originally posted by Merka
Ancient world maps where crude, low in resolution and solely based on coastal observation and guesswork.
Can we prove this? How do we REALLY know how accurate ancient maps where if we have no evidence of what the map makers actually saw? Perhaps ancient
maps are highly accurate but we have lead to believe otherwise.
originally posted by Runetang
IF Atlantis existed, it was either where the modern Azores are now off of West Africa in the ATL (Atlantic, homie), or present day Cuba and its'
I agree that both these locations are likely to have been a destination for Atlantean colonies. I think Cuba is generally not the location of the City
of Atlantis but more a colony of it. I agree with the Azores and my map reflects that
originally posted by mojo4sale
What is the reason for adding the yellow markers to your map. None of those date to anywhere near the time required for them to have been a part of
either Atlantis or Lemuria.
I do not generally buy into the 'official' stories of these monuments. They are ALL hotly contested as to their age and rightly so. It is really a
topic for another thread entirely as there is simply too much information to bring to the table.
But undoubtedly the Pyramids are older than the stated 2600BC date. The same story that states a 2600BC construction date also insists the Giza
Pyramids were used as tombs - which is categorically incorrect.
With Nan Madol, they only dated pottery found at the site. That pottery could have literally been dropped there in 1AD - doesn't really prove a
Rapa Nui is still shrouded with mystery. Once again, it's almost worthy of an entire other thread, but there are plenty of anomalies with the
'official' story (there always are) if you choose to look at non-mainstream sources.
The reason I chose those locations/artefacts is because from everything I have read I believe that they all date from the either the time of Atlantis
and Lemuria or they were built by the survivors of those civilizations.
I am open to adding more dots on the map of artefacts/locations which are officially recognised as 10,000 years + old (such as you suggested), but
haven't got the time at the moment to research that aspect fully
originally posted by IvanZana
In due time you will learn that "Atlantis" is north America.
I agree that North America holds many mysteries which are still to be unravelled, but was the City of Atlantis located there? I personally don't
believe so. An outpost, colony or colonies though, absolutely!
Nice map too, interesting take.
originally posted by cormac mac airt
It would mean more if you were talking about civilizations along the ancient continental coastlines, that we could possibly agree on. Lemuria is a
19th century fantasy. Atlantis, of a size and location as Plato puts it will probably never be found. One estimate of size was supposedly around
80,000 square miles. That's an area of 282 miles by 282 miles. There is NO landmass outside the Straights of Gibraltar that size and no indication
that there ever was.
I have to disagree whole-heartedly with that whole joke that Lemuria was a made-up name of a possible continent which maybe existed to possibly help
Lemurs move from land mass to land mass. Such a convenient cover and one which people always refer.
Look at the land now covered with water surround Australia, New Zealand and the general Pacific region, there is undoubtedly land under the water
there. How do we really know that land wasn't Lemuria or Mu?
originally posted by TheWalkingFox
You realize we have records of the building of Machu Piichu, right? And that we have the full history of Rapa Nui (Easter Island) including its date
of colonization? These places aren't at all mysterious except to those who have chosen to remain ignorant.
Also, if Eurasia had ever looked remotely like that, the Gobi desert would have stretched across the breadth of Siberia and into Europe.
It doesn't help that you're putting to-scale landmasses on a map that is not to scale.
Yes, there is A history and AN explanation given for those places but who are we to say that they are correct? If I question them, does that make me
ignorant? Certainly not - it does the EXACT OPPOSITE.
History is the EASIEST thing to fake. Who is going to be able to prove you wrong? Maybe Marty and the Doc at best!
But honestly, I don't buy into all histories we are told - if its an official line then there should be reason to question it and make sure it isn't
just that - a line!
And for the record here, I made this map as something to kill the time on a boring Sunday arvo. It isn't scientifically accurate nor do I claim to
have created a map of exactly how the world used to look.
It's just a representation of how I think the world COULD have looked at one point in time based on my knowledge. I could spend another week on
making it more accurate - and I may do that - but as it stands its simply one persons opinion really.
The only thing I truly stand by is that I think my depiction of Atlantis and Lemuria are pretty good.
Oh and thanks for those interactive map things. Will have a look when not at work