Elite coverup. Atlantis found long time ago

Atlantis is real. That might not be its name, but it is very real.



The govts of the world dont want you to know
the UN doesnt want you to know
Most religeous leaders dont want you to know

Atlantis was located during the 20th century when plate tectonics were first being discovered.
The reason that this can never be admitted is because those in charge will lose control and power.

Scientists know that the continents are drifting faster then you are told. The recent earthquakes are making it harder to hide.
In the past they moved even faster.
The reason that anceint world cultures have so much in comon is because not long ago the land mass was one pangea
The ancents all had the same religions because they use to be one people.

Atlantis, that mystical place that sank into the sea, that there is only verbal history of, is the pre-flood world. All cultures have a flood story because they all have the same root. That preflood world was one land mass and so was the world right after the flood.

Atlantis is real
They cant tell you that for one reason. They would then have to admit God is real. Then they would have to be responsible.
It is all satans conspiracy to lead you to hell with him. He knows he has lost and is just playing out the final few minutes.

The best way to hide the truth is in plain site. Thats why we have a so called 'billion' year old pangea that was really only 5 or 6 k years old.

Think about it. There is NO evidence of a missing land mass, but

THERE IS evidence that the east and west were once joined in mid atlantic.
The people SAW the land move apart. To them it looked like it was sinking.

When? The time of babel. Babel was not some fancy tower. It was a ziggeraut...a pyramid..just like all the rest in the world.

I know this is probably pointless, but do you have any proof?

You do realize that maps of the ocean floor are available to the public?

Atlantis could not possibly have been what Cayce and others have said. There is no evidence on the ocean floor for anything like that in the timelines they give.

I believe he is speculating that the seperation of Pangea is the fabled flood of the early civilizations and that Pangea was actually Atlantis, but Plato said that it was the city that sank, not the continent. I believe is mistaken in it alll

[edit on 4/28/2005 by hatchedcross]

When Pangea was around....we (humans) weren't.

The finding of Atlantis, or any other ancient civilization, wouldn't help nor hinder those in power in any way that I can even begin to see....

Atlantis (imho) the continent is still very visible, just renamed (South America), and the city can also be found (Altiplano, Bolivia), once sunken by periodic flooding long ago.

forgive my ignorance, how did plato know of SA ?

Why would the world leaders lose power if it was discovered ?

Is it even possible to move the continents from the pangea formation to their current locations in only 5 or 6 thousand years. I've always heard that the amount of energy required to do this would have probably destroyed the planet.


As to dating the formations and split of the continents I found this:

Paleomagnetism is a magnetic direction (polar magnetism) recorded in igneous rock at the time the rock solidified. When lava and magma is in its fluid state, small iron minerals in the flow align with the polar magnetism of Earth. When molten rock solidifies, those minerals stay pointing toward the magnetic north. If the rocks moved after that magnetic direction has been locked in, the rock compass does not align with the poles and scientist can determine the original position of the igneous rock along with the amount it has moved over time.

Scientists found that the magnetism in young rocks is aligned with the current north. Ancient rocks vary in orientation and in direction. Scientists determined that instead of magnetic poles wobbling around in different orientations for each continent, the continents moved and the poles stayed in their relative locations.Link

Doesnt this give us a somewhat precise timeline for the creation and subsequent seperation of the pangea land mass?


(edit) also found many links with regards to ocean depths and ocean floor compositons that show this break-up 'had' to of happened long ago. Although they probably cant be entirely accurate, it should be obvious as to whether or not this 'event' happened in the recent or distant past....correct?

[edit on 28-4-2005 by Rren]

You are right on one thing . . . that most ancient civilizations have a story of the deluge even civilizations that never even became in contact with the Mesopotamia flood story and the Hebrew.

Its about 500 different stories of the deluge from ancient civilizations and this “other” ancient civilizations survived to tell the story.

This put Noah in the bible in a shallow waters taking in consideration that the only true account is to be the bible account.

It makes the bible to be faulty and perhaps the story of Noah as been copied from “other ancient tales”

The ancient accounts also tell that it will be another catastrophe for earth of the magnitude of the deluge.

The problem is that the account of such catastrophe has been corrupted through the centuries from the original true accounts by interpretations of long ago lost civilizations.

I don’t believe that Atlantis has been found, somebody out there would have the story in the open by now.

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
Why would the world leaders lose power if it was discovered ?

Exactly what I was about to say. How can a 'supposed' continent created ficticously for the purpose of entertainment usurp the power of world governments? I think someone is guilty of using current events to push a narrow agenda by saying that the recent epidemic near the sub Asian continent is related to Atlantis, I though Atlantis was in the Atlantic and not the Indian.

Originally posted by Gazrok
When Pangea was around....we (humans) weren't.

The finding of Atlantis, or any other ancient civilization, wouldn't help nor hinder those in power in any way that I can even begin to see....

Atlantis (imho) the continent is still very visible, just renamed (South America), and the city can also be found (Altiplano, Bolivia), once sunken by periodic flooding long ago.

Interesting theory there, Gazrok. Certainly one that requires some looking into, as well, I believe. Have you posted your reasons (if there are more, that is) here somewhere before?

what about soutj or noth poles one of those is a land continent under the ice very very large land mass, no one knows whats beneath the ice but maps have been made long ago that are accurate to what our satalites made in the last century so how they knew exactly what the land mass was like before ice age is anyones guess, as it was impossible to know without the technology of satalite mapping that only came about in later 20th century.....

also rivers,lakes mountains are all on the land mass, so if it melted we would have a new land mass as we would surely loose others if ice melted??? but land mass is there for the takeing.

i personally beleive the land mass at one the poles is where Atlantis once was on that continent but covered in ice thats why we not found it yet.

Originally posted by blobby
...what about soutj or noth poles one of those is a land continent under the ice very very large land mass, ...

No land underneath the Arctic ice pack. It's all water.

The Antarctic is not one land mass, but an archipelago with ice completely covering all the islands together. Same as Greenland -- it's not one big island, it's several.

Plato heard the story from Solon, an Egyptian priest.

As for the theory, yes, I've posted before on it, but the real credit goes to Jim Allen, the researcher where I heard about it from. His site is here:

www.geocities.com...

When I first heard the idea, I thought it was ridiculous, until I read and re-read Plato's writings on it, then looked at the evidence myself. Bar none, it's the most logical conclusion for it's location imho....

Originally posted by Gazrok
Plato heard the story from Solon, an Egyptian priest.

As for the theory, yes, I've posted before on it, but the real credit goes to Jim Allen, the researcher where I heard about it from. His site is here:

www.geocities.com...

When I first heard the idea, I thought it was ridiculous, until I read and re-read Plato's writings on it, then looked at the evidence myself. Bar none, it's the most logical conclusion for it's location imho....

Thanks for re-posting it here, Gaz! I'll have to look that over and do some more reading. Atlantis has long been an interest of mine, as you might know.

FYI, Mop of Antarctica is a true ccontinent not an archipelago.
Here is a map for you:

Originally posted by kenshiro2012
FYI, Mop of Antarctica is a true ccontinent not an archipelago.
Here is a map for you:

That's a map of the ice -- not the solid land under the ice. 'Lift' the ice off the solid land and observe what is above and below MSL. Antarctic is a large island surrounded by a cluster of smaller ones. It just looks like one large land mass because the ice covers everything and obscures what's underneath.

Originally posted by jake1997
Atlantis was located during the 20th century when plate tectonics were first being discovered.

How?

The reason that this can never be admitted is because those in charge will lose control and power.

How?

Scientists know that the continents are drifting faster then you are told.

And how did you find out?

The recent earthquakes are making it harder to hide.

Earthquakes are earthqaukes. The entire plate didn't move.

In the past they moved even faster.

Demonstrate this.

The reason that anceint world cultures have so much in comon is because not long ago the land mass was one pangea

You suggest that the world's land masses all broke up and moved to their current positions in human history? And yet haven't moved in the past, what, 2ky?

The ancents all had the same religions because they use to be one people.

Then why do the oldest records show that they had very different religions?

All cultures have a flood story because they all have the same root.

Right, local floods. They happen everywhere and are devastating.

That preflood world was one land mass and so was the world right after the flood.

There is no evidence of a global flood, I'd say that the evidence contradicts it, heck, refutes it.

They cant tell you that for one reason. They would then have to admit God is real.

Why? And why would that stop them?

It is all satans conspiracy to lead you to hell with him. He knows he has lost and is just playing out the final few minutes.

Satan is keeping everyone from learning that atlantis is real, so that that way we all go to hell? That doesn't make any sense.

THERE IS evidence that the east and west were once joined in mid atlantic.

There is geological evidencethat millions of years ago it was, more or less, yes.

The people SAW the land move apart. To them it looked like it was sinking.

The continents can't possibly rip apart and fly to all the corners of the globe while people are watching it.

When? The time of babel. Babel was not some fancy tower. It was a ziggeraut...a pyramid..just like all the rest in the world.

Preposterous. You are actually suggesting that this happened in actual recorded history???

[edit on 28-4-2005 by Nygdan]

This is the most obsurd thread i have ever read on this site. I think it should be removed.

Jake, until you have any evidence at all, I’m going to assume that your multitudinous assertions – indeed, your entire post -- is bogus. The only thing I can see in your post that is even remotely accurate is where you say “THERE IS evidence that the east and west were once joined in mid atlantic.”. And you have the time-period there completely wrong.

Gazrok says:

“Atlantis (imho) the continent is still very visible, just renamed (South America), and the city can also be found (Altiplano, Bolivia), once sunken by periodic flooding long ago.”

I can’t see any mechanism for a land mass that is presently between 2000 and 4000 meters in altitude to have ever been submerged by flooding, periodic or otherwise.

Certainly the rock which is now the Nacza Plate could have been subducted, but it would have been sometime in the Mesozoic, which ended about 60 million years ago.

Rren says:

“Is it even possible to move the continents from the pangea formation to their current locations in only 5 or 6 thousand years. I've always heard that the amount of energy required to do this would have probably destroyed the planet."

The plates move by convection; I haven’t pencil-whipped it, but the speed of masses moving due to convection (whether within the convective matrix or on its surface) is a function of the viscidity of the matrix and its temperature. Since the aesthenosphere hasn’t ever been anything but felsic and mafic magma, the only thing that would’ve caused plates to move that energetically would be a temperature probably higher than the vapor point of rock.

In other words, you’re right; it probably would’ve destroyed the planet.

Pangaea split into Gondwanaland and Laurasia late in the Triassic Period (about 260 mya).

kenshiro says:

“FYI, Mop of Antarctica is a true ccontinent not an archipelago. Here is a map for you:”

Actually, Ken you show a map of the Antarctic ice sheet, under which the Antarctic land mass lies. According to the most recent British polar geo-surveys, in East Antarctica the ice sheet rests on a major land mass, but in West Antarctica the bed is in places more than 2500 m below sea level. It would be seabed if the ice sheet were not there.

NASA, in one of its FAQs, says that the actual Antarctic continent is about half the size of what we think of as Antarctica, i.e., the ice sheet.

Originally posted by rick_y_2
This is the most obsurd thread i have ever read on this site. I think it should be removed.

ive seen much more absurd threads, i saw one where the guy said that KKK's were reptillians and a lot of other strange threads

To the last post why cant the KKK be some can a lizraids? What do you know? The truth could walk up and slap you in the face and you wouldnt know. The first step to not understand anything is ruling out what seems the hardest to look into. We only see one world though our eyes, the one we wants to see. There are then billions of worlds(over a billion people). just in this one we are in now. Which one of those is right, your's? Worse, as you do point out, most things we talk about eveyday are just plain silly. People are asking for proof. What shows Atlantis is real. Well I guess the writting and such are some proof right? The bible is just some writtings too. Well we use science to find truth. That works a little, its like using a a pitchfork to find a needle in the haystake. At some point you will say the fick needle is or isnt there. As others have point to, there is no agreed on facts that a flood/island things is in the geo record as told. Im a big lover of history because its just smart people fiction. If you want to see Atlantis you will and it will be found. But if you dont than its not part of the world, your world and thats just fine too. Look, we understand very little about the ancient past, even less about the birth of this planet. If we dont have Atlantis' whether right or wrong then we wont have a story of history worth reading or one that has any parts of so called truth. You have to be wrong to be right.