It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is it possible that the Atlanteans came from a planet in our own solar system?

page: 4
4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 1 2006 @ 10:51 PM
link   
Yeah, they were from a planet you know today as the asteroid belt ...




posted on Feb, 2 2006 @ 04:43 AM
link   
I might could go for that. But could we first put a theory in place that the Asteroid belt is comprimised of the debris that was once a Planet? I'm not asking for Hard Core Facts here, just a nice little sample theory. Like how it occured, and the effects?

(It could very well be as you speak. Just like getting things straight, is all.)



posted on Feb, 2 2006 @ 03:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stari
How about Egyptian artifacts found in the Grand Canyon? I know this does not help my proof other than knowing that Egyptians traveled the high seas and came to the Americas way before it was the Americas. Why did they do that?
www.geocities.com...


Originally posted by Harte
This bogus claim has been debunked so many times that I am amazed that people keep citing it. For starters, see what you can find out about these two gents - Prof. S. A. Jordan and G.E. Kinkaid.


If you google their names, you'll find numerous sources "debunking" the two men. Apparently, they never existed, and therefore could not have ever been affiliated with the Smithsonian, ALSO meaning they never went and found a cave and crypt. It made a wonderful story for the yellow press, which was in its hey day at the turn of the century.

I always try to keep a critical mind....an open mind, but a critical one. Some of the evidence posted here is not substantiated. There are many explanations that can explain irregularites in photographs on Mars, and it is quite inappropriate for someone searching for the truth on any matter to jump to one conclusion, when there are more reasonable explanations for such irregularities. It is also worth mentioning (as an earlier poster on the subject has already) that we DO NOT know the dimensions of these photographs, are they measured in inches, feet, miles...? They look like sand dunes to me. Or wind smoothed rock.

I find similarities between world cultures very interesting. The most interesting to me is probably the phenomenon of FLOOD MYTHS.
Nearly every culture has one. (I'll have to go find a few of the books I've read that in.)
Gilgamesh, biblical, and yes, Atlantis, not to mention many others, including Native American stories.

The other that fascinates me are the Pyramids, in Egypt, South America, and even a few in North America (they were more of mounds, and were called Ziggurats, built in the mississippi river valley...6th grade history.)
I think it is interesting that they have been linked to the constellation Orion, the Hunter. Those Pyramids at Giza take the symbolic form of the hunters belt (google for a comparison, many pages show it) Also there are theories circulating that the pyramids'air shafts were placed so that people inside would be able to see certain constellations or stars through the shafts. I think this is an interesting theory.

I remember someone poated regarding the fact that most midieval Towns and cities were fromed in a ringshape. Look at arial photos of paris and london as examples. The center was generally a military fortress or castle, the island of paris was the original settlement by the romans, they had a fortress on the island, because water is a good defense. the city gathered around it growing outwards in a helterskelter of rings. At the time they did not know they were imitating nature itself. The solar system is made of concentric rings like ripples also. IF the proposed Atlanteans had Superior knowledge of the Universe, perhaps the Ringed city was planned to be that way, not only as a means of defense, but as a tribute to nature.
This is all coming to me as I type, I'm just putting ideas on the table.



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 01:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by BradKellBrrexkl
I'm not sure when the Inca's and Mayan's and others 'formed' or what not. But I wouldn't find it hard at all to believe it was at the same time that Rome and Greece and Phonecians and others were beginning to thrive.


Brad,
Not only is the timeline for the Incas and Mayas wrong for this, but the Romans, Greeks and Phoenecians all had there "heydays" in different eras as well.
Heres a timeline for mesoamerica:
www.timelines.info... lizations/ancient_civilisations/mesoamerica/
That website (www.timelines.info) has timelines for all areas and time periods in human history.

Harte



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 09:25 PM
link   
Barra, Olmec, the next down the line. Do any of these coincide with the Atlantis timeline? After all, they were supposedly at war, so cultures had developed. There should have been cultures on the Western Hemisphere. Who were the neighbors?



posted on Feb, 6 2006 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by BradKellBrrexkl
Barra, Olmec, the next down the line. Do any of these coincide with the Atlantis timeline? After all, they were supposedly at war, so cultures had developed. There should have been cultures on the Western Hemisphere. Who were the neighbors?


Brad,
The problem is, no known civilization coincides with the Atlantis timeline. Atlantis is supposed to have been destroyed something like 12,000 years ago. The earliest civilization we know of is the Sumerians, who settled in Mesopotamia around 5500 years ago (3500 BC.)

Harte

[edit on 2/6/2006 by Harte]



posted on Feb, 8 2006 @ 05:23 PM
link   
Then how did those records of Plato show war with the Spartans? That's how it was told to him. So someone existed when they did if you follow Plato's explanation.



posted on Feb, 9 2006 @ 03:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by BradKellBrrexkl
Then how did those records of Plato show war with the Spartans? That's how it was told to him. So someone existed when they did if you follow Plato's explanation.

No, Plato's account describes a war with the Athenians, who were supposed to be the only major power left. The big problem with that is that in the timeline Athens was no more than a few huts at best at that time. Athens grew to become a minor power in the Mycenaean world, survived the Greek Dark Ages (1100BC-800BCish) and then of course became the Athens of Classical history.
Atlantis is based on one story, told to Solon by an Egytian priest and passed down to Plato. The dating is wonky, but there is a theory that if you knock a '0' off the age you get possible viable date for the Trojan War.



posted on Feb, 9 2006 @ 08:35 AM
link   
Forgive me, I did indeed mean the Athenians.

So, which is it. They were at War with huts around Athens, which would then assume huts also in the Americas who would record such events. Or they were around at a later date, even more exposing them to written or oral history from other groups than just the Egyptians?



posted on Feb, 9 2006 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Darkmind
Atlantis is based on one story, told to Solon by an Egytian priest and passed down to Plato. The dating is wonky, but there is a theory that if you knock a '0' off the age you get possible viable date for the Trojan War.

Actually, there's no real reason to believe even that Solon had ever heard this story. There is no Egyptian record of it, after all, and the Egyptian writings go back much further than the time of Solon, though they are certainly incomplete. Still, I think one would expect to see some reference to such a story as the Atlantis one in several recovered Egyptian texts, yet there is none.


Originally posted by BradKellBrrexkl
Then how did those records of Plato show war with the Spartans? That's how it was told to him. So someone existed when they did if you follow Plato's explanation.

You may want to read what Plato wrote about the Athenians war with Atlantis:
classics.mit.edu...
classics.mit.edu...
The war described the Athenians as a very powerful force, that rid the Mediterreanean countries of the opressive Atlanteans.


Originally posted by BradKellBrrexklThey were at War with huts around Athens, which would then assume huts also in the Americas who would record such events. Or they were around at a later date, even more exposing them to written or oral history from other groups than just the Egyptians?

The (very real) problem with the "misdating theory" is that at the time, there were a couple of civilizations around that had writing. These civilizations most certainly would have had records of dealings with Atlantis, if Atlantis as described by Plato ever existed. But there are no such records.
There is a (literary) theory out there that Plato, while writing the fictional story of Atlantis, left off of it in sort of a sudden manner after realizing that the war he was describing was very similar to the Trojan War (plagiarism!)

Harte



posted on Feb, 11 2006 @ 08:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Harte
Actually, there's no real reason to believe even that Solon had ever heard this story. There is no Egyptian record of it, after all, and the Egyptian writings go back much further than the time of Solon, though they are certainly incomplete. Still, I think one would expect to see some reference to such a story as the Atlantis one in several recovered Egyptian texts, yet there is none.


Let's not forget about the great loss to our civilization when the Library of Alexandria was burnt to the ground. The library had around 700,000 books. I am sure the history of Atlantis was lost when the world lost that library. Out of that many books (and that is an approximate number of books) Some of Atlantis history had to be lost. Even people who are skeptic of Atlantis being a real place in our history has to admit if Atlantis existed then the documents lost when the library at Alexandria burned down could have made mention of the great city of Atlantis. And the people who came after the fire would not know anything about Atlantis. The only people who would have known about Atlantis would have been the Egyptian priests, they were the ones in charge of the library.



posted on Feb, 12 2006 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stari

Originally posted by Harte
Actually, there's no real reason to believe even that Solon had ever heard this story. There is no Egyptian record of it, after all, and the Egyptian writings go back much further than the time of Solon, though they are certainly incomplete. Still, I think one would expect to see some reference to such a story as the Atlantis one in several recovered Egyptian texts, yet there is none.


Let's not forget about the great loss to our civilization when the Library of Alexandria was burnt to the ground. The library had around 700,000 books. I am sure the history of Atlantis was lost when the world lost that library. Out of that many books (and that is an approximate number of books) Some of Atlantis history had to be lost. Even people who are skeptic of Atlantis being a real place in our history has to admit if Atlantis existed then the documents lost when the library at Alexandria burned down could have made mention of the great city of Atlantis. And the people who came after the fire would not know anything about Atlantis. The only people who would have known about Atlantis would have been the Egyptian priests, they were the ones in charge of the library.


I'm sorry Stari. While I, like you, lament the loss of Alexandria's Library, this loss cannot account for the absence of any Egyptian record of the Atlantean story.

The Library of Alexandria was established during the reign of Ptolemy II (beginning of the 3rd century - Late 200's BC.) Plato lived 200 years before this library even existed. And Plato's supposed source for the Atlantean story, Solon, born in 638 BC, most likely made his famous trip to Egypt (the trip Plato claims is where Solon heard the tale) in around 560 BC.

So, you can see that the Egyptian records of Atlantis would at least have to pre-date Solon, and would certainly pre-date Alexandria's Library by some 400 years at a minimum. When you consider that the Egyptians only started writing arount 3600 BC (or somewhat thereafter), and the Atlanteans supposedly were destroyed before 10,000 BC, you can begin to see the non-relevance of Alexandria. Not that the Library would not have contained such a record (assuming Atlantis existed.) It's just not possible that it would contain the only record. Not to mention the fact that hundreds of years worth of scholars had been through that Library, yet none wrote about Atlantis.

No, for these Egyptian priests to even have such a record, it should exist in hieroglyphic text carved in stone prior to the invention of papyrus.

Harte



posted on Feb, 12 2006 @ 06:49 PM
link   
Yes Harte Your right, Plato lived in 427-347 BC and the Library of Alexandria existed in the time frame of 281 BC to 246 BC. But the Egyptian priests did not come up with this Library over night hundreds of years of information was collected and stored somewhere until finally the Library was built in Alexandria.

There is a mask that was found in South America with an inscription of an unknown writing. To my knowledge it has not been translated yet. And it may never be. It could be a helmet from an Atlantean soldier. OK, I know that is far fetched, my point though is that there is at least one language that I know of that has not been translated yet. There could be more. You also mention the fact that there has been no stele found in Egypt with a story of Atlantis and there should be if the story where true. Well, what about the Egyptians who built cities on top of cities, over and over again? This was a practice in Egypt. They would not have quarried stone if there was a stone not being used anymore because the priests wrote or translated a story off from the stele and put the ancient story on papyrus and stuck it safely away in the library. The old stone would have been reused.



posted on Feb, 13 2006 @ 11:19 AM
link   
We still have no further corroboration of the apparent Atlantis story, even if it was carved out and reused. More tellingly, if the Athenians were going to war with this enemy that had conquered the rest of the Med, why is there no corresponding legend on the Athenian side? Plus, wouldn't that mean that Egypt was conquered as well?



posted on Feb, 13 2006 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stari
...There is a mask that was found in South America with an inscription of an unknown writing. To my knowledge it has not been translated yet. And it may never be. It could be a helmet from an Atlantean soldier. OK, I know that is far fetched, my point though is that there is at least one language that I know of that has not been translated yet. There could be more.

There certainly are languages that have never been translated. One in particular (if I remember right it's referred to as Linear B) comes from the area around Greece. But there's been no writings found that date far enough back to correspond with Atlantis.


Originally posted by Stari
You also mention the fact that there has been no stele found in Egypt with a story of Atlantis and there should be if the story where true. Well, what about the Egyptians who built cities on top of cities, over and over again? This was a practice in Egypt. They would not have quarried stone if there was a stone not being used anymore because the priests wrote or translated a story off from the stele and put the ancient story on papyrus and stuck it safely away in the library. The old stone would have been reused.


That really is a stretch. If this were true, then we would have no knowledge of any Egyptian mythology, as it all would have been copied over onto papyrus, the "carved in stone" record re-used, and the papyrus burned in the Library of Alexandria.

The Egyptians did not consider stories of their bravery in battle to be so easily stashed away in some library. If the Egyptians had been overrun by the Atlanteans (as Plato claims that Solon was told), we would find all kinds of memorials to whatever brave Egyptian leader "defeated" the Atlanteans (even though he didn't), and Solon would never have heard the story as told in the first place, the Egyptians were revisionist historians in the worst way. There can be no doubt that they would have claimed to have been the ones that defeated Atlantis, and certainly they would not have given any credit to the Greeks.


Harte

[edit on 2/13/2006 by Harte]



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 06:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Harte
The Egyptians did not consider stories of their bravery in battle to be so easily stashed away in some library. If the Egyptians had been overrun by the Atlanteans (as Plato claims that Solon was told), we would find all kinds of memorials to whatever brave Egyptian leader "defeated" the Atlanteans (even though he didn't), and Solon would never have heard the story as told in the first place, the Egyptians were revisionist historians in the worst way. There can be no doubt that they would have claimed to have been the ones that defeated Atlantis, and certainly they would not have given any credit to the Greeks.

Harte


So are you saying that the Egyptians went back 12,500 years ago? I don't think so Harte. They only go back 5 maybe 6 thousand years. There is no proof of Egyptians dating back that far.



posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 02:44 PM
link   
I applaude you for speaking your mind. I think and feel that AL THINGS ARE POSSIBLE.
Are we all just following an old story/legend? I know that most ancient stories and legends are based on some fact.
Recently, science finds this to be the case, where before no.

HOW ARE THIS?

If ppl all believe that GOD exists (from a fable/story of old. i.e. Bible)
Why is it so hard to believe in Atlanteans?



posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stari

Originally posted by Harte
The Egyptians did not consider stories of their bravery in battle to be so easily stashed away in some library. If the Egyptians had been overrun by the Atlanteans (as Plato claims that Solon was told), we would find all kinds of memorials to whatever brave Egyptian leader "defeated" the Atlanteans (even though he didn't), and Solon would never have heard the story as told in the first place, the Egyptians were revisionist historians in the worst way. There can be no doubt that they would have claimed to have been the ones that defeated Atlantis, and certainly they would not have given any credit to the Greeks.
Harte

So are you saying that the Egyptians went back 12,500 years ago? I don't think so Harte. They only go back 5 maybe 6 thousand years. There is no proof of Egyptians dating back that far.


Stari,
No, I'm explaining why it couldn't be true. It was Plato that made this claim. He had no knowledge of how far back Egyptian civilization went, and neither did anyone else (including the Egyptians) at the time. Plato took advantage of this fact when he fabricated his Atlantis story.

Remember, according to Plato, Solon was told that all the countries around the Mediterreanean (including Egypt) were subjegated by Atlantis, and that Athens had freed them from this harsh rule.

People that want to believe in Atlantis deal with this inconvenient timeline (which you have pointed out) in a couple of ways, one being that Plato got the date wrong, another being that we have misdated the Egyptians. Neither option is viable when examined.

Harte



posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 03:18 PM
link   
Ok Harte, lets not forget my first post.. the reason for this thread, that is did atlanteans come from another world, like Mars. There is enough proof to state that Atlantis really existed, even the most skeptic has to admit that the simularities in ancient civilizations means that there was a familier aspect many hundreds possibly thousands of years prior to those with the simularities. Also wouldn't it stand to reason if Atlantis is lost to the world couldn't other civilizations that lived back then be lost as well. Scientists are saying that the Earths magnetic field flipped back then around 12,500 years ago and they have no idea how bad it was when it happend. Also there is proof all around the world of a catastrophe happening around 12,500 years ago worldwide, not just locally. This is also suggestive that Platos story was based on facts. Now lets face it.. we will never actually find Atlantis. It is not only sunk at the bottom of the Carribean Sea, it is also covered in many feet of sand then coral then sea weed, what ever else is down there. The only way it will ever be found is when the magnetic field does another flop, and scientists believe it will happen soon, then an archeology dig will be needed to find the remains of the main city.

Also Harte, where is your proof or I mean evidence
that this story was fabricated? Plato is adiment through out the entire story that it is a fact, not fiction. It is quite possible that Plato did mean the Athens when he told about how Atlanteans ruled them then Athens took over and defeated the Atlanteans. When Americans first came to America they were not called Americans, later after a government was formed we were called Americans.

Isis you made a great point, is the Bible not true either? I believe in God and everything that is in the Bible. Some of the stuff writen in the Bible are just now being proved, what about the city of Troy? That was always believed to be myth but it is now indeed a fact! Scientists were called crazy and could loose all reputation for searching for the lost and fabled city of Troy. Not now. Atlantis is the same. Or maybe you have proof-evidence you would like to share with us? Because the evidence for the story to be true, in my eyes, out weighs the evidence for it not to be true.



posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 04:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stari
There is enough proof to state that Atlantis really existed, even the most skeptic has to admit that the simularities in ancient civilizations means that there was a familier aspect many hundreds possibly thousands of years prior to those with the simularities.


There's not even any evidence at all, much less "proof", that Atlantis ever existed.
There is no skeptic anywhere that would even come close to admitting that some imagined "similarities in ancient civilizations" means Atlantis or any other "mother" civilization had to exist. As a matter of fact, there are no archaeologists or anthropologists that propose such a theory either. Exactly what "similarities" do you refer to here?


Originally posted by StariAlso wouldn't it stand to reason if Atlantis is lost to the world couldn't other civilizations that lived back then be lost as well. Scientists are saying that the Earths magnetic field flipped back then around 12,500 years ago and they have no idea how bad it was when it happend.
This is not even true. The last time there was a "flip" of the magnetic poles (that we know of, anyway) was almost 800,000 years ago. (Source:www.physorg.com...)


Originally posted by StariAlso there is proof all around the world of a catastrophe happening around 12,500 years ago worldwide, not just locally. This is also suggestive that Platos story was based on facts.

What "proof" are you talking about here? I'm aware of no such catastrophe.


Originally posted by StariNow lets face it.. we will never actually find Atlantis. ...The only way it will ever be found is when the magnetic field does another flop, and scientists believe it will happen soon, then an archeology dig will be needed to find the remains of the main city.
Why would an archaeological dig require a geomagnetic pole flip?


Originally posted by StariAlso Harte, where is your proof or I mean evidence
that this story was fabricated? Plato is adiment through out the entire story that it is a fact, not fiction.

My proof lies with my proof that the universe is not supported by the strong backs of an infinite array of turtles. Never heard of that theory?

What I mean is that, when someone makes a claim that goes completely against everything we know (like Atlantis), then it is up to that person (the claimer, if you will) to provide what you call "proof" (I call it "evidence.")

Plato is also adamant in other of his dialogues that some of the things he's saying about the Greek Gods is true. Excuse me if I don't believe that either.


Originally posted by StariIt is quite possible that Plato did mean the Athens when he told about how Atlanteans ruled them then Athens took over and defeated the Atlanteans. When Americans first came to America they were not called Americans, later after a government was formed we were called Americans.
The age of the settlements that started Athens is well known. Believe me, no civilization ever found dates back to anything like 10,000 BC. The earliest is around 3500 BC.


Originally posted by StariIsis you made a great point, is the Bible not true either? I believe in God and everything that is in the Bible.

How then do you account for Atlantis? The bible makes no mention at all of it, supposedly the "Mother of All Civilizations."
Also, please get back to me when you figure out how Noah got all those South American marsupials onto the Ark.


Originally posted by Stariwhat about the city of Troy? That was always believed to be myth but it is now indeed a fact! Scientists were called crazy and could loose all reputation for searching for the lost and fabled city of Troy. Not now. Atlantis is the same.


Ah yes, the Troy argument. No, Atlantis is not "the same" at all. Just as one example, see if you can find out how many references to Troy exist in Classical Greek literature. Thousands. How many references to Atlantis? None outside of the two dialogues written by Plato.

What this means is that, while Troy was legendary all the way back beyond Homer (last I checked, experts aren't even sure Homer existed, that's how old that tradition is) while the Atlantis "legend" is not a legend at all, it being mentioned only in the two dialogues of Plato I linked to earlier. There's literally hundreds of frescoes, paintings, statues and other artwork from ancient Greece depicting this or that aspect or occurence from the Trojan War legend. How many similar artwork designs refer to Atlantis?None. Not one.

Stari, I've been over these arguments before in other threads. There's other arguments there as well, I suggest you use the search function, or the "sticky" on the Atlantis subject. I'm really tired of making these same arguments over and over.

If you want to believe Atlantis existed after checking all these arguments made by myself and many others here, and in spite of what's been said in this thread, then of course you have that right. But it is I that should ask you for your "proof," and not vice-versa, because it is you that is making the claim here.

Harte




top topics



 
4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join