Seperating Atlantis from reality

originally posted by: toysforadults
a reply to: Hanslune

That you can make up whatever you want

You should be more specific...

That you can make up whatever you want whenever you want

originally posted by: Whatsthisthen

So the gods had "aspects"? or is that a modern idea applied?

You can guess again, bet you get it wrong. English please . . . .

Sorry no I don't consider you a credible 'judge'.

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: toms54

They have found quarries. An entirely new set of mysteries. Just looking at the pics you posted; how did they cut those chunks out? Copper chisels?

The precise manner is unknown as they didn't have writing. However one unfinished stone was found:

The people of this region were conquered by the Inca and became their stone workers so the fine technique of the Inca is thought to be the same as these folks.



Jean-Pierre Protzen was the archaeologist who studied the Andes stone working technique.

digitalassets.lib.berkeley.edu...

• Protzen, Jean-Pierre; Stella Nair, 1997, Who Taught the Inca Stonemasons Their Skills? A Comparison of Tiahuanaco and Inca Cut-Stone Masonry: The Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians. vol. 56, no. 2, pp. 146-167

• Protzen, J.-P., and S.E.. Nair, 2000, On Reconstructing Tiwanaku Architecture: The Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians. vol. 59, no. 3, pp. 358-371.

"Garcilaso de la Vega wrote in 1609 that the Incas ‘had no other tools to work the stones than some black stones ... with which they dressed the stone by pounding rather than cutting’. Jose de Acosta, a Jesuit priest travelling with the conquistadors, wrote in 1589: ‘All this was done with much manpower and much suffering in the work, for to fit one stone to the other, until they were adjusted, it was necessary to try the fit many times."

I was referring to the empty places in the quarry where the stones had been removed. Would you have me believe that after they got the stone out of there, they used "much manpower and much suffering" to leave such straight perfect looking cuts in the hole where the stone had been?

a reply to: SLAYER69

In Koine Greek Atlantis most likely was the name of The Atlantic Ocean. And in Plato, the dialogue goes along the lines of globular world, movement of Sol and meridians etc. It's all about knowledge, and knowledge in the time of Plato was far more valued and nested into riddle for only the most powerful to know about. Look at how only the highest ranked Masons know the real truths nested into The First Rite. The band before the eyes is justice and equality. The ripped shirt is brotherhood and its power, the pulled up leg is freedom or liberty as in chains released, and the noose is Fr. «ou la mort». The threat of death. When the head band is removed the initiate sees weapon(s) pointed at him/her, as in the severity involved if one reveals the truths revealed. There is much more to be said about the rite. In my degree, we are all equipped with weapons and one after the other lift their weapon of choice shouting out their one syllable word of choice. I already said too much, then again the price on me head rises, so if people just as much as tries to bend a hair on me head they will surely see and feel Damocles' sword. Let's call it my insurance. There is more to life than merely one lifetime. They will understand that. Properly. When most people dies. They don't even notice. And. Some times they come back.

originally posted by: toms54

I was referring to the empty places in the quarry where the stones had been removed. Would you have me believe that after they got the stone out of there, they used "much manpower and much suffering" to leave such straight perfect looking cuts in the hole where the stone had been?

It is thought that they used the quarries as training areas for masons. Once the stone was removed they then practiced polishing and finishing work here.

Such - training stones - were found in association with the Inca and earlier cultures too.



That one is 6.5 by 13 feet

I like to think that there could have been some kind of prototype civilization that arose during the Younger Dryas on a larger landmass that was situated where the Azores are now. That part of the world has proven to be quite unstable, and it could be deformed given a decent-sized shock and loss of the the sheer weight the North American ice sheet. The timing of 12,600 - 11,600 years ago seems reasonable, as most of the topside land in North America east of the Rocky Mountains is dated to around that time.

As far as them being "advanced," I can easily imagine that if they were in a warm, fertile area they could have started figuring out stuff like agriculture and written language (and law), and certainly astronomy / astrology, along with how to move large blocks of stone. Nothing like flying laser pyramids or any other such fantasy.

I think it would be interesting, however, I'm not going to get all that passionate about it. I have a mild interest in it, and like to speculate, but I don't really have a dog in the fight. Does it really matter if the Atlanteans actually existed? Not really. We never benefited from it in any way that I can see. Most of what they might have been able able to figure out about agriculture and astronomy we had to relearn anyway. If they were indeed trying to warn us about a potential catastrophe, then there's not really anything we can do about that, either. Nice try, ancients, but you failed.

I don't feel superior to "science" if they're forced to rework their prehistory to include an early lost civilization, because that's the job of science to begin with. Everything is conditional, and if good, solid evidence is found to prove a hypothesis about just such a civilization, then it'll be accepted. No sense getting all wound up about it, although I wish there wasn't such a stigma attached the name of Atlantis, but that's what happens when the fringe grabs on to something.

a reply to: Hanslune

I've seen that before. This is the second time you side stepped the question.

I was referring to the empty places in the quarry where the stones had been removed. Would you have me believe that after they got the stone out of there, they used "much manpower and much suffering" to leave such straight perfect looking cuts in the hole where the stone had been?

Please, not another red herring.

a reply to: Hanslune

That's okay and you can consider me any way you like.

I did not say patron goddess, it is not a matter of judgement, but one of ordinary observation and you don't need deductive reasoning to know.

a reply to: toms54
Well then, as you can see none of it is very reliable, because not even the stones, are set in stone.

Round and round we go on this spinning ball.

originally posted by: galadofwarthethird
a reply to: toms54
Well then, as you can see none of it is very reliable, because not even the stones, are set in stone.

Round and round we go on this spinning ball.

There is so much we really don't know. Anything old in Italy is automatically ascribed to the Romans or maybe Etruscans. I remember reading there are thousands of small sites in Greece that no one ever even looked at just everywhere on hilltops all over the place. I see people flooding threads with posts saying we already know everything trying to shut down conversation and speculation.

I look at it in dismay. It helps to keep the conversation realistic but we should not close our minds to new ways of seeing things.

Hmm, Ever considered the global cataclysm could be a side effect due a "global" war for over 11 thousands years ago? Off course this is purely speculation

Those ruins of stones in Egypt, Peru and some megalithic sites across the world leaves us more questions than answers, like scorch marks at some statues in Egypt near pyramids and some at the macchu Picchu. Not to mention method to build and form it. Not mention size and weight to move it.

As for scorch marks, Hancock speculate about some solar plasma that caused the scorch marks at those granite statues and megalithic construction. I have hard time to believe that since then alot of areas would have visible marks but I see just here and there. (Weapon?)

Oh I have a crazy idea, considering we hear Atlantis theories here and there across the globe. Ever considered Atlantis was the name of our planet?

originally posted by: toms54
a reply to: Hanslune

I've seen that before. This is the second time you side stepped the question.

I was referring to the empty places in the quarry where the stones had been removed. Would you have me believe that after they got the stone out of there, they used "much manpower and much suffering" to leave such straight perfect looking cuts in the hole where the stone had been?

Please, not another red herring.

This is the problem with specialisation in modern professions, Archeology has its specialist sub branches as does Engineering. It seems though that most Archeologists know next to nothing about engineering or they wouldn’t claim all ancient stone working had to be done with stone pounders or bronze tools. Some have suggested granite sand imbedded in copper could cut hard stone, which is true more or less, but you can’t cut internal right angles with that technique nor the other fine cuts we see. An engineer looks at these cuts in such hard stones and wonders at what technology was used. Because whatever it was, it isn’t what the archeologists claim.

I’ve been through all this with Harte and if anything he has me more convinced that some as yet unknown method or technology was used at certain ancient sites as evidenced by the stone work. Hell we even see over cuts on some stone, where whatever tool was used has gone right over the mark it was cutting to which would take hours with any conceivable hand tool.

a reply to: SLAYER69 so you believe it didn't exist?

a reply to: ManyMasks

I can’t speak directly for Slayer but from the OP I believe what he is getting at is on one hand we have the myth of Atlantis and on the other probable evidence of global catastrophe that could have spawned the Atlantis myth.

a reply to: surfer_soul

I've watched quite a bit of video about old stone quarries and I know what you are saying is true. They thought more seriously about stone cutting back then. If there was anything else to work with, it did not survive. Now the whole craft is a lost art. We still cut stone today but with modern tools and we don't need to use stone for everything because we have alternative methods. As you look at these different buildings, you can often see the progression from megalithic to stone block and finally to bricks. At each phase, the older techniques are lost.

a reply to: surfer_soul

I was just trying to pick slayers brain, he did say according to Plato, i dont think he believes either way, yet possible..for me there is a chance that the things Plato talked about including Socrates existed in Platos dream walking.
It's possible that Plato is talking about things that happened in parallel universes, and he could visit these places then wrote about them, it's even possible that if these things did exist in other universes then the power of human consciousness of it on thus world could make proof materialise........
Anything is possible

a reply to: toms54

Modern building methods tend to go for the most cost effective route even in audacious designs, like you say we also have the benefit of modern materials, the main reason I think the ancients used megalithic stone is because they wanted certain structures to last a very long time, as indeed they have. But why did they go to all that effort?

The most common building materials would have been wood and/or mud brick/cob and that’s what the majority of dwellings would have been made from, and why not if properly maintained these structures can last hundreds of years. We even have examples of such in England that are lived in to this day. So why did they go to all that trouble and work with such cumbersome megalithic and hard stones? If they wanted these things to last, is it possible there is a message for us hidden in them they wanted to pass on? Or did they just know of a relatively easy way to work these kind structures? That’s what I ponder on.

a reply to: ManyMasks

I tend to agree that anything could be possible but I also like to think what is the most likely? Seen as Plato got the Atlantis story from his uncle who in turn picked it up from Egypt’s priesthood, it’s not very likely It existed in Plato’s dream walking.

Plato used Atlantis in one his own story’s but more as a kind of metaphor and that is the account we have to go on today, so no wonder it’s all a bit vague and mythical.

But other cultures around the globe tell similar stories so is it all just coincidence or is there something more to it?

originally posted by: surfer_soul
a reply to: ManyMasks
[...] so no wonder it’s all a bit vague and mythical. [...]

Have you read Plato's account? It's highly detailed and specific. There's even a prologue about how sometimes celestial bodies change trajectories and cause problems on Earth. He pretty much tells you up front what caused the destruction.

a reply to: surfer_soul

My most possible version of what happened is that it is an exaggerated story of something that did happen, but that's a boring perspective.
And the most probable isn't always the one.
I like to imagine that it does still exist and it's under the sea in a globe, and it is a perfect utopia. Atlantis is truly back in the human psyche and i am always interested in the "in things", as they have our conscious thought.
Atlantis is one i have been getting a tug towards lately, by one of my fav songs as of late
m.youtube.com...