Origins of Atlantis/Lemuria Myths Part-1

Originally posted by win 52
Being able to find sea shells on the top peaks of the Rocky Mountains makes this thread a no-brainer.

Not really, because there are three ways of that happening: the sea was too high, the mountain was too low or a combination of both.

Considering our present understanding of tectonics, there is no need of the sea being that high for the sea shells to appear on the top of mountains because the mountains were not always mountains.

reply to post by ArMaP


Some of the clam shells I found were 10 - 12 inches across. At the time (1978) I thought ..... everything was big in the old days. There were all sorts of various sea shell remains at that site.

What I was getting at is, for there to be sea shells at the top of the world, there must be cities under the sea (if there ever were such things...Ancient cities).

In fact, that was when I became interested in ancient history. I did read the bible, looking for answers. I did not buy into the fringe areas of thought, as I was looking for my own understanding, not wanting to get bogged down with possible "wrong theory".

I also understood how to make oil. You pile up a bunch of "fresh" organic material, cover it with tons of debris and rock, let steep for millenia and voila "oil".

Having traveled through the bad lands in Alberta, I understood Earth has gone through, what seems like, a repetative series of World wide desasters. I could not grasp the idea of why this happens.

More and more it was starting to look like Earth hits the re-fresh button from time to time. Or, more likely, Earth has another cyclical event, we (modern theory and the School's History books) do not take seriously, for some unknown reason.

What type of event could cause the whole Earth to be turned up side down all of a sudden? (Hint: big bang doesn't cut it) Then after 1000 years, we forget about what happened and Earth is re-freshed, shedding off many of the signes of previous occupation, leaving a jumble of artifacts above and below the waters.

reply to post by win 52

OK, I understand it now, thanks for a detailed answer.

And with a correct spelling of "voila", I have to give you a star.

Originally posted by SLAYER69
I haven't heard from HARTE or Byrd yet.

I wouldn't speak for Byrd even if I could, but for myself, there is a very good reason I've not commented.

The thread says "Origins of Atlantis/Lemuria Myths."

Since there are no such myths about either fictional land mass, there can be no origins of said myths.

The only "myths" about these nonexistant places are completely and utterly modern.

For God's sake, the word "Lemuria" was coined by scientists before plate tectonics was understood:

In 1864 the zoologist and biogeographer Philip Sclater wrote an article on "The Mammals of Madagascar" in The Quarterly Journal of Science. Using a classification he referred to as lemurs but which included related primate groups,[2] and puzzled by the presence of their fossils in both Madagascar and India but not in Africa nor the Middle East, Sclater proposed that Madagascar and India had once been part of a larger continent. He wrote:

The anomalies of the Mammal fauna of Madagascar can best be explained by supposing that... a large continent occupied parts of the Atlantic and Indian Oceans . .. that this continent was broken up into islands, of which some have become amalgamated with ... Africa, some ... with what is now Asia; and that in Madagascar and the Mascarene Islands we have existing relics of this great continent, for which ... I should propose the name Lemuria![3]

Source

Sorry, Slayer. It's obvious you put a lot of time in, but your entire thesis is completely bogus.

If not, then please direct me to any mythology on Earth that includes either Lemuria or Atlantis.

Harte

[edit on 9/24/2009 by Harte]

reply to post by Harte


Hey thanks.

I'm not going to be desHARTEned.

reply to post by Harte


After giving your reply some thought I can see your point. I would also feel disHARTEned by the theory given.

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by win 52
Being able to find sea shells on the top peaks of the Rocky Mountains makes this thread a no-brainer.

Not really, because there are three ways of that happening: the sea was too high, the mountain was too low or a combination of both.

Considering our present understanding of tectonics, there is no need of the sea being that high for the sea shells to appear on the top of mountains because the mountains were not always mountains.

I had the penny drop recently with regards this subject, due to an interesing article I read, not my own intuition I hasten to add! Melting ice at the end of the last ice age is not the only mechanism for inundating large areas of land. There is another which could explain the rise of some areas of sea-bed to become mountain ranges, while mountain ranges end up as deep-sea massifs.

Geographical pole shift has happened before, and will probably happen again as the seas get warmer, tilting the axis of rotation towards Alaska. I believe this was first discovered in relation to Greenland, where ice cores revealed a discrepancy between the ages of the ice on one side of the country compared to the other. At one point some of Greenland had been ice-free. This was because the North pole had moved to it's current position, meaning the Arctic circle covered a different area, dissecting Greenland.

I think I have that straight. I will dig out the article I read.

Here you go: www.veravera.ch...

Not the one I read, but very interesting. I hadn't seen a cause attributed to this phenomena before, but according to the writer:

Mammoths lived in Arctic East Siberia. In this region there is not sufficient sunlight over
the year for the growth of the plants on which these animals feed. Therefore the latitude of
this region was lower before the end of the Pleistocene. As the cause of this geographic pole
shift, we postulate a massive object, which moved in an extremely eccentric orbit and was
hot from tidal work and solar radiation. Evaporation produced a disk-shaped cloud of ions
around the Sun. This cloud partially shielded the solar radiation, producing the cold and
warm periods that characterize the Pleistocene. The shielding depends on the inclination
of Earth’s orbit, which has a period of 100’000 years. The cloud builds up to a density
at which inelastic particle collisions induce its collapse The resulting near-periodic time
dependence resembles that of Dansgaard-Oeschger events. During cold periods fine grained
inclusions were deposited into the ice. The Pleistocene ended when the massive object had
a close encounter with the Earth, which suffered a one per mil stretching deformation.
While the deformation relaxed to an equilibrium shape in one to several years, the globe
turned relative to the rotation axis: The North Pole moved from Greenland to the Arctic
Sea. The massive object was torn to pieces, which evaporated.

[edit on 24-9-2009 by Karilla]

reply to post by Karilla


Hey thanks for the input.
I'm reading the link now good stuff.

Originally posted by Harte
The thread says "Origins of Atlantis/Lemuria Myths."

"The Lost Lemuria"
Harvard College Library
in the GEOGRAPHY department

by W.Scott-Eliot

References to the 'Secret Doctrine'

PDF AVAILABLE HERE


Lemuria
The Lost Continent of the Pacific
by W S Cerve' 1914

Rosicrucian Library

Dedication

"In appreciation of the first researches into the History of the lost continents of Altlantis and Lemuria made by that brilliant mind and soul, Sir Frances Bacon, this book is dedicated to his memory and everlasting greatness of character"


Sir Francis Bacon
Francis Bacon, Imperator of the Rosicrucian Order in the XVII Century
www.rosicrucian-order.com...

It was from his work that America "The New Atlantis" was conceived and created...

Francis Bacon, 1st Viscount St Alban KC (22 January 1561 – 9 April 1626)
en.wikipedia.org...

So that predates your reference by a few hundred years at least




[edit on 24-9-2009 by zorgon]

Originally posted by Karilla

Originally posted by demongoat
the problem with your idea is this, our only source for atlantis is plato and no stories of atlantis are found within egyptian beliefs or texts, there are no myths about cities sinking beneath the waves that i've heard.

Whoever built this lot certainly had some pretty useful building techniques, not replicated anywhere on dry land that we know about. These are solid rock, not built from blocks.



[edit on 24-9-2009 by Karilla]

from my understanding this is natural not man made. there are examples of it being a natural formation in other parts of yonaguni as well as across the world.
giants causeway is very uniform like the underwater formations in yonaguni, but its not considered man-made
believing something is man-made because of angles or flat surfaces is rather strange or in my view "myopic" seeing as nature can and has formed those things.


[edit on 24-9-2009 by demongoat]

Originally posted by zorgon
So that predates your reference by a few hundred years at least

What did sir Francis Bacon wrote about Lemuria?

reply to post by zorgon



Interesting post.

Thanks. I'll check it out and post a reply later.

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by Harte
The thread says "Origins of Atlantis/Lemuria Myths."

"The Lost Lemuria"
Harvard College Library
in the GEOGRAPHY department

by W.Scott-Eliot

References to the 'Secret Doctrine'

PDF AVAILABLE HERE

ah a theosophy book,that was written in 1903, nearly 50 years after a scientist came up with lemuria and 15 years after bavatsky took the name and made up her nonsense

Lemuria
The Lost Continent of the Pacific
by W S Cerve' 1914

Rosicrucian Library

Dedication

"In appreciation of the first researches into the History of the lost continents of Altlantis and Lemuria made by that brilliant mind and soul, Sir Frances Bacon, this book is dedicated to his memory and everlasting greatness of character"

how is that proof of anything? the book was written in 1914, bacon never wrote anything about lemuria, no one wrote anything about lemuria until the 1800's

Sir Francis Bacon
Francis Bacon, Imperator of the Rosicrucian Order in the XVII Century
www.rosicrucian-order.com...

It was from his work that America "The New Atlantis" was conceived and created...

Francis Bacon, 1st Viscount St Alban KC (22 January 1561 – 9 April 1626)
en.wikipedia.org...

So that predates your reference by a few hundred years at least

[edit on 24-9-2009 by zorgon]

uh no, no one wrote anything about lemuria until the 1800's and pretty much anything outside of it being a hypothetical place for lemurs wasn't until the 1880's
some guy dedicating a book to bacon about lemuria doesn't make lemuria something bacon knew about.
bacon did write about atlantis, but plato came up with it thousands of years before and there is nothing before plato wrote about it.

Originally posted by demongoat
from my understanding this is natural not man made. there are examples of it being a natural formation in other parts of yonaguni as well as across the world.
giants causeway is very uniform like the underwater formations in yonaguni, but its not considered man-made
believing something is man-made because of angles or flat surfaces is rather strange or in my view "myopic" seeing as nature can and has formed those things.

Surely it's "myopic" to dismiss the possibility out of hand. I have had the mechanism that formed the Giant's Causeway explained perfectly rationally. Nature is good at producing regular shapes in the course of crystallisation processes, but no mechanism has been put forward in anything but a tentative way to explain the formations at yonaguni. The formations on land in Okinawa and elsewhere on the same strata do not produce such perfect right-angles.

None of the geologists I have read state categorically that the formations are natural, with NO human involvement whatsoever. They cannot be certain, yet people who do not know enough to be uncertain state, without a shadow of a doubt, that they are natural and usually insult anyone who says otherwise.

Before you accuse anyone of short-sightedness, please explain the natural mechanism that caused this:


Edit for numerous typos.

[edit on 24-9-2009 by Karilla]

Just to add that the names Atlantis and Lemuria may well be red-herrings in this thread. The fact remains that nearly every historic culture has had mythology surrounding sunken lands/earlier civilisations. In Britain we have Hy-Brasil and Tir-Nan-Og. The Japanese have the Mu. The sumerians have the epic of Gilgamesh which features the great flood. The Tamils have their legends too. Look at this National Geographic page: news.nationalgeographic.com...

Off the coast of Mahabalipuram, in Tamil Nadu, South India, the discovery of a complex of submerged ruins has sparked an investigation into their origin. Local lore has long held that the area once boasted seven magnificent temples, but that six of these were swallowed by the sea. The seventh, and only remaining temple, still stands on the shore.

Stories passed from one generation to the next tell of a large, beautiful city that once occupied the area. The legends say the ancient metropolis was destroyed by the gods who were jealous of its beauty, and sent a flood to bury it beneath the waves.

The main issue is that there are numerous examples of sunken civilisations. There is commonality between them, and modern science keeps revealing ways in which this could happen. The date of the birth of civilisation is constantly being revised.

[edit on 24-9-2009 by Karilla]

Slayer, that is one of the best OPs i have read. Outstanding work, friend.

I can only add some of the research that The Way I See It and myself worked on in our unofficial collaboration. She is a top notch researcher and this is right up her alley.

I have yet to read beyond the OP. I wanted to set a foot in here for later, as i have a sick wife and sick son to tend to (darned flu for him, diverticulitis for her) so they will be ready for our trip to see Metallica on Monday night.

I would say that what you propose should be completely obvious to those who do not accept the standard theory. The submerged shorelines are the missing piece in the puzzle.

As TWISI and I discussed, there was a proposed impact event at the end of the Younger Dryas period that is suspected to have hit the northern ice shelf. There is evidence of massive flooding over the NA continent from multiple events of natural ice dams breaking, but this event was much larger.

Imagine the melting capacity of a cometary impact on an ice shelf. You have melting from the top due to the heat of the energy release upon impact. But, almost just as important, is the melting that happens UNDER the glacier. Ice melts when under pressure. This is a well known event, and it is what helps glaciers to 'glide" across the land. The greater the pressure, the greater the melting. Beneath a 2000m ice sheet, you could imagine the pressures there. There is already a healthy amount of water that is in the ground, making a muddy mess. Now add in the pressure of a comet travelling even a modest 50000 mph...massive amounts of water released from the impact.

This was no minor impact, either. It obliterated most life in the northeast, and wreaked havoc across the greater continent (a good reason to find scarce pre-clovis artifacts in the northern areas of the NA continent). The release of water into the north Atlantic would have been staggering to consider. Not salt water...fresh water. Ocean currents would be choked off, even if the "flushing" created by such a massive amount of water didn't completely divert and destroy the currents paths (basically "resetting" the oceanic current system in the norther hemisphere).

Another issue is the change in weight/force on the continental shelves globally. The most obvious effect would be from the release of the weight of ice/water on the NA continent. You could imagine that the decrease in weight caused a fairly substantial rise in the landmass. Bear in mind, however, that when you release pressure on one side of a plate, the other side dips. It is the same as a see saw. This type of thing may explain why we see mountain ranges that have evidence of being far younger than geologically possible. For example, the Himalayas, which are mythologically supposed to be a fairly new occurance as there are legends of human habitation when they were flat. As well, Lake Titicaca with what has been interpreted as a possible sea faring port (although this is highly contended with viable evidence). There are also terraces on the sides of some mountains in the region that appear to have been farmed more recently towards the top, which could indicate locals having to deal with super rapid water level changes (once again, this has been contended...only with less viable evidence).

Add to this the inundation of the underground aquifer system. The legends tell of water bubbling up from underground. It rained like crazy, and water was bubbling up from underground. This is simply explained by the above phenomena. First, if you introduce large amounts of water into the world water system, and do it rapidly, you could reasonably expect to see the aquifer system effected to such a degree (remember, this is a comet impact we are talking about here). Compounding the event, you have the "teetering" continental plates world wide, wobbling back and forth not only from the overall shock of the impact, but also from the effect of large volumes of water washing up over its shores. Even a 3 foot dip in the shelf on one side would likely cause a fairly large flood from groundwater in areas with more shallow groundwater amounts (we have seen similar events in volcanic areas like Yellowstone due to magma pressures...a similar concept).

The Phoenicians told tales of not travelling beyond the Straits of Gibraltar because of extremely turbulent waters. This is another obvious. As i stated earlier, a "resetting" of the world oceanic current system would be long lasting as the currents sought stability. Additionally, it likely took a considerable amount of time to stabilize the water after several episodes of fresh water introduction (there are multiple ice dam break events in the subsequent years).

I have some notes kept on this topic somewhere...but during this time i was deep, deep into the research and did a poor job of keeping track of many things. But i bet we could reconstruct much of this information from previous threads TWISI and I worked on, as well as some she worked on by herself.

Originally posted by ArMaP
What did sir Francis Bacon wrote about Lemuria?

The hard part is finding all of his writings. Sir Francis Bacon was the genius behind many pens, including Shakespeare (William Shakespeare was a lower caste man with an illiterate daughter....hardly the kind of person who would pen such great works littered with Rosicrucian references).

Here is a site that sets out an atlas of the earth at the time of the last ice-age. It shows (not in great detail I'm afraid. I'm looking for better) the extent of the land masses that were exposed. www.esd.ornl.gov...



The text on the site is far more enlightening than the images. Still looking for better images. I know they're out there!

Originally posted by demongoat there is nothing before plato wrote about it.

How do you know what was written that was burned at Alexandria?

reply to post by Karilla


I have a more detailed pic I'll be using for demonstration purposes.
Don't be tide down by the 8000BC barrier