Interesting theory about the lost City of Atlantis.

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 12:58 AM
link   
Ok we have all heard of Plato's account of the Continent / city of Atlantis.

What if the area that it was ounce located in is no longer on the earth surface.
All right bare with me for minute here. We all know about Pangea the mega content.
What if when Pangea broke apart there was another continent on the other side of the world. When the subduction started it would of forced what was there to dive into the earths crust and back into the core. Thus any evidence that there was an advanced civilization/Continent on earth would have been destroyed when this happened.

Granted there is no proof of any kind to back this up. Just a theory.

What do you all think?




posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 01:06 AM
link   
Well, not to knock your theory or anything, but if the continents were splitting apart, I am sure that they would have enough time to move the city as continental drift was quite slow.

I was under the impression Atlantis succumbed more quickly?



posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 01:12 AM
link   
Like i said this is just some weird theroy that poped into my head. If there was a continent where the Subduction zone is now there is a good posibilty that what ever was there was in the middle of it when it started and was sent down into the core.

It's was just a weird idea i had, nothing more and can't be proven, just wounder what others thought of it.

Peace
Zintac



posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 01:15 AM
link   
Well, taking all the underwater cities off the coast of okinawa, Japan, it would support your theory of cities being gradually dragged either under water or underground, so as to be "lost" so to speak.

Your theory is sound, it is just the time factor which bothers me.



posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 09:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zintac
Granted there is no proof of any kind to back this up. Just a theory.

What do you all think?


That there's no proof, as you said, and the evidence actually contradicts the theory.



posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 10:07 AM
link   
There was a program in discovery channel right about know, that says they discovered atlantis and it wasnt under the sea, it was under ground. The strory is that some earthquakes sunk the city and a tsunami cover it with water. Then with the time, sediment cover it.



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 08:01 AM
link   
Atlantians couldnt really be trading with Egypt if the capital got destroyed 300 milliions years before the rise of the egyptian empire...



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zintac
What if when Pangea broke apart

This is way too long ago to be part of human history.


When the subduction started it would of forced what was there to dive into the earths crust and back into the core.

Close, but not quite accurate. Crustal material can be driven into the mantle, it sinks because of "slab pull" even if its less dense than the plate its being driven under. But it doesn't return to the core proper.

Also, subduction, we're not talking about plates sinking like rocks in pudding or something, but plates colliding and getting pushed under-over one another.


Thus any evidence that there was an advanced civilization/Continent on earth would have been destroyed when this happened.

I don't think it woud work, the process is extremely slow, any civilization on that continent would've moved to the over-riding continent. Perhaps if the civilization was destroyed and everyone was dead, and the entire plate was being subducted, then the evidence could be destroyed, but then again there are also 'accretionary wedges/prisms' that build-up along the overriding plate, so that might still contain some sort of evidence (not intact structures or the like). Also, it 'atlantis' was destroyed, but another civilization was still around, they'd've gone over to atlantis, even thousands of years later, and find the remains of it.

The human time-scale is just far too short for any of this, and it also just wouldn't be rememered as an island, it'd've been a part of the land itself that used to be there, but after time was not. The rate is so slow that it couldn't be remembered in anything like human terms.


[edit on 15-6-2005 by Nygdan]



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 01:51 PM
link   
my opinon is that i doubt this city of atlantis existed i believe this cuz thers no proof it did just a story passd down through the ages u know like that lil mexican rat that supposedly eats kid..forget wat its calld but ya..



posted on Jun, 16 2005 @ 10:45 PM
link   
I don't see proof of anything but "Plato knows how to make up a good story." Like his story of The Cave.



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 02:37 PM
link   
I didn't read all the comments, but I see this as viable. While continental drift is extremely slow, it is also believed that the big split occurred very suddenly, in a cataclysmic event that could have wiped out the dinosaurs and may have been caused by that famous meteor.

different theories can be fused together and you can see that pieces of the puzzle seem to fit, we just don't have all the pieces yet.



posted on Jun, 21 2005 @ 02:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zintac
Ok we have all heard of Plato's account of the Continent / city of Atlantis.
...
What do you all think?


The entire Atlantis legend probably is based on fact. But it was a small city/island that was destroyed by an earthquake or eruption (Santorini in the Mediterranean is a strong candidate). The story lived on in folklore getting embellished over time. As subsequent generations retold the story the island got bigger, the city become larger, the inhabitants gained superhuman attributes, etc. Not dissimilar to the telephone game of telling one person a story, who tells the next, etc, until it is unrecognizable to the first person.

Plato may have recorded the story as he heard it, but by that time the story had been morphed and altered to the point it can not be taken as factual.



posted on Jun, 21 2005 @ 03:13 PM
link   
Zintac...

Visit this site...if you want to find Atlantis... (imho) It's surprisingly non-shocking...


www.geocities.com...



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 01:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by dave_54
The entire Atlantis legend probably is based on fact. ...The story lived on in folklore getting embellished over time. As subsequent generations retold the story the island got bigger, the city become larger, the inhabitants gained superhuman attributes, etc...

Plato may have recorded the story as he heard it, but by that time the story had been morphed and altered to the point it can not be taken as factual.


Before Plato, there is no record of this supposed "legend." There is nothing about any advanced weaponry or technology in any of Plato's writings on the subject. In fact, according to Plato, the Athenians beat back the invading Atlanteans and managed to rid the Medittereanean of this scourge.

Only after Plato (many many years after Plato) did the idea of a real Atlantis gain any respectability. If the tale was a pre-existing legend prior to Plato, why don't we see anything about it anywhere in Egyptian mythos?

Atlantis never existed. This is easy to surmise from Plato's own writings. I explained this a little more in-depth in this thread:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 6/22/2005 by Harte]

[edit on 6/22/2005 by Harte]



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Harte
... If the tale was a pre-existing legend prior to Plato, why don't we see anything about it anywhere in Egyptian mythos?

[edit on 6/22/2005 by Harte]


Can't speak for Egypt, but there is a vaguely similar story (village near a lake that mysteriously disappeared) in local Native American folklore (Paiute and Maidu). Other nearby native oral traditions do not have a similar story. I am certain it is just a coincidence. It would be a real stretch to find a connection between the Mediterranean and Great Basin/Sierra Nevada cultures.





new topics
top topics
 
0

log in

join