Seperating Atlantis from reality

Or maybe these people are right, maybe this was Atlantis the Richat Structure, or whatever you want to call it now a days. But if it were then that means that we don't know as much as we think about the world some 12,000 years ago. the whole thing just going by the outer rings, is larger then cities like Seattle and London almost twice or 3 times as large.

And if it was like Plato described and an actual city, oh ya, it would have been much more impressive then today's cities. But now its definitely not coastal, and not really a low land even though it seems to be in a sort of bowl like landmass, and considering that the oceans were supposed to be a bit lower then because of the ice age. Either those were some massive massive waves, if the ocean was at the current location.

Or if in its day it was located closer to the ocean, And if it was Atlantis. Well, something more must have been going on back then then an ice age and lowered oceans considering the oceans must have been higher. Which just means we don't know nowhere near as much as we like to think.

Or? Well its anybody guess now. But 12,000 years aint much, pretty sure then in the next 12,000 its just as likely that even today more civilizations will rise and fall. And if you get into the millions of years. Forget about it may as well look into the chicken bones or sheep guts to see the future like our ancestors once did.

And off course there was a part two, and part 3 which I missed. But I think there are more then a few threads on the Richat Structure on this site from years ago, including the original people who put the theory about the Richat Structure, or the eye of the desert, that the guy links in his video.

But ya it would change some things in the history books and archeological classifications, if it was Atlantis at that time period. From the Eye in the sky, to the ice in the north, what the hell does anybody know anyways.

I am confused. If Athens was knocking about at the same time as Atlantis (9000BCish?) how on earth did they manage to somehow reform so many of thousands of years later with the same name. I mean didn't the Myceneans dominate most of mainland Greece for a number of years? Or was this added to the story to make it relevant to the Athenians?

Cracking post Slayer, I tend to agree the mythos surrounding sunken cities in some form of natural cataclysm appears to be a norm across cultures. I imagine their stories would have had an element of mystery and wonder just as it does today. Seems we are just fueled by science fiction and fantasy though. There is a site in south-east Asia on the coast which is literally half sunken, huge stone walls etc which is a fantastic representation of rising tides.

Saw somebody mention Catahoyluk in this post as well... That is a true mystery.

Atlantis could have been anywhere outside the Pillars of Heracles. It could have been in the Bahamas, or in South America, or ............ just about anywhere.

The main thing is it looks like Atlantis possessed sailing technology similar to 1700's England, and the people telling us about them did not. So the sum total of their knowledge about Atlantis' location would be "somewhere out in the Atlantic where our ships can't go."


Personally, I'm leaning toward Antarctica, except with the Earth's axis of rotation set about 30 off where it is now (so the side nearest South America can be less snowy.)

Unfortunately, DNA analysis does not show that there was any significant population that could have spread out from a point in the Atlantic to other areas in Europe, Africa or the Americas. They had a reputation for being good sailors (probably because they figured out longitude some way), and so you would see little DNA traces of them all around the Atlantic.

The closest thing we get are the Basques. They apparently came from a neolithic band of people in southern Europe about 7,000 years ago. Did they escape the sinking of Atlantis?

So little evidence. Maybe more will turn up as we get better at deep water archeology.

Awesome that you brought up the Basques. It's a solid point. At a minimum anyone sailing throughout the world, the sailors would have sought company whenever they made landfall. And if their trade was prosperous, they would have found it sometimes, at least.



Herodotus wrote about a group of people called "Atlantes" who lived in the Atlas Mountains of Northern Africa. Which doesn't match up well with them living on a faraway continent across the Atlantic, unfortunately. But it has other similarities. For example: Plato's account mentions Atlas being the son of Poseidon and one of Atlantis' early kings.

dancingfromgenesis.wordpress.com... cily-atlas-mountains-center-atlantean-empire/


Furthermore, the Atlas mountains appear to have been called that for a really long time. The word in Arabic has "Atlas" in it. So it's not like Europeans named them.

en.wikipedia.org...


So maybe the historic Atlantis was set in the Atlantic side of the mountain range? So they would sail from there and get to Greece via the Pillars of Heracles? During the Green Sahara era, there was a really big river emptying out on the East side of North Africa, so maybe people honestly didn't know Atlantis was on the same continent?

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous
Awesome that you brought up the Basques. It's a solid point. At a minimum anyone sailing throughout the world, the sailors would have sought company whenever they made landfall. And if their trade was prosperous, they would have found it sometimes, at least.



Herodotus wrote about a group of people called "Atlantes" who lived in the Atlas Mountains of Northern Africa. Which doesn't match up well with them living on a faraway continent across the Atlantic, unfortunately. But it has other similarities. For example: Plato's account mentions Atlas being the son of Poseidon and one of Atlantis' early kings.

dancingfromgenesis.wordpress.com... cily-atlas-mountains-center-atlantean-empire/


Furthermore, the Atlas mountains appear to have been called that for a really long time. The word in Arabic has "Atlas" in it. So it's not like Europeans named them.

en.wikipedia.org...


So maybe the historic Atlantis was set in the Atlantic side of the mountain range? So they would sail from there and get to Greece via the Pillars of Heracles? During the Green Sahara era, there was a really big river emptying out on the East side of North Africa, so maybe people honestly didn't know Atlantis was on the same continent?

The Atlas Mountains are named for the Titan Atlas. The Atlas in Plato's story was a human king (demigod, actually.)

Not the same Atlas.

Even Poseidon himself wasn't a Titan. He was an Olympian, one of the offspring of the Titan Cronus.

Harte

That makes sense. They must be two different Atlas'.

After googling this, I discovered that the Pillars of Heracles are part of the myth of the Titan Atlas, because in some versions of the story of Hercules getting Atlas' golden apples, he builds those pillars to hold up the sky and frees Atlas.

So if Plato is mentioning the Pillars of Heracles in the same story as Atlantis, I'm thinking he probably didn't intend for the Titan Atlas to be the same person as the King of Atlantis Atlas.


I'm glad you cleared that up. (Besides it would have been a boring place for Atlantis to be at.)

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous
That makes sense. They must be two different Atlas'.

After googling this, I discovered that the Pillars of Heracles are part of the myth of the Titan Atlas, because in some versions of the story of Hercules getting Atlas' golden apples, he builds those pillars to hold up the sky and frees Atlas.

So if Plato is mentioning the Pillars of Heracles in the same story as Atlantis, I'm thinking he probably didn't intend for the Titan Atlas to be the same person as the King of Atlantis Atlas.


I'm glad you cleared that up. (Besides it would have been a boring place for Atlantis to be at.)

Plato named his fictional Atlantis king "Atlas" so that he could say that Atlantis (and therefore the Atlantis Sea -the Atlantic) was named after him. In fact, it is named after the Titan.

Harte

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous
Atlantis could have been anywhere outside the Pillars of Heracles. It could have been in the Bahamas, or in South America, or ............ just about anywhere.
Personally, I'm leaning toward Antarctica, except with the Earth's axis of rotation set about 30 off where it is now (so the side nearest South America can be less snowy.)

Personally, I'm leaning toward Greenland... which itself was some 30degrees S.E. of Its' present location -- which happened some 12,500 years ago when the Earth's Crust Displacement took place (ancient Greenland where the Caribbean is today)

(the whole outer shell of crustal plates shifted after the Inner Mantle heated up which led to a sudden but temporary separation between the Earth Crust & the inner Core & Deep Mantle layer -> eventually causing the great Ice Age Melt as a result of open magma & thermal vents for a decade of surface heat & landmass icemelt in certain places & sudden freezing zones in the new lands relocated to polar circles)

Mini-Nova Sun cycle & Pole Shift & Crustal Displacement = 3 of the 4 Horsemen-of-apocalypse in the near future

originally posted by: St Udio

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous
Atlantis could have been anywhere outside the Pillars of Heracles. It could have been in the Bahamas, or in South America, or ............ just about anywhere.
Personally, I'm leaning toward Antarctica, except with the Earth's axis of rotation set about 30 off where it is now (so the side nearest South America can be less snowy.)

 

Personally, I'm leaning toward Greenland... which itself was some 30degrees S.E. of Its' present location -- which happened some 12,500 years ago when the Earth's Crust Displacement took place (ancient Greenland where the Caribbean is today)

(the whole outer shell of crustal plates shifted after the Inner Mantle heated up which led to a sudden but temporary separation between the Earth Crust & the inner Core & Deep Mantle layer -> eventually causing the great Ice Age Melt as a result of open magma & thermal vents for a decade of surface heat & landmass icemelt in certain places & sudden freezing zones in the new lands relocated to polar circles)

Mini-Nova Sun cycle & Pole Shift & Crustal Displacement = 3 of the 4 Horsemen-of-apocalypse in the near future

Good thing we were on thick ice.
There's yer evidence for God.

Harte

a reply to: SLAYER69

Great Ideas there , Welcome Back SLAYER69 , Missed You Man .........)

a reply to: SLAYER69

I am not one who believes "Atlantis" existed as described by Plato, however...

Inform yourself. Learn your history. Read the Vedics.

originally posted by: yogibear999
a reply to: SLAYER69

I am not one who believes "Atlantis" existed as described by Plato, however...

Inform yourself. Learn your history. Read the Vedics.

The Vedics?
LOL

Harte

originally posted by: St Udio
[

Mini-Nova Sun cycle

This one is confirmed by science.

www.express.co.uk...

There was a solar flare event in 1859 called the "Carrington Event" that caused telegraph lines to heat up, and in a few cases even catch fire. That's in recorded history. Who knows how many similar events happened prior to the age of electricity and didn't get observed because there were no telegraph lines?

& Pole Shift

Also confirmed by science.

en.wikipedia.org...

& Crustal Displacement = 3 of the 4 Horsemen-of-apocalypse in the near future

This is the only one left in dispute.

But as I've pointed out elsewhere, if you look at a top down map of the placement of glaciers during the last ice age, a common sense interpretation would be the layout of the ice is kind of lopsided.





Unless the North Pole were located somewhere other than where it is today.

Also, I'm not sure that "crustal displacement" necessarily has to be the mechanism. It is a plausible mechanism, but the ability of planets to change their axis of rotation is well known. What mostly holds the Earth's axis in place is the Moon, and the force of the Earth's slightly bulging toward the location the Moon is at.

If an event such as the Haiawatha meteor impact, were to create a large displacement of water far away from the tidal displacement, and on a scale comparable to that of the tidal swell, giving the planet two asymmetric features instead of one, it would probably be pulled toward the weighted average of both of them for a while, until it had time to redistribute its mass evenly again.

www.nationalgeographic.com...

If the planet is already pretty well distributed, and you melt trillions of kg of ice, and have the resulting water run off into the ocean, then a whole lot of mass that was previously located a mile or more upwards toward the sky at one location, has now moved to sea level and distributed itself over another. All while the planet is still spinning.

a reply to: SLAYER69

Hi Slayer, it's been a while...good to see you back.

Atlantis is elusive. Did it really exist as Plato described? Let's think back of how Plato described it.

Outside the pillars of Hercules, what and where is this?

On the side toward the sea, and in the center of the whole island, there was a plain which is said to have been the fairest of all plains, and very fertile. Near the plain again, and also in the center of the island, at a distance of about fifty stadia (one stadia=606 feet), there was a mountain, not very high on any side. In this mountain there dwelt one of the earth-born primeval men of that country, whose name was Evenor, and he had a wife named Leucippe, and they had an only daughter, who was named Cleito. The maiden was growing up to womanhood when her father and mother died. Poseidon fell in love with her, and had intercourse with her; and, breaking the ground, enclosed the hill in which she dwelt all round, making alternate zones of sea and land, larger and smaller, encircling one another; there were two of land and three of water, which he turned as with a lathe out of the center of the island, equidistant every way, so that no man could get to the island, for ships and voyages were not yet heard of. He himself, as he was a god, found no difficulty in making special arrangements for the center island, bringing two streams of water under the earth, which he caused to ascend as springs, one of warm water and the other of cold, and making every variety of food to spring up abundantly in the earth. He also begat and brought up five pairs of male children, dividing the island of Atlantis into ten portions: he gave to the first-born of the eldest pair his mother's dwelling and the surrounding allotment, which was the largest and best, and made him king over the rest; the others he made princes, and gave them rule over many men and a large territory. And he named them all: the eldest, who was king, he named Atlas, and from him the whole island and the ocean received the name of Atlantic. To his twin-brother, who was born after him, and obtained as his lot the extremity of the island toward the Pillars of Heracles, as far as the country which is still called the region of Gades in that part of the world, he gave the name which in the Hellenic language is Eumelus, in the language of the country which is named after him, Gadeirus. Of the second pair of twins, he called one Ampheres and the other Evaemon. To the third pair of twins he gave the name Mneseus to the elder, and Autochthon to the one who followed him. Of the fourth pair of twins he called the elder Elasippus and the younger Mestor, And of the fifth pair be gave to the elder the name of Azaes, and to the younger Diaprepes. All these and their descendants were the inhabitants and rulers of divers islands in the open sea; and also, as has been already said, they held sway in the other direction over the country within the Pillars as far as Egypt and Tyrrhenia (Italy).

ascendingpassage.com...

Almost biblical isn't it; great flood?

Point being, great flood within that area...within the pillars of Hercules.

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous

originally posted by: St Udio
[

Mini-Nova Sun cycle

This one is confirmed by science.

www.express.co.uk...

There was a solar flare event in 1859 called the "Carrington Event" that caused telegraph lines to heat up, and in a few cases even catch fire. That's in recorded history. Who knows how many similar events happened prior to the age of electricity and didn't get observed because there were no telegraph lines?

It wouldn't matter if there was one every day, if there was no grid for it to affect.
Particles streaming toward the Earth from a flare are invisible, except for the increase in the Aurora Borealis that they cause.

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous

& Pole Shift

Also confirmed by science.

en.wikipedia.org...

Also doesn't matter, since you've linked the wrong kind of pole shift.

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous

& Crustal Displacement = 3 of the 4 Horsemen-of-apocalypse in the near future

This is the only one left in dispute.

But as I've pointed out elsewhere, if you look at a top down map of the placement of glaciers during the last ice age, a common sense interpretation would be the layout of the ice is kind of lopsided.

Unless the North Pole were located somewhere other than where it is today.

Sure, if the Earth was smooth as a billiard ball.

originally posted by: bloodymarvelousAlso, I'm not sure that "crustal displacement" necessarily has to be the mechanism. It is a plausible mechanism, but the ability of planets to change their axis of rotation is well known. What mostly holds the Earth's axis in place is the Moon, and the force of the Earth's slightly bulging toward the location the Moon is at.

Crustal displacement is in no way a "plausible mechanism."
Also, you have confused the axis of rotation with the orientation of the axis of rotation.

originally posted by: bloodymarvelousIf an event such as the Haiawatha meteor impact, were to create a large displacement of water far away from the tidal displacement, and on a scale comparable to that of the tidal swell, giving the planet two asymmetric features instead of one, it would probably be pulled toward the weighted average of both of them for a while, until it had time to redistribute its mass evenly again.

www.nationalgeographic.com...

If the planet is already pretty well distributed, and you melt trillions of kg of ice, and have the resulting water run off into the ocean, then a whole lot of mass that was previously located a mile or more upwards toward the sky at one location, has now moved to sea level and distributed itself over another. All while the planet is still spinning.

Which would result in a tiny wobble lasting maybe an hour, and a slight change in rotational speed that would take maybe a few milliseconds off the time required to complete one revolution.

Harte

a reply to: Harte

Crustal displacement is in no way a "plausible mechanism."
Also, you have confused the axis of rotation with the orientation of the axis of rotation.

Is that just your opinion, I am not aware that this theory has ever been falsified. That was Hapgoods theory. Einsten gave it credence too. It is not accepted by modern science as it blows the cover on an event that happened on our planet in the past which wiped out megalithic structure worldwide and almost erased our memory of the past.

An event that is recorded to some extent in the bible, the Quran and the Vedics (extensively). That is the reason crustal displacement is an unaccepted theory.