Ancient Global Civilization

originally posted by: spiritualarchitect

Anyone who is certain that Atlantis never existed you should not be here wasting their time reading and talking about it.

I see no reason to think that Atlantis did not exist.

And what about Middle Earth? Hogwarts? Narnia? Do you likewise see no reason to think that they too did not exist?


In any case, if Atlantis existed it was just a bronze age culture readily defeated by another bronze age culture (Athens). No more a global, technological advanced civilisation than a Ford Zephyr is a intergalactic spaceship. Unless of course you dismiss everything that Plato said about it in his stories. In whoch case you're making it up as you go along ....

don't believe a single word science FICTION says anymore any more than I believe any thing that politicians or cult members say. Scientific fundamentalism IS in fact a cult masquerading as the truth. Replace scientific "discoveries" with religious testimonies in "holy" books. TPTB found a way to hook the non-religious...with science. Same trick, smarter dog. A MASSIVE form of mind control no different from the "news"...

a reply to: Murgatroid

The above could be true, but for all it's faults, science is self correcting, just need that extraordinary proof to back up that extraordinary claim, religion??..once the priest, imam, or rabbi says "God" sayz so ??? Then so let it be written so let it be done, there is no argument with God, for God and the priest rarely disagree, if so go find your own clique and let's violently disagree for the next thousand years.. Our father can whoop your father who art in heaven.

originally posted by: reject

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: fromtheskydown
a reply to: Harte

I think you don't really now what you're talking about.

Well, that's a really arrogant way to dismiss someone's opinion. I never said I was "expert" on the subject but I can hold a belief based on my personal opinion from what I have read and the path I choose to believe, contrary to being told by "experts" that I am totally ignorant of the facts. I don't hold you in any less respect for your beliefs and I do realise you probably have studied possibly even made a career out of it.

I don't concern myself of what people that post this crap think of me. Finding out I had been blatantly lied to multiple times each by these fringe "authors" has led to my attitude toward the entire field.
Not a career. I was a believer like you until the internet first put the resources in my hand to find out the facts of most of these matters.

originally posted by: fromtheskydown

The age of Dwarka has yet to be firmly established, but we do know it sank in the Medieval Period - you know - the Middle Ages. This is because of some of the masonry found there.

I looked and found this...

The highest global sea level of the past 110,000 years likely occurred during the Medieval Warm Period of 1100 - 1200 A.D., when warm conditions similar to today's climate caused the sea level to rise 5 - 8" (12 - 21 cm) higher than present.

Source...
www.kwaad.net...

But, you see, that city is still underwater today, even though sea level has retreated. India is very active geologically speaking due to the fact it is currently crashing into Asia. The site sank, in other words. It wasn't sea level rise.
I'm not gonna address Dwarka further than that in this post. You can use search terms like "Dwarka Medieval Period" or "Dwarka Archaeology" to find out all you want about it. Or, you can search right here at ATS, but I'd recommend using a site-specific google search. Just add the words site:abovetopsecret.com at the end of your search terms and you'll get all ATS has to say about it (last I checked, the search function here wasn't that great.)
Check a map too. Dwarka has nothing to do with Hancock's tall tale about an ancient civilization at the bottom of the Gulf of Khambhat.

originally posted by: fromtheskydown

You ignore the written accounts of the Spaniards who saw the Inca building techniques, saw the Inca using those techniques, and actually hired the Inca to build for them.

I tried to find examples of the Spanish written accounts but don't have the resources, so maybe a source or a link may be handy in this case.

I admit they're a little obscure. But I found these two volumes for you from a chronicler I remember reading - could be you can find it in there. Link1 Link2
If not, wiki has a list of four or five of theses chroniclers of that time. You could look up their works. If all else fails, Jason Colavito probably has the source and probably even provides translations to the pertinent parts. You'll have to look for yourself though.
Harte

you won't discuss sunken City of Dwarka because YOU KNOW YOU'RE WRONG when you put your foot in your mouth when you denied it's in the bay of cambay and you claimed it only SANK during the middle ages.

I see. So your unable to look for yourself. Are you disabled?
And the statement that it sank in the Medieval Period comes from the archaeology of the site. I told you why - Medieval architectural techniques, quite well known from other cities IN India from that period, have been found AT THE SITE by archaeologists working underwater.
I see also that you won't be bothered to check a map. Do you need assistance?
Here ya go
Assuming you can see over your leg, or you can get your foot out of your throat, you will find Dwarka at the mouth of the Gulf of Kutch. You're only off by a little over 400 kilometers. At least you have the correct continent.

originally posted by: rejectI don't care how much you suffer from Wobegon effect, at least get your basic geography and history right because it's ANNOYING!

We can see, at least, that you don't care to check even a simple map that takes milliseconds to load. And what's annoying is people that show their preference for ignorance by shooting off their mouths before even checking what they're criticizing.

originally posted by: reject
legendary SUNKEN City of dwarka
Or else provide links to your STUPID alternate reality.

I see that your linked fringe website goes off on a tangent about Hancock's disproven claims concerning the Gulf of Khambhat. I see that you have never checked on the archaeology that your linked site mentioned. If you had, you would have found out that this work is being done off the coast at the actual city of Dwarka, in India, at the mouth of the Gulf of Kutch, like I told you above. It is there that the Medieval techniques were found.
This is your site leading you by the nose down the primrose path. This is also you trying to stay safe and snuggly in your manufactured dream world.

originally posted by: rejectWhy do you insist on Plato's source on Atlantis not being ancient Egyptian priests?

Because Plato wrote that an Egyptian priest was Solon's source, not his, and that the story was supposedly recited before Critias' grandfather Dropides during the Festival of Apaturia. That festival featured the telling of "educational" stories to very young boys, ages one and up. If you would bother to read what Plato actually wrote concerning the education of such youths, you'd know why I believe what I believe.
Of course, given that there is not a single bit of any evidence for any such civilization as Atlantis in Plato's time frame, I don't need to even go that far with what Plato said. But I have gone that far and much further in my search for evidence

originally posted by: rejectThe mythology is atlas (king of Atlantis) was chief king among 10 siblings (either twins or sets of twins) and each was king over their own country AND EGYPT WAS ONE OF THEM.

You, on the other hand, refuse to even read the story. I say this based on the ignorance you display in this quote.

originally posted by: rejectI'm just doing these things from memory and I do not claim to be superior or an ultimate infallible authority.

I've made no such claim of infallibility. But you've not even tried to show any fallibility on my part - just shouting ignorant thoughts at me because I have bothered to try and find out something about the ancient past and you haven't.

Harte

originally posted by: fotsyfots

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: fromtheskydown

Those who dare to question mainstream science and history are labelled as 'fringe' and told they have all their facts and figures totally wrong or are deliberately distorting the facts for their own confirmation bias. This may be true in some cases, however, not every 'fringe' researcher can be tarred with the same brush.

I think you don't really now what you're talking about.
There exists no great wall of "Mainstream Science." Science is constantly questioning itself. But those questions come from people that are aware of the known facts - the data - or the artifacts, as the case may be.

In Paleoarchaeology, the scientists go with the facts they actually have in hand, or artifacts found elsewhere, or known deposits of rock, etc. They're not going to abide a "questioning" from someone that is utterly unfamiliar with the field, just like an auto mechanic isn't going to abide a "questioning" from someone that doesn't know how timing, fuel injection, etc. work. That's not some kind of barrier, it's a person that knows something having their time wasted by someone that doesn't.

Also, I would maintain that every (professional) fringe researcher that opines on Humanity's past knows better than what they're saying, leaves out known factual evidence in order to promote their "theory," and flat out lies to whoever is listening to them, whenever required.

I put it that way because "fringe researcher" is what is the broad brush here. You use a term like "researcher" - that covers a lot of ground, including my own self.

originally posted by: fromtheskydownBelieve what you want to believe and question the things you doubt to be the truth. Nobody should be criticised for that.

Ordinary "researchers" aren't usually criticized for that. Usually, posters here (in this genre) are criticized for dismissing other people's arguments without evidence - in order to maintain their Ancient Civilization house of cards.

I won't watch the video because of what the OP said about it:

The ruins in America, for example,were probably already ruins when the Inca came upon them and co-opted them for their own use.

Same thing with the megalithic sites in Turkey.

You ignore the written accounts of the Spaniards who saw the Inca building techniques, saw the Inca using those techniques, and actually hired the Inca to build for them.

Also, it looks like you don't know much about Turkish megaliths. That's not so bad, no one really does. But claiming they're old ruins taken over by someone else is incredibly ignorant.

Then there's Dwarka underwater in the bay of cambay in India that's at least 9K years old; of course there are the legends of shambhala also.

Dwarka is not in the Bay of Cambay (Khambat.) Next bay north of there. Just offshore of a city named... Dwarka.

The age of Dwarka has yet to be firmly established, but we do know it sank in the Medieval Period - you know - the Middle Ages. This is because of some of the masonry found there.

Anyway, which is older? Egyptian or Hindu civilization?

Egyptian. Of course, that might depend on your definition of "civilization."

I think this all goes back to Atlantis.

There exists no evidence that Atlantis ever existed, so there is no reason whatsoever to think it did.

Plato cited Egyptian high priests as his source on Atlantis.

Er...
No he didn't. Have you not read Plato? That would be typical if you haven't.

Supposedly, ancient Egypt claims lineage from it.

No they don't. Not in any way at all. Maybe you should read what the Egyptians actually believed.

Harte

I suggest you sit your opinionated self down & watch a few of randall carlson videos son. He's one of them academics that you are not & he clearly says exactly as the poster you poo pood said was going on is going on & only very slowly & recently starting to change.
Oh dear all that cut & pasting you done as well ? Too bad, so sad !!!!

At least you got that bolded part right. I don't owe any of these posters any references or quotes - the whole thing is based on somebody's ramblings - no references at all - Youtube videos. LOL

Harte

originally posted by: fotsyfots
I suggest you sit your opinionated self down & watch a few of randall carlson videos son. He's one of them academics that you are not & he clearly says exactly as the poster you poo pood said was going on is going on & only very slowly & recently starting to change.

You misrepresent Randall Carlson when you refer to him as an academic. He is (was) a science teacher.
Guess what? I teach Mathematics and Physics at the same level he did - but I'm not doing it with an education degree - mine's mechanical engineering with a math minor. Am I an "academic" as well, like Randall?

Harte

originally posted by: reject
you won't discuss sunken City of Dwarka because YOU KNOW YOU'RE WRONG when you put your foot in your mouth when you denied it's in the bay of cambay and you claimed it only SANK during the middle ages.

I don't care how much you suffer from Wobegon effect, at least get your basic geography and history right because it's ANNOYING!

legendary SUNKEN City of dwarka

Or else provide links to your STUPID alternate reality.

I wasn't going to do this, but since the ignorance is piling up in this thread, allow me.
The following is quoted directly from the site you linked:

These findings suggest that Dwarka was one of the most busy port centers during the past on the west coast of India. The comparative study of surrounding sites indicates that the date of the structures of Dwarka may be between Historical period and late medieval period.

The suggestion is obvious - read what your own links say before you expose yourself as an utter fool again.

Harte

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

originally posted by: spiritualarchitect

Anyone who is certain that Atlantis never existed you should not be here wasting their time reading and talking about it.

I see no reason to think that Atlantis did not exist.

And what about Middle Earth? Hogwarts? Narnia? Do you likewise see no reason to think that they too did not exist?


In any case, if Atlantis existed it was just a bronze age culture readily defeated by another bronze age culture (Athens). No more a global, technological advanced civilisation than a Ford Zephyr is a intergalactic spaceship. Unless of course you dismiss everything that Plato said about it in his stories. In whoch case you're making it up as you go along ....

Two Atlantis' exist the one made up by Plato and called CPA (Classical Platoan Atlantis) which is what you describe above and NAA (New Age Atlantis) which has all kinds of marvy high technology of which Plato wrote nothing about.

Its all newly made up stuff.

Harte you are in fine mettle today!

Hey, I was officially an academic once upon a time and with that magical power bestow you with 'first class trusted all powerful credibility'....not that you hadn't already obtained it.

Oh one note for the one poster above. The Library of Alexandria existed for centuries if it had had books about Atlantis someone - and many quotes of lost books exist - would have probably mentioned then. Additionally there were many other libraries some 'public' some private - no books on Atlantis and the Arabs who translated much Greek material into Arabic don't mention it either.

Private library example of:

en.wikipedia.org...

This library has 1,800 scrolls in it - not yet readable but soon.

Public: Library of Pergamum, The Libraries of Trajan’s Forum, The Library of Celsus, etc.

en.wikipedia.org...

penelope.uchicago.edu...

en.wikipedia.org...

Most Greek & Roman cities had smaller libraries also.

originally posted by: Hanslune

... NAA (New Age Atlantis) which has all kinds of marvy high technology of which Plato wrote nothing about.

...

But surely Plato's silence on this question is evidence of a far-reaching conspiracy to prevent the truth about high-tech Atlantean infrastructure reaching us ...

(Take, for instance, hoovers. I'm very anxious to know whether there were hoovers in NAA, and, if so, how they worked. Oh, and irons ... and breadmakers. Etc., etc. ... Strange that Plato remained so tight-lipped on these questions ... )

originally posted by: Hanslune
Harte you are in fine mettle today!

Did you read the thread?

If you shoot at the king...

Harte

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: Hanslune
Harte you are in fine mettle today!

Did you read the thread?

If you shoot at the king...

Harte

Yes old mighty and testy one! I have read and bowed to your righteous anger. Cursed are the non-believers and all their present, future and past ilk and kin.

originally posted by: Hooke

originally posted by: Hanslune

... NAA (New Age Atlantis) which has all kinds of marvy high technology of which Plato wrote nothing about.

...

But surely Plato's silence on this question is evidence of a far-reaching conspiracy to prevent the truth about high-tech Atlantean infrastructure reaching us ...

(Take, for instance, hoovers. I'm very anxious to know whether there were hoovers in NAA, and, if so, how they worked. Oh, and irons ... and breadmakers. Etc., etc. ... Strange that Plato remained so tight-lipped on these questions ... )

I have asked Rupert (see my avatar at the Unexplained Mystery forum to see who Rupert is) and they used automated reverse engineered servant squids for that.

They were called 'Meropis mops' after the parody of Plato's idea written by Theopompus of Chios.

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: Harte

Ok you were not wrong.

There is something seriously effing wrong WITH you.

I said Dwarka in Bay of cambay (which you said is khambhat.)

You are so full of yourself you would not consider there may be a much older archaeological site being called Dwarka 120 feet underwater in the gulf of khambhat, EAST CENTRAL GUJARAT.

You, in your arrogance, keep insisting on the city of Dwarka, SOUTHWESTERN GUJARAT.

People are calling the site Dwarka (maybe a competing claim/narrative.)

It's like someone saying, "Hillary was at rally in Bristol, Arkansas.". Then someone yells, "No she wasn't. There was no rally. Bristol is in Tennessee. Retard!"

Why didn't YOU Google it?

It would've turned out lots of hits.

In your delusions of grandeur, you'll probably dismiss them offhand as fringe; not worthy of your time, right?

is Wikipedia fringe for you?

How about "India Today?"

People are calling it Dwarka and for ease of use and because I'm not a stark raving lunatic, that's just fine by me.

a reply to: Harte
ooh ah & I got a cert iii in horticulture & a forklift licence but I wont go about with closed mind attitudes insisting I know the history of the earth. That's where we differ but carry on oh mighty horn blower. toot toot .

a reply to: reject
Awesome son, love ya work !

a reply to: fotsyfots

But you don't mind another high school teacher insisting he knows the history of the Earth
Yeah. I see.

Harte

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: Spider879
a reply to: reject
Any major civilization with far ranging contacts that worth it's salt, borrows and gave techniques to other civilizations, yes local development of similar ideas and design do not exclude borrowing techniques from others, and it doesn't have to do with some singular pre historic defusion from Atlantis, look at it this way , at one time all our ancestors lived in Adobe type buildings with Thatched rooves , does that mean that such structures came from a single source??? .

Yep and to expand on that thought:

Spears, knives, shields and many other common tools or items all resemble one another?

Spears and knives go back to the very dawn of time. There may not ever have been a homo sapiens group that didn't have those tools.

That helmets were the first defensive armor developed by almost all cultures and civilizations?

That's because a helmet and shield is a necessary combination.

If you use a shield to guard your head from an attack, then you can't see your opponent. Guard any other part of your body with it, and you're fine. Just not your head.

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: spiritualarchitectI see no reason to think that Atlantis did not exist.

This tells us you don't bother looking because you enjoy living in fantasyland.

originally posted by: spiritualarchitectTherefore at one time there were lots of Atlantis stories. But none of them survived down to our time. I blame that not on Plato making it up, but on the burning of the Alexandra Library, which probably had several books on Atlantis.

One of the most ignorant statements I've ever read. I suppose all the stories of the Trojan War were also burned in that Library?

Homer's recounting of the Trojan war was one of the first things ever written into Greek. Some historians believe the writing system may have been invented just for that purpose. (Although I think they are eggagerating when they say this.)

There would have been many many copies of that book lying around.


On the other hand Manetho's manuscript of distant Egyptian history is indeed long gone. Only a few scraps of it surviving in commentaries.

He appears to have been able to cobble together some written records (reliable or not) about the era of Atlantis. None of which speak of Atlantis, of course.

But my point is, today neither his manuscript, nor the records he consulted to make it, have survived.

And regarding Plato's "lies," Plato himself (in the voice of Socrates in "The Republic," IIRC,) celebrates lying as a means of educating the young. So, Plato even admits to lying for that purpose.

I tried to say people should actually read what Plato said. Nobody cares to do this because nobody wants to live in a world where Atlantis never existed. That's the fantasyland I mentioned. You don't care enough about the validity of Atlantis (or lack thereof) to even look into it beyond what some fringe website is telling you as it leads you by the nose down the primrose path. No, no, much better to stay in your Atlantis hole with your pals, nodding and winking at each other in calm assuredness that you are in on some "big secret" that others don't know about.

They call that self-imposed ignorance, and it's the worst kind. This site's motto is "Deny Ignorance." That's what I'm doing and that's why you saying I shouldn't waste my time here is out of line.

Harte

You do make a strong point in mentioning that most of Plato's dialogues about non-historical figures are "he said he heard it from this guy, who heard it from that guy, who heard it from some other guy.......... etc."

That very well could mean he is conjuring up a plausible story, without committing to the truth of it.

On the other hand, the character of Critias, goes into a great deal of detail about how the information was obtained.

If you read about the conversation Solon is having with this aged priestess, it doesn't sound like he's receiving information that was widely available.

www.atlantis-scout.de...

originally posted by: Hanslune
Harte you are in fine mettle today!

Hey, I was officially an academic once upon a time and with that magical power bestow you with 'first class trusted all powerful credibility'....not that you hadn't already obtained it.

Oh one note for the one poster above. The Library of Alexandria existed for centuries if it had had books about Atlantis someone - and many quotes of lost books exist - would have probably mentioned then. Additionally there were many other libraries some 'public' some private - no books on Atlantis and the Arabs who translated much Greek material into Arabic don't mention it either.

The Arabs didn't even arrive on the scene until pretty late in the game. 600 AD. And library at Alexandria is certainly not the only library the early Christians got mad and burned. (Although that is not the only time the library of Alexandria got ruined or damaged, anyway. It was just the final one.)

But I don't think books about Atlantis were a high priority for relic preservers. The story is only mildly exceptional, and worse: it has no supporting/surrounding history to tie it into. It's like reading a moderately dull book that isn't part of a series.

The Pharoahs of Egypt didn't want to hear about it, because they preferred all history prior to Narmer to be considered meaningless. But they also couldn't take action directly against the priesthood of Egypt's established religions.

Not without consequences, anyway.

The priesthoods, for their part, knew it would also be unwise for them to take action against the Pharoah.

The impasse, or peaceful outcome, would be that the priesthoods could keep any history they wanted. Just not go broadcasting it around.

a reply to: Harte
Yes. Yes I do. I guess it's down to how he conveys himself . Go study him perhaps dude.
BUT I guess you'll just have to reply to this in usual smug condescending know it all manner instead of lowering yourself to self reflect. I care none.

originally posted by: Harte
a reply to: fotsyfots

But you don't mind another high school teacher insisting he knows the history of the Earth
Yeah. I see.

Harte

Do you think that all patent clerks are capable of coming up with special relativity? Or do you perhaps think that despite similar careers, people are capable of very different things?
Randall Carlson is quite obviously not the standard model for what a teacher gets up to outside of the classroom. I've heard of him and his ideas. Never heard of you.
Maybe tone it down a notch there champ.