramids are the ones he built, for himself, his wife and his daughter. And he has no problem claiming that. So those small pyramid are the ONLY ones Egyptologists should be giving him credit for.

quote:
________________________________________

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Odd thing about the pyramids is that, as they progressed, the Egyptians seemed to get worse at them, not better. Some that came after the Giza complex now lie in rubble.
________________________________________
Wrong again. They evolved in terms of function and purpose. you can't understand the pyramids without understanding the culture that constructed them, so my suggestion is that you put a little work into researching the ancient Egyptian culture and its development in the 300 years prior and following Khufu to get a better understanding.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In all, 23 major pyramids were erected following the Fourth Dynasty and in each single case, the work on them was hastily done, with little precision or care, using blocks that were little more than roughly-hewn boulders. There isn’t anything even comparable to the Great Pyramid built after the Fourth Dynasty, and a lot of them now lie in rubble.

Doesn’t sound to me that they evolved in terms of purpose and function. Maybe I’m missing something.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
________________________________________
*Manetho's king's list is accepted by Egyptologists as the way the royal line progressed, and yet his "mythology" when the gods were said to rule Egypt is discarded. Why is that?
________________________________________
No, it isn't accepted as the way the royal line progressed. It is used in conjunction with other lists and archaeological evidence to uncover how the royal lines evolved. Again, sheep.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ba yourself. Just like I said, they take some parts of his work, the parts that agree with their traditional concepts and time frame (post 3100 b.c ) and disregard the rest.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
________________________________________
*Thoth is claimed to have come from a homeland in the west, the "western ocean", I believe the Egyptians called it, and Egyptology seems to be reluctant to date anything past 3000 b.c.
________________________________________
Thats complete crap. Whats your source?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Emerald Tablet of Thoth, also considered another forgery by Egyptologists.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
________________________________________
I've also noted that Egyptologists seem eager to dismiss anything as a forgery that doesn't fit in with their conventional chronology. Of course, that may just be mere coincidence.
________________________________________
Umm, do you see what you're saying here? THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE DOING! And what do Egyptologists claim as a fogery?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let’s see here, the Inventory Stela, Emerald Tablet of Thoth, Manetho’s king’s list, did I leave anything out? Anthing that disagrees with them is conveniently assigned to the realm of mythology.

The point is, Peter, you have bought so much into what your profession has taught you that you seem to be incapable of independent thought towards any of this. I’d leave the sheep motif behind, by the way. It’s a little silly, and if people here are sheep for wanting to believe in Atlantis, I’d say that people who study Egyptology are sheep just the same for believing everything that their instructors tell them, without questioning any of it. Anyone who says they are a total expert on Egypt when most of what matters probably lies buried is, to say the least, mistaken.

I do agree with Riven, it would be nice to have someone actually out in the field who might still be interested in some of this stuff.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 240 | From: the void | Registered: Nov 2004   

[Tina Walter]

Rich

Member
Member # 2265

Member Rated:
   posted 08-12-2005 07:24 PM                   
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Long story short, we don't know for sure yet who Menes was, or if he existed at all."
--This is correct, although I'm leaning towards Mestha as Menes, personally. Also, It seems like there is very little egyptian history/mythology known after the pyramids, and before the Hyskos.

[ 08-12-2005, 07:27 PM: Message edited by: Rich ]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 2160 | From: Parts Unknown, USA | Registered: Dec 2004   

[Tina Walter]

2253
Member
Member # 2597

Rate Member   posted 08-13-2005 01:30 AM                   
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear All,

Below, I have a link with my work upon Atlantis Myth.
The contents of this work are:
The revelation that the Leaders of Atlantis were the TITAN Hyperbeings [ Platon does not mention anything about it and is wrong to be claimed arbitrary by the readers because they read the word ATLAS.But here there is a proof ].Also the same period in Greece there were the ELIN HyperBeings.The proof about this is unusual and unique.

Also from 15 page starts the revelation of the exact location of small Poseidon island and the sunken continent of Atlantis, with many indications and regarded to those said by various other Ancient Greek Writers [ Proclus, Hesiod, Plutarhus,e.t.c ].

Please start from 15 Page and after you go to the end, then re-read from page 1.

Web Link:
http://users.altecnet.gr/john_tg/Atlantis/Atlantis.zip

[1.6Mbyte ][ there are two .pdf files.One in Greek and the other in English.Do not be afraid about viruses. ]

My work is based only on two keywords "Atlantis" and "Atlas".

I will appreciate any comment of yours.

e-mail:john_tg@acn.gr

Regards

2253

P.S.Although I did not participated to the Milos conference, I sent my work to all participants of it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 80 | Registered: Jul 2005

[Tina Walter]

Erick Wright

Member
Member # 1145

Member Rated:
   posted 08-14-2005 07:48 PM                   
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jose,

I appreciate that you started a separate thread for your discussions regarding Helike & Georgeos' research. Thank you. Now if the rest of the people here would just limit themselves to discussions/questions about the conference, perhaps this thread could stay on track!

Anyway, to answer your questions:

Q. How it was decided the 24 points about Atlantis theories?

Answer: This part of the conference was actually a little disturbing. One of the presenters proposed 10 criteria to help identify Atlantis' resting place. He argued that none of the sites that have been suggested fulfills all ten criteria both in the past and in the present. As he was proposing his ten criteria he kept getting loud objections from a lot of the conference attendees, who kept shouting out additional criteria until the list climbed all the way up to 24 criteria.

2. Who proposed them?

Answer: Anthony Kontaratos - an independent researcher from Greece.

3. It was a democratic voting, that is to say, by majority of votes?

No. People shouted out criteria and Anthony wrote the criteria down that people shouted out. The next day we were handed a sheet of paper with the 24 criteria listed on it, as if we had all agreed upon them - which was far from the case. As I said, it was all very disturbing to me and quite chaotic.

4. Nobody objected nothing against no of the points?

Yes. Many people objected to a variety of the criteria, however, the list was compiled by Mr. Kontaratos and distributed the next day as if we had all agreed upon it. We had not. In fact, I got a hold of the microphone and objected to the fact that their list of criteria could not be applied to any theory suggesting that the story of Atlantis was an allegory based upon historical facts. I was dismissed offhand.

In regards to the SAIS Forum, I can e-mail you a copy of the paper I submitted for the conference, if you like. Unfortunately, I don't have the time to get involved in another forum. I barely have the time to post here anymore. I am honored, however, that Georgeos would think to create a space for me. Perhaps some day I will have the time to participate, but not right now.

_________________________________________________

Brig,

No, there was no concensus regarding location. On the other hand, I think that several presenters actually helped eliminate a couple locations with their presentations. The Ampere Seamount was one that was actually hurt by Marc-Andre Gutscher's presentation, due to the fact that he was able to scientifically demonstrate that the seamounts in that area weren't far enough above sea level in 10,000 BC to be able to support a large & mighty nation like Atlantis; nor would it have sank in a day & night, as Atlantis was said to have done. In private discussions with Marc, he told me that he didn't believe that Atlantis existed anyway. It was also shown through Floyd McCoy's presentation that the island of Santorini could be eliminated as a possibility, as well. Legends of its destruction might have served as an inspiration for Plato, but that's about all. The whole center of the island was blown out during its volcano's eruption, aside from which, the center of the island was cone-shaped, pretty much eliminating it as a possible location for Atlantis. Floyd didn't believe Atlantis existed either.

My experience was fairly different from Ulf's. What I observed was that the conference attendees seemed to pitch their tents in one of two camps; those who believed it existed and those who didn't. Disagreement regarding its location existed ony amongst those who believed that it existed.

Kind Regards,

Erick

--------------------
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a LOT of inquisitive idiots."

www. despair.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 770 | From: Columbus, Ohio U.S.A. | Registered: Sep 2002   

[Tina Walter]

Riven

Member
Member # 1495

  posted 08-14-2005 08:29 PM                   
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Erick;

Once again thanks.

You know that I would strongly disagree with the Amperes statement,undoubtebly.

No one could actualy demonstrate any opinion on or in the Ocean 10 millenia ago. They can have a rough idea of what was going on, but not exactly what went on.

The Sea mount tips can be reached by a mere 40-60 metres.

Geologists agree 150 meter Ocean drop 12,000 years ago in 10k.bC

How could such a large conference not see that there is still 100 metres of land to appear.

On their average thinking scale as we know.

There would have to be an enormous amount of research, rather than sonar fishing on the surface as Gutscher did, or McCoy.

You would also have to figure out land sinkage as well, or land movement, not just the Ocean levels which,to be sure, they cannot. The Ocean floor could have sank another 500 metres for the matter.

As a matter of fact,my research also shows land shifts such as northwest vergence folds which are evident on Ormond.

To further that statement we have the most volatile region on Earth in terms of Earthquakes,the mid-Atlantic Ridge and Transform fractures also.

Is it a wonder why the Great Flood came from the Atlantic?

It is not a statement we should take to heart.

All speculative.

People are either to Lazy to know the Truth or to Hyper to follow lead.

[ 08-14-2005, 08:39 PM: Message edited by: Riven ]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 4048 | From: Azores Atlantis Isles. | Registered: May 2003   

[Tina Walter]

Riven

Member
Member # 1495

  posted 08-14-2005 11:12 PM                   
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just bumping your thread up Ulf and Erick;

Seems we are having a problem with MARIA as JOSE.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 4048 | From: Azores Atlantis Isles. | Registered: May 2003