You are running with it. You have taken inconclusive ongoing archaeological research and concluded to for yourself that it's Atlantis, when none of the people who are actually DOING the research have said anything like that.


You cannot get around that.



Thusly You are misrepresenting their work to prove a point. This is not evidence for Atlantis.

I'm not misrepresenting anything or anyone and i'm linking to their actual articles and websites.

However, we have to remember that according to the beliefs of skeptical scientists, materialists, atheists, and evolutionists, there shouldn't even be anything like these underwater structures existing.

Yet those who researched Atlantis, Pyramids, Astrology, Bimini road etc. would have predicted this as completely possible.

So we can clearly see who was correct here........ and obviously this is Atlantis if it's not natural. So far the data itself is not consistent with a natural origin.

Originally posted by Hollywood11
It's physical evidence of Atlantis' existence, just as many people for many years have known and predicted that it was real. I'm not "running" with anything, people have predicted there could be remnants of Atlantis for many decades. The Bimini road was just the beginning.

It's 2000 feet at the bottom of the ocean, land that sank, right in the correct location we would expect Atlanteans to have been, in the right time period.



[edit on 23-10-2008 by Hollywood11]

Right where we would expect Atlantis to be? You mean in the countless different locations that Atlantis is said to have been at the various ages? As Good Wolf said, you're taking evidence for various cultures and claiming its Atlantis.

Umm, I'm just wondering when this thread got derailed into an 'Atlantis, fact or fiction' thread??? Isn't this supposed to be about how evolution has been proven wrong? (Which it hasn't, just for the record!)

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
Umm, I'm just wondering when this thread got derailed into an 'Atlantis, fact or fiction' thread??? Isn't this supposed to be about how evolution has been proven wrong? (Which it hasn't, just for the record!)

Guess that's my bad for asking for evidence for what would be the find of the century.

Originally posted by FSBlueApocalypse
Guess that's my bad for asking for evidence for what would be the find of the century.

Well I can tell you now, you haven't been given any.

Originally posted by dave420
Weird all this 'evidence' you put forward is ignored by these atlantis-hating scientists! Damn their rational appraisal of evidence! Damn their objectivity!

Not all scientists are ignorant of Atlantis, however, the majority definitely are. It is not because of being "rational", but rather, them not understanding real history or the real history of mankind is due to their ignorance

Yeah, although i do believe Plato's account is describing the flooding at the end of the last ice age, since that is the date he gives afterall, it wouldn't surprise me if aspects of the legends from Santorini, Crete, the Minoans etc. got mixed in there too.

The date could have just as easily been fudged and probably was too. But the thing is that nothing in the Atlantis legend suggests that men materialised into being and hence didn't evolve, it only has bearing on anthropology just like your claims about the earliest man in America. For it to be significant to evolution it would have to be hundreds of thousands of years not just aound 10,000.