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.

 

Atlantis' exclusion from Ancient Maps

page: 1
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 05:48 PM
link   
If Atlantis, according to Plato, was located outside the Pillars of Hercules then why is there no indication for it having been there in the maps of Anaximander, Hecataeus of Miletus, Eratosthenes or Ptolemy?




posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 05:55 PM
link   
According to Atlantis-Lore, the island/country of atlantis was long gone by the time these guys made their maps. We´re talking more than 10 000 years.

[edit on 18-11-2007 by Skyfloating]



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 06:13 PM
link   
True, Plato does say that it happened more than 10,000 years ago. However, if it had such an historical influence, cartographers would at least have left a passing mention of it. Also, with what was believed to be the known world during Plato's time there was NOWHERE to place a continent the size of Atlantis outside the Pillars of Hercules. Cartographers would have known where it had been and allowed for its location on a map. They didn't.



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 06:15 PM
link   
10 000 years is a VERY long time. You cant expect more than little shreds and hints here and there. Even 50 years after the holocaust some are denying it ever happened. Now imagine what 10 000 years will do to peoples memory.



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 06:18 PM
link   
Yet people will read Plato's account of Atlantis and its location and take it as 100% fact. You rather made my point for me. Thanks.



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 06:45 PM
link   
next week we're having a band



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 09:01 PM
link   
The Phoenicians kept the location of the mystery island secret. They didn't want other civilizations to hord in on their special trading partners. The Phoenicians were decendants of the Canaanites and the Canaanites practiced a custom similar to that of the Mayans. The Mayans and the Phoenicians both had the custom of Bloodletting. I don't know if the Phoenicians taught the Bloodletting custom to the Mayans or the Mayans taught Bloodletting to the Phoenicians. Anyway, the Atlantis legend really comes from the Phoenicians. All the ten rulers of the Atlantean empire were the colonies set up the Phoenicians. It was the Atlan colony of the Phoenicians that sank in the Atlantic. The Egyptians captured a few of these Phoenician sailors which told of this legendary tale. It's no coincidence that the capital city of Sidon and the sea god Poseidon sound similar.

en.wikipedia.org...

Bloodletting of the Canaanites
1 Kings 18:28
www.biblegateway.com...:28&version=9;



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 09:42 PM
link   
So the Phoenicians, who only date to between 1300BC and 1400BC were trading with Atlantis, which was destroyed more than 8000 years earlier. Interesting, but wrong. And there is no proof that Phoenicians and Mayans taught each other anything. Similarities in customs does not constitute proof that the two ever knew each other let alone traded.



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 09:49 PM
link   
reply to post by cormac mac airt
 


what is your understanding of "lamuria" could the alians we are seeing be the desindents of atlantis and lamuria? The ancient sandscit describes a war of sorts with silver flying birds....



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 10:30 PM
link   
i agree with skyfloating on this one. 10,000 years is a very long time. if austrailia sank tomorrow (sorry austrailia, nothing personal), i doubt it would be remembered very well, let alone mapped, several thousand years from now. also, why would they even bother mapping a landmass that was several thousand years gone? that, i think, would just confuse people.

and @ rockets red glare: er... it was my understanding that lemuria supposedly predated atlantis by at least as much as atlantis predates us. in my opinion (going by my understanding of of it) lemuria is 100 times more speculative than even atlantis. but i like your idea that our supposed "aliens" are the remnants of an ancient, space-faring people. not saying i believe it, but it fits with my pet theory (warning: what follows is highly speculative and mostly for my own entertainment only) that atlantis was really a space station put in orbit by an ancient human civilization (or a combined effort of several), which, for some reason (crustal shift? magnetic shift?) fell out of the sky and sank into the ocean. just an idea. highly unlikely, i know, but it amuses me to think about it.



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 11:21 PM
link   
Atlantis, if it existed and I think it did, was most likely the same as Santorini. Just one example. Its approximate stated size 3000 stadia X 2000 stadia is very much the same size as the southern Aegean Sea. Coincidence, I think not. Also, Egypt circa 900BC barely knew of Greece, may or may not have known of central Italy. However, there is no evidence that they knew anything of locations west of Italy. If the Egyptians of Solon's time knew of an island continent west of the Pillars of Hercules, how come they didn't know about it in 900BC? In 2000BC? In 3000BC? To answer the question,


why would they even bother mapping a landmass that was several thousand years gone?

Because the area was supposed to be impassable due to the mud left over from its destruction.

There is also no evidence of continental crust anywhere in the Atlantic, especially the alleged size of Atlantis, to show it existed. 10,000 years is a very long time indeed. So much so that there wouldn't even be a name for such an alleged continent let alone a remembrance of its location.

On a side note, I believe that there may be other life in the universe, I just don't think we are that important to have been visited by them in any significant degree. If they were anywhere near as advanced as is claimed they would realize there isn't much intelligent life here. Many humans are too busy making stuff up.



posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 01:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by cormac mac airt
Atlantis, if it existed and I think it did, was most likely the same as Santorini.


Too much of Santorini just doesn't fit Plato's description, which is pretty detailed. I'm still going with the Azores plateau. A significant shift of the mid-Atlantic ridge, possibly a result of a shift in current and mass distribution at the end of the last Ice Age, or a comet fall, and all you'd have left are islands that used to be mountain tops. Almost due west of Gibraltar. Mountains in the north. Fertile plains to the south. Elephants (mammoths?) from North America. Fits much better than Santorini.



posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 02:14 AM
link   
Goes back to a previous post of mine about people reading Plato's description of Atlantis and its location and taking it as 100% fact. Science has never shown a shift of the mid-Atlantic Ridge, which is NOT continental crust. Plato's account claims that an earthquake caused Atlantis destruction, not a comet. It is also claimed that the destruction of Atlantis had a disasterous SAME DAY affect on Athens. Being outside the Pillars would not have caused that. Many of the facts about Santorini DO fit the facts of Plato's account. It had hot and cold running water, red and black rock formations and scientists know rather well what it looked like before the eruption. Also, what was to become Athens along with Egypt both fought against Atlantis. If Atlantis was so advanced, its amazing how Athens, with the use of spears, swords and arrows apparently kicked their butt.



posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 07:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nohup
Too much of Santorini just doesn't fit Plato's description, which is pretty detailed.

Too much of Platos description doesnt match the modern interpretations which are considerably more detailed and elaborate.

So that really doesnt say much.

It really boils down to 1 thing: Plato wasnt a historian. I compare him with George Lucas more than anything.

Atlantis IV: A New Continent



posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 07:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by merka


Atlantis IV: A New Continent


Plato devotees will tell you that should be

Atlantis IV: A New Republic




posted on Nov, 20 2007 @ 02:22 PM
link   
reply to post by rockets red glare
 


There is no such thing as Lemuria. You are mixing mythologies.



posted on Nov, 20 2007 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by frumpwallow
 


The "Atlantis space-station" idea is excellent! I don't believe it for a second, but it would make a fantastic T.V. series. Reminds me of Battlestar Galactica.



posted on Nov, 20 2007 @ 02:46 PM
link   
Atlantis IS on a map. Look up the Piri-Reis map. How could an accurate map of an ICE-FREE Antarctica been made, when is hasn't been ice-free for at least 6000 years? The map has been proven accurate with modern technolgical ability to see through the ice pack. Even if this artifact doesn't prove that Antarctica is Atlantis, it does prove to me that civilization is older than we think and so we have to rethink everything we know.



posted on Nov, 20 2007 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by cormac mac airt
True, Plato does say that it happened more than 10,000 years ago. However, if it had such an historical influence, cartographers would at least have left a passing mention of it. Also, with what was believed to be the known world during Plato's time there was NOWHERE to place a continent the size of Atlantis outside the Pillars of Hercules. Cartographers would have known where it had been and allowed for its location on a map. They didn't.

Jackinthebox is right.


When the planetary axis shifted from the global calamity (most likely from a nuclear holocaust) that also caused worldwide earthquakes and The Great Flood, there was also a drastic change in weather patterns. The continent of Atlantis went from being a semi-tropical and lush environment to a frozen wasteland.

That is why there are no direct maps of Atlantis at the time of Plato.

It is currently buried under a thick layer of ice.

In Antarctica


[edit on 20-11-2007 by Paul_Richard]



posted on Nov, 20 2007 @ 03:15 PM
link   
So how does one fit the fact that Athens went to war with Atlantis, considering Athens was clearly after this cataclysm?

And dont tell me "ooh he exaggerated on that" or "he probably went a little fantasy in that area". Either you take what Plato says for 100% the truth or 100% fiction. There is no in between because none of us can say which parts are which.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join