I Wish To Offer An Opinion On Atlantis

page: 6
5
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Harte

I believe that all I've said is that there is absolutely no reason at all to believe that Atlantis ever existed.

That and, IMO, it never existed.

The problem is, no evidence at all exists that any unknown civilization existed.

But there's not a single reason to believe

None.




The quotes I have taken from your post show five repetitions of the same point.

Thats five reptitions in this thread and a few hundred in threads of similar nature.

Since you also adress me specifically with these statements, I must assume you still havent understood that I believe research in these lines are warranted.

Whats next? Let me guess: "There is no reason to research at all! There is no evidence!"




posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 12:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating
There are a few problems of logic with your statement. But I guess that doesnt matter when looking for something...anything...to debunk.

Name the problems.

I'm not saying we know everything. Quite the contrary, I dont think we really know even 1% of history (the years since Plato is probably far less than 1% of the years since the first toolworker, lol).

I am saying that "secret" information is a fantasy. Open information hold up to scrutiny by anyone. Could the church be "holding back" all the information you imagine it does? I suppose it could, but its not known information until everyone can research it. And thus, information in the open is the only known information.

I'm sure some smart person in history has said this: We do not know what we do not know.

If not, dibs on the quote!


This could of course be applied on the opposite end to. That's the wonders of fiction. Maybe some dude named Skywalker really DO exist far away in another galaxy.

Edit:


Whats next? Let me guess: "There is no reason to research at all! There is no evidence!"

But people have researched. ALOT. And there's still no evidence. Will we still be researching Atlantis in a thousand years, still with no evidence? Well that's a thought, lol.

[edit on 18-1-2008 by merka]



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by merka

Quite the contrary, I dont think we really know even 1% of history (the years since Plato is probably far less than 1% of the years since the first toolworker, lol).



Precisely.




I am saying that "secret" information is a fantasy.



Have fun explaining that to ATSers.



And thus, information in the open is the only known information.



The only information known to you



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 

Well you know, the forums always need critics


Dear lord if the theories on the forums ran rampant. The lizardmen from Atlantis in the hollow Earth would be all over us in a heartbeat.

Neither of these arguments change the fact that we should see evidence of Atlantis had it been like Plato said. Even if the church is hiding stuff, are they also making it up as they go to fill in the gaps? If so, I really underestimate them. History is amazing if one read up on it all. I havent even scratched the surface, you're right about that, dont know all that much.

[edit on 18-1-2008 by merka]



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 12:55 PM
link   
Sure, critics are fine.

The basic idea is not even about "Atlantis" specifically, but about there having been other civilizations on earth over the past million years...and not just primitives. Its hard to prove as things are lost and forgotten over time, but the idea holds fascination.



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 01:26 PM
link   
Yet (again I say) we are still waiting for some evidence that is not hoaxed and that can be considered reliable.

When will you stop your claims and start backing them up?

Most of what has been said in this thread is simply erroneous. That's pretty much been shown.

So, when (if ever) will you give us something else?

Harte



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 01:52 PM
link   
Hi Harte,

A quote from you.



So, when (if ever) will you give us something else?


And one from Skyfloating.



If we are talking about 3000 B.C. structures, then yes, there should be a few remnants. But many of us pro-Atlantis people conviniently place the date 10 000 B.C. after a comet impact and global flood...which makes finding remnants highly unlikely.


I believe that should answer your question, it does mine. Skyfloating admits CONVENIENTLY looking for something in a timeframe it didn't exist, surrounded by events that didn't happen, with the expectation of NOT finding any significant evidence or proof of same. Definitely qualifies as an EXERCISE IN FUTILITY.

Cormac



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 02:31 PM
link   


I believe that should answer your question, it does mine. Skyfloating admits CONVENIENTLY looking for something in a timeframe it didn't exist, surrounded by events that didn't happen, with the expectation of NOT finding any significant evidence or proof of same. Definitely qualifies as an EXERCISE IN FUTILITY.



The "skeptics" have no sense of humor nowdays.


[edit on 18-1-2008 by Skyfloating]



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 02:39 PM
link   
Yet he deigns to say things like:


The quotes I have taken from your post show five repetitions of the same point.

Thats five reptitions in this thread and a few hundred in threads of similar nature.

Since you also adress me specifically with these statements, I must assume you still havent understood that I believe research in these lines are warranted.

Whats next? Let me guess: "There is no reason to research at all! There is no evidence!"


That's another straw man argument. Nobody has said anything even resembling "there's no reason to research."

What has been said is along the lines of:
"I've been researching this subject for years."

"Really? What evidence can you provide, because so far there's been no reason at all to believe in Atlantis."

"What do you know? You haven't put in all this time like me, researching and whatnot."

"No? Read my posts."

"Okay, I guess you have, but that doesn't give you the right to attack me."

"Attack who? All I want is your evidence"

Well, where we look, we wouldn't expect to find any evidence per se"

"Precisely my point, no?"

"Well, it's there for people that have eyes to see and that don't have a closed mind and aren't led around by the nose by the church, the PTB, or the Masons."

Okay, then, let's have it."

"You just don't understand my research."

etc.

Sorry, man, but I'm afraid I understand perfectly well your "research."

It's an exercise in ego inflation. It's a pitiful attempt to seem to know something that very few others (if anyone) knows.

It's a way to make yourself seem special.

It's not worth talking about - because you haven't conducted any research, you've merely tried to find the ramblings of every pseudohistorian nutjob out there and present these untrue statements they make as if they were true.

IMO.

Harte



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 03:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Harte


It's an exercise in ego inflation.

It's a pitiful attempt

It's not worth talking about

you haven't conducted any research,

you've merely tried to find the ramblings of every pseudohistorian nutjob out there



Ah, I see. I rest my case.



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by Harte


It's an exercise in ego inflation.

It's a pitiful attempt

It's not worth talking about

you haven't conducted any research,

you've merely tried to find the ramblings of every pseudohistorian nutjob out there



Ah, I see. I rest my case.


I thought one needed to (at least) attempt to make a case prior to "resting" it.

So, again, what evidence you got? Any?

Harte



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Harte

I thought one needed to (at least) attempt to make a case prior to "resting" it.

So, again, what evidence you got? Any?



So, after saying that I dont have any evidence numerous times you then follow up by asking if I have evidence?


No, I dont think I have any evidence that will suit you.

And if I had, I wouldnt post it here for it to be ripped apart with pseudoskeptic rhetoric. I´d publish it in the form of a book at a well-run publishing house.



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 08:11 PM
link   
Harte,

Stop this foolishness, MY thread is about posting theories on atlantis (especially those relating to my current research & findings) If all you are going to do is take up thread-space and mock all of those contributing to this thread positively, then please kindly leave or start your own thread for this meaningless argument against those who are firmly sure that these civilisations DO exist



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 09:24 PM
link   
AmmonSeth,

If you can take Skyfloating's statement below:




But many of us pro-Atlantis people conviniently place the date 10 000 B.C. after a comet impact and global flood...which makes finding remnants highly unlikely.


And can consider this convenience "a theory" then it can only be assumed you are either delusional or helping to ADVANCE THE LIE.

If you take my statement:




Skyfloating admits CONVENIENTLY looking for something in a timeframe it didn't exist, surrounded by events that didn't happen, with the expectation of NOT finding any significant evidence or proof of same.


And can consider this convenience,



contributing to this thread positively


Then it appears to me that you put the LIE to the usefullness of this thread and your opinions/beliefs or any kind of search you may be doing for the truth.



posted on Jan, 19 2008 @ 04:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by cormac mac airt
Then it appears to me that you put the LIE to the usefullness of this thread and your opinions/beliefs or any kind of search you may be doing for the truth.


Theories are neither a lie or the truth, its just that, a theory.
We accumulate theories to hopefully find the truth,
But you can look for the truth without a theory,



posted on Jan, 19 2008 @ 04:57 AM
link   
Reply to cormac:

I used the term "conviniently" as to echo the attitude of skeptics...in an ironical way. Turning it into an argument against me is poor taste.

As not to derail this thread any longer I wont be responding to such nonsense in this thread anymore.





[edit on 19-1-2008 by Skyfloating]



posted on Jan, 19 2008 @ 11:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by AmmonSeth
Theories are neither a lie or the truth, its just that, a theory.
We accumulate theories to hopefully find the truth,
But you can look for the truth without a theory,

A theory can easily be a lie if its based on nothing. I could present a theory that the Vikings built the Great Pyramid.

[edit on 19-1-2008 by merka]



posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 06:05 AM
link   
Well its safe to say my thread got fairly off-track,

I firmly believe that the crown jewel city of the atlantis empire will be located at Mount Penglai



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 07:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by AmmonSeth
Harte,

Stop this foolishness, MY thread is about posting theories on atlantis (especially those relating to my current research & findings) If all you are going to do is take up thread-space and mock all of those contributing to this thread positively, then please kindly leave or start your own thread for this meaningless argument against those who are firmly sure that these civilisations DO exist


Ammon,

I hate to break it to you bub, but you're not gonna post a bunch of drivel here without being challenged.

It is not up to you to decide who gets to post what in which thread.

Besides that, you didn't mention anything in your OP that looks anything like what you state here.

Not that it matters in the least regarding whether or not I can post in your thread, but this is what you said:


I have a vast amount of information, theories, thoughts and experiences to do with the ancient world,

For all those interested, please do get in contact with me,
I am not a secretive person, i am happy to share all that i have,
All that i ask in return is that you listen to all that i have to say,

And for any of you who read this who have similar beliefs to what i have mentioned,
Then i strongly suggest you contact me as soon as possible,

-Seth-

If you can't abide being shown how wrong you are, perhaps you should actually conduct some of this research you (and others here) claim to have done prior to making a ridiculous claim.

As it is, you're not gonna run off the truth by crying foul.

Harte



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Harte
If you can't abide being shown how wrong you are, perhaps you should actually conduct some of this research you (and others here) claim to have done prior to making a ridiculous claim.

As it is, you're not gonna run off the truth by crying foul.

Harte


And what you say also applies to you,
When regarding a unknown subject, there is no 'truth' without fact, simply saying that a person is wrong because of no facts is not truthful either,

Simply, proove that any theory or statement anyone says about atlantis is false, and then you can say you are right,

Until then you cannot say anyone else is 'wrong' or 'right' as there is no 'wrong' or 'right' until truth is established,

And in regards to this subject, no truths are established




new topics
top topics
 
5
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join