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.

 

Amazing new insights on Atlantis: We might be close to solving the mystery!

page: 1
15
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 03:21 PM
link   
After reading a few articles today on the Ramayana epic and the historical evidence for it and then an article on Atlantis and Lumeria, an amazing insight occurred to me. It was the coming together of so many different strands and I think I have come to a huge realization on where Atlantis was and how it fits in into prehistory.

Atlantis was in Sri Lanka!

Does that sound preposterous? Well, hear me out then on how I have come to this conclusion. However, first let me tell you what I have concluded. I have concluded that Lemuria and Atlantis are actually different names for the same civilisation. It is possible that Lemuria is a much earlier phase of the later Atlantis that Plato describes or that they are both completely identical.
The key to the location and the history of Atlantis is in the Sanskrit texts. I have maintained this on ATS for a long time that the clearest evidence of an advanced civilisation is to be found in the Sanskrit texts. And once again they have come to the rescue in giving insight into prehistory.

First, let us look at Plato’s account. Plato is talking about a memory of an advanced civilisation that existed 9000 years ago, that was a naval power, that had conquered Africa and Western Europe, that sank in a single night. Where did Plato get this memory from of such a distant past. Well 9000 years ago, the Greeks were not actually in Greece, so that Plato’s Atlantis may not actually be anywhere near Greece. In fact most likely it would be near where they were 9000 years ago.

So where were the Greeks 9000 years ago? What do we know about the Greeks? They are an Indo-European group, and what do we know about the Indo-European group? The oldest and most complex known literature of this group is Sanskrit. And here is what is very interesting the Sanskrit literature talk about the Greeks(Sanskrit: Yavana) long before the Greeks and the Indians were in contact. The Mahabharata epic(dated by Indian records to 3000BCE) mentions the Greeks and the Sanskrit grammarian Panini(Indian records date to 2000BCE; western records 500BCE) mentions the Greeks, and guess what, they mention them as actually being in India! Panini even mentions Greek scholars that he references to compose his Grammar. But no such grammatical traditions are to be found in Greece! That is very interesting right?

It is long been suspected by scholars that Greeks and Indians are related because their philosophy, medical systems, even social structure were so similar. But Indian philosophy is older than recorded Greek philosophy and Greek philosophy appears all of a sudden in Greece. Thus suggesting that the Greeks descended from the Indians!

And isn’t it also very interesting that the so-called Dravidian people(Indus) whose civilisation goes back 10,000 years ago, who were a navel power, and were the first civilisation to build docks and service ships remember a lost continent in the far South of India near Sri Lanka that sank in a single night? Wait, does that not sound like Plato’s Atlantis? Interestingly, the legendary Lemuria has been speculated to have been near Sri Lanka!

And now with many researchers and historians pushing back the so-called Vedic period of Indian history to the Indus valley it means that the Indo-Europeans were in India in 3000BCE and prior! In other words the Greeks being members of that group were actually in India at the same time. This is where they are getting their common memories from, their common philosophies from and their common gods from.

And the clue is in Plato’s description of Atlantis itself. He saying that it was near the Pillars of Hercules"

And who is Hercules? It is incredibly ironic that the ancient Greek historian Megesthenes actually identified Hercules as the Hindu god Krishna! Also look at this:


The myth of Hercules suggests in certain features the Hindu saga of the hero Krishna, who like many heroes escapes a general infanticide, and is then brought up by a herder's wife, Iasodha. A wicked she-demon appears, who has been sent by King Kansa to kill the boy. She takes the post of wet nurse in the home, but is recognized by Krishna, who bites her so severely in suckling--like Hera, when nursing Hercules, whom she also means to destroy--that she dies


sacred-texts.com...

This is definitely not just some coincidence. The fact that the Greeks and Indians belong to the same linguistic and cultural group. That that they share similar gods and philosophies and finally Hercules identification with the Hindu god-man Krishna! It is definitely suggesting that the Greeks and Indians were one time together. And we know they were not together in Greece, so they must have been together in India.

And if Hercules really is Krishna and Platos describes Atlantis as being near Krishna, then without a doubt he is talking about India. The word pillar may suggest the country of India or the south of India: Sri Lanka.

Now here is what is going to potentially clinch it. The Ramayana, of which there exists several versions in different regions in South Asia and South East Asia, suggesting it is a real historical event recorded by several different populations in Asia. It describes Sri Lanka as a huge continent, a mega world power, where the king Rawana has dominion over vast areas of the world though conquest and interestingly this includes Africa and Western Europe - just what Plato described!


Dr Suriya Gunasekera a reputed historian in an article to Rivira a weekend newspaper states that Rawana the powerful great administrator and Emperor ruled over seven continents from Lanka. They were the modern South America, Southern Europe; Himalaya including the Hindukush mountain range and continents up to Madagascar.
According to the belief of Sri Lankan populace the only tsunami they have ever heard before was the one that took place nearly 2,200 years ago during the reign of the King Kelanitissa. This tsunami is recorded in Mahawansa and is accepted as a tsunami.
Since the last tsunami of 2004 which shocked the world many evidences of many tsunamis that had taken place since prehistory were highlighted. It’s interesting to note that more frequent tsunamis have shattered the isle of Lanka than most of us have ever thought. Information of different incidents related to earthquakes and tsunamis can be gathered by carefully studying diverse sources of history.
The first incident, which has not been recorded in any of the ancient Sri Lankan texts, allegedly has taken place at the end of Rawana’s reign. According to Ramayana, Rawana’s kingdom, with 25 Palace’s and over 400,000 streets were swallowed by the sea. Let’s think over whether it could have actually happened. Though the exact location of the Rawana’s kingdom is not historically identified but it is accepted as Sri Lanka. However, with the findings of rock edicts pertaining to Rawana and his dynasty in Sri Lanka, it proves that Sri Lanka is the Lanka stated in Ramayana. So it was quite possible that this pre-historic or rather pre-Mahawansa kingdom near present Arugambay has been completely destroyed by a tsunami or an earthquake.
This provides an answer to the question if there had been beyond doubt a ‘Rawana’s kingdom’ in the pre-Mahawansa period and why we cannot find any evidence of it today. If it were entirely submerged by sea, as described in the script, there could not have been any traces of this kingdom on the land. It is quite probable that the remaining land area of Sri Lanka is the tiny portion of the massive Rawana’s kingdom, which had been several times bigger. Why cannot the rock islands, on which the light houses Great Basses (Maha Rawana) and Little Basses (Kuda Rawana) stand were remaining parts of the Rawana’s kingdom?
According to Ramayana Sri Lanka was a huge continent.


www.ramayanaresearch.com...


And WAIT there is actually evidence that Sri Lanka WAS once part of a huge and lost continent!



The lost continent of Lemuria (Mu) was originally referenced in the works of several 19th century scientists. Observing similarities between the geology and fauna of India and Madagascar, some scientists theorized that there once existed a huge land mass (Lemuria) in the Indian Ocean that spanned the two locales. As with Atlantis, the days of Lemuria came to an end with a cataclysmic natural disaster that sank the continent into the sea. Lemuria was originally an hypothesised continent in the southern Indian Ocean, proposed in 1860 by the geologist William T Blandford (1832-1905) as a means of explaining the presence of identical Permian rocks in South Africa and Gondwana (in southern India). Geologists noted that strata of Permian age in India, South Africa, Australia, and South America (245 to 286 million years ago) were almost identical in the types of sedimentary rocks that comprised them. In addition, these strata on these continents contained identical fossils of land plants, e.g. cordaites and "Glossopteris" and land animals, e.g. Therapsids.

Because these land plants and animals could not have crossed the open sea and continents were thought to be immobile, geologists explained the presence of identical fossil plants and animals on India, Africa, South America, and Australia by postulating the existence of land bridges and even whole continents that had long since sunk beneath the oceans. In 1864, the English zoologist Philip Lutley Sclater (1829-1913) suggested the name Lemuria for this land bridge, and the name stuck.
Around the same time, Ernst Häckel (1834-1919), a German biologist, saw this as an explanation for the presence of lemurs in Madagascar and south-east Asia; he also proposed that lemurs were our ancestors and that this land bridge was the original home of humanity.
Haekel used it to explain the distribution of lemurs in Africa, India, Madagascar, and Malaya.

[edit on 16-12-2009 by Indigo_Child]




posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 03:27 PM
link   
This theory was eventually rejected by geologists because better explanations emerged of continental drift and plate tectonics and then Lemuria was forgotten about, kept alive only in the mind of the occultists. However, recently new evidence has surfaced which actually suggests that land three times the size of Japan did indeed get submerged in the Indian ocean.


In 1999, drilling by the JOIDES Resolution research vessel in the Indian Ocean discovered evidence [1] that a large island, the Kerguelen Plateau, was submerged about 20 million years ago by rising sea levels.


en.wikipedia.org...(continent)

Take a look at the geography around Sri Lanka on a map, you will find bits and pieces of islands scattered around the Indian ocean close to Lanka; Maldives, Seychelles, Andaman and Nicobar island. Could they have been part of the same landmass?

There does seem to be very strong evidence that Sri Lanka was once part of a much larger land mass just as the Ramayana describes and given its proximity to Madagascar, Australia, Indonesia it would explain Rawana dominance of these regions!

Interesting observations that may actually corroborate this dominance by the Dravidians that the Ramayana describes:

The fact that Dravidians and Australian aborigines look the same.
Indonesia shares a history with ancient India and has ties with her going well into the 10th century. It also knows about the Ramayana and the ancient Indian histories actually refer to Indonesia by name. It too has Dravidian looking natives.
Asians did migrate to the Americas. And Indus-script like script has been found on Easter island:


In the 1930s the world was stunned by the claim of a Hungarian scientist living in Paris that Easter Island's rongorongo had derived from the Indus Valley script of approximately 2000 BC. The "Indus Valley Hypothesis," as it came to be known, was of course eventually silenced by those remindful of the realities of time and distance -- 4,000 years and nearly half-way round the world


www.netaxs.com...

There is an awful lot of evidence suggesting the Ramayana account is true. The Indians did seem to have a huge amount of influence and power in prehistory and have cast a global footprint.

But when did this all take place? The evidence I have seen so far has dated the Ramayana variously to 5000BCE, 7000BCE. While Puranic account suggest it happened millions of years ago. Whatever the case, it is highly likely given all this evidence that Plato’s described Atlantis was in Sri Lanka or near Sri Lanka!

[edit on 16-12-2009 by Indigo_Child]



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 04:02 PM
link   
I think I love you.
Just kidding!LOL Outstanding research! I can't wait to see what other revelations stem from it. S&F!


[edit on 16-12-2009 by gazerstar]



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 04:08 PM
link   
An account of the legend of the Dravidians of their lost continent:

Kumari Kandam and Lemuria

"Lemuria" in Tamil nationalist mysticist literature, connecting Madagascar, South India and Australia (covering most of the Indian Ocean). Mount Meru stretches southwards from Sri Lanka.Kumari Kandam is a legendary sunken kingdom sometimes compared with Lemuria (cf. works of G. Devaneyan, Tamil: ஞானமுத்தன் தேவநேயன்).In Tamil tradition, Kumari Kandam is referred to as the Land of Purity, a sophisticated kingdom of higher learning, located south of Kanyakumari or Cape Comorin. During a violent geologic catastrophy the entire island was submerged under the water. The survivors migrated to the present Indian subcontinent and supposedly sparked the Indus Valley civilization. This mass of land is often compared to the island of Lemuria[7].

According to these modernist interpretations of motifs in classical Tamil literature — the epics Cilappatikaram and Manimekalai that describe the submerged city of Puhar[8]— the Dravidians originally came from land south of the present day coast of South India that became submerged by successive floods. There are various claims from Tamil authors that there was a large land mass connecting Australia and the present day Tamil Nadu coast.

Another piece of literature in Ayyavazhi mythology, specifically Akilathirattu Ammanai speaks of a sunken land about 152 miles south or south east of present day Kanyakumari. It goes on to describe the civilization with exactly 16008 streets[8].

en.wikipedia.org...(continent)#Kumari_Kandam_and_Lemuria

[edit on 16-12-2009 by Indigo_Child]



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 04:10 PM
link   
time lines of our history are wrong though, atlantis lumuria, etc possibly time zones, who knows and if that the case then atlantis and lumuria were all over the planet just like the native indians were all over the planet all over the place there were tribes but the question is who actulley built the pyramids



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 04:23 PM
link   
Atlantis has always interested me.

Unfortunately, even had it existed, I dont think they'll ever find any evidence of it.

I think of The Lighthouse of Alexandria, one of the wonders of the world, ... its a little over 2000 years old, yet when they dive the sight there is almost NOTHING left, ... I mean, what were once statues look like rocks.

So if your trying to find evidence of something 10,000 years old !! good luck with that.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 04:36 PM
link   
reply to post by IntastellaBurst
 


I am not really trying to prove whether this continent really existed. It probably did, there are so many records of it in Sanskrit, Tamil and then Plato's sole account to not take the possibility seriously. I think what I am really trying to prove here is the source of Plato's "Atlantis" legend. The Ramayana is difficult to date, but it definitely seems to have been a real historical event, because there are so many accounts of it in so many different populations in Asia and loads of histories documenting the events. It does actually describe the sinking of a massive continent around Sri Lanka over night, which is a naval power, has colonies all around the world including in Africa, just like Plato's description of Atlantis.

[edit on 16-12-2009 by Indigo_Child]



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 04:54 PM
link   
After watching an episode of How the Earth Was Made on history channel last night I think the Sahara is a likely candidate for the location of Atlantis.

Geologists have uncovered overwhelming evidence that the Sahara switches between being a desert or a lush green grassland every 20,000 years like clockwork due to a regular wobble in the earth.

During the green phase, the Sahara contains many mega-lakes connected by a vast network of rivers making it the largest concentration of fresh water in the whole world.

Up until around 5,000 years ago the Sahara was a lush paradise that was probably home to millions of people. When the wobble occurred the Sahara turned into a desert within 100-200 years!

The population most likely migrated to the Nile and formed the Egyptian civilization.

It was an amazing episode.

www.history.com...

Africa's Sahara Desert is the size of the United States, making it the largest desert in the world. It's also the hottest place on the planet. But now an astonishing series of geological discoveries has revealed this searing wasteland hides a dramatically different past. Scientists have unearthed the fossils of whales, freshwater shells and even ancient human settlements. All clues to a story that would alter the course of human evolution and culminate in biggest climate change event of the last 10,000 years.

[edit on 16-12-2009 by Deny Arrogance]



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 06:32 PM
link   
Well, you have proposed a very intriguing possibility, but I wonder how it would hold up when adhering to known time lines of history.

In your favor, I too have thought that the legend of Atlantis may have followed the "proto" Greeks from an earlier land, but then in Plato's writing he specifically mentions that the "Atlanteans" attacked Athens, and then their homeland of Atlantis was destroyed by misfortune. Right away we're presented with a quandary - the time of Plato's Atlantis is given as 9,000 years prior to Solon, or around 9600 BC. Solon was an Athenian who had a profound impact on Greek culture and is credited with laying the groundwork for Athenian democracy, so naturally to Greek writers he was a logical choice to base a time line on. Which begs the question, in 9600 BC, was Athens in existence then? Most scholars will say no. For your theory to hold any water, it would mean the Indo-Europeans whom eventually settled on the Attica-Ionian peninsulas had to have an earlier city named for Athena, which remained in their oral traditions / legends until the eventual founding of the Greek city. I think a lot of scholars again would have a major problem with that. The Athenian Greeks themselves would attribute their history to the influences of their neighbors such as the Dorians and Mycenae before jumping thousands of years to the past and a far distant land. It's not impossible but highly improbable.

One thing I thought right off the bat, in 9600 BC, the root language for the Indo-European families were still in the Black Sea region;

The Indo-European Family is thought to have originated in the forests north of the Black Sea (in what is now Ukraine) during the Neoloithic period (about 7000BC). These people bagan to migrate between 3500BC and 2500BC, spreading west to Europe, south to the Mediterranian, north to Scandinavia, and east to India.
- source
This is also where the Aryan peoples originated from.

So who was it then, the Atlanteans were fighting with? Who was in the Indus region during the Neolithic period, that would have had this war with them, would have had a city possibly named for Athena? Can you elaborate on the peoples and culture that was there at time? How the legend was preserved until Plato had heard of it from Egyptian scholars? In fact how the Egyptians themselves, the source for Plato's Atlantis, would have heard of it, since they too, weren't a civilization yet (according to scholars).

Athena may be one possible link in the puzzle, when you consider she is likely based on Inanna, who established the archetype for many of the later goddesses. Inanna was a Sumerian diety, a goddess of both love and war. Athena was a goddess of war, while another Greek deity, Aphrodite, was goddess of love. Inanna was also prevalent in Indian mythology,



Inanna ruled the Aratta on the Indus while also remaining a central cult figure in Uruk and Nippur in Sumer. She may well be the "Athena" preserved by the proto-Greeks that settled into Attica and established a newer city in her honor, but not the one the Atlanteans attempted to invade.

But again, this is wildly speculative and flies in the face of convention.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 06:38 PM
link   
Have you read Stephen Oppenheimer's "Eden in the East"?

A review is here - "An Atlantis in the Indian Ocean"



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 05:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


You raise interesting questions, which I must attempt to answer. First of all, though, I have to say that any discussion on the actual existence of Atlantis will go against accepted timelines and conventions. Proposing any kind of alternative history that diverges from accepted history in academia, will certainly go against some conventions. So the fact that the alternative history goes against convention does not automatically make it invalid, because it is possible that the conventions are wrong and the alternative history proposed is a better explanation of a certain history. Therefore we must evaluate an alternative histoy theory on the basis of evidence, and not by comparing it what historians currently accept.

In this case one of the conventions is the Aryan invasion of India in 1500BCE and the beginning of the Vedic period of India in 1200BCE. I am sure you are aware, as you cited Koenrad, that this convention is strongly challenged by many scholars today. On the grounds of the near total absence of evidence to support that this invasion or migration actually took place. Secondly, because the vast archeological evidence collected from the excavations of the Indus valley civilisation demonstrate that the Vedic literature and the Indus valley match. Some of the features:

1. The geography described in the Rig Veda is decidely Indian.
2. The city planning of the Indus matches with the descriptions of cities in Vedic engineering texts and the Mahabharata. Even the measurments used for the mud-bricks used in the Indus are identical
3. Most of the Vedic features are already a part of the indus. Such as Yoga, firealtars, sacred symbols like the Swastika, Aum, Banyan tree
4. There is clear continuity between the Indus, the Vedic phase and Modern India, thus suggesting the evolution of Vedic religion within an Indian context without foreign influence.
5. The Vedic texts describe a highly literate, numerate, artisan, seafaring and commercial society. The Indus valley are literate, numerate, artisan, seafaring and commercial.
6. The Vedic texts describe contact with various parts of the world via sea-trade, naming various countries by names. The Indus was indeed in contact with various parts of the world through sea trade.
7. The Vedic religion is both matriarchal and patriarchal. The Indus religion is both matriarchal and patriarchal

Thus the evidence is clearly showing that the supposed historical dichotomy of the Indus phase and the vedic phase is a false dichotomy. The Indus is already vedic, thus there was no such thing as a vedic phase, Indian society was vedic from the very beginning of its recorded history.
This clearly means, therefore, that the Indo-Aryans are indigenous to India. That is in turn consistent with the fact that the Vedic people never claimed a home outside of India and record their history in India going back more than 5000 years. Even Greek scholars record the same.

Therefore, we must reject the accepted dates by Western scholars that the Indo-Aryans came to India in 1500BCE. They were definitely in India during 3000BCE during the Indus valley's mature phase and even before. This establishes therefore that the Indo-Europeans originated in India, and migrated outside of India. Therefore, proto-Greeks must have originated in India and their distant memories and legends therefore must be Indian. This is further corrobrated by the fact that Indian records that are dated to 3000BCE and earlier actually mention the Greeks as a group in India. Apparently, the Lithuanians which are earliest of the Indo-European remember their journey from the Himalyas. I was told this by a Lithuanian scholar who posts on ATS a few years ago.

The fact the Greek gods are traceable to the Hindu gods also cannot be a coincidence. Hercules = Krishna; Dionysis = Shiva; Athena = Saraswati; Indra = Zeus.

Therefore the evidence strongly suggests that the Proto-Indo Europeans were Indians and the Greeks were in India during the Indus valley. They migrated from India during the decline phase of the Indus valley somewhere around 1700BCE. This, we know now was caused by ecological changes and the drying up of the Indus-Saraswati river.

The spread of Indo-European culture around the world can be explained as
1) The diffusion of the Vedic culture throughout the world due to the extensive sea trade links the Indus valley had with the world and its huge influence and power at the time. Its power and influence is evident from the fact that it was the most advanced and largest civilisation of the ancient world and its global footprint.
2) The waves of migrations during the decline phase

I think, as the evidence is overwhelming and the number of scholars supporting this revised history is growing, the academic community will eventualy be forced to accept this and discard the Aryan invasion theory.
But for now I am going to accept this as true based on the evidence.

This means the proto-Greeks were definitely in India. As Plato's account is describing 9600 years ago, this means that this is corresponding to India's Mehgara period. This is the period when the Indus valley was in its very early phase of development. It is still sophisticated, but it is less urban and cities are not as well planned. Therefore it could not have been the same as Atlantis. But, what is interesting some of the estimated dates based on astronomical evidence place the Ramayana in 7000BCE. And the Ramayana is described as less-urban and more agrian than the Mahabharata age(3000BCE). If 7000BCE is the correct timing of the Ramayana, this is when the war between India and Sri Lanka took place.

Plato said that Atlantis attacked Athens. I propose that Athens is none other than the Proto-Greek name for India or ones of its main cities. As Athens is derived from Athenia. Athenia is traceable to the Hindu goddess Saraswati. And Saraswati was the river the Indus civilisation was built on and ironically modern scholars call it the Indus-Saraswati civilisation.

But I suspect that the Ramayana is vastly older than 7000BCE and the astronomical evidence used to derive this could also derive an earlier date going back hundreds of thousands of years. This means that Plato's Atlantis maybe much older than 9000 years. I think both the Ramayana and Atlantis are prehistoric memories going back to an antiquity that defies convention.

[edit on 17-12-2009 by Indigo_Child]



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 05:57 PM
link   
Plato said that Atlantis was located west of the Pillars of Hercules, which are the Straits of Gibralta. This means that the civilisation was on an island in the Atlantic Ocean.

No theory of Atlantis that cherry-picks what Plato said in his writings and ignores what contradicts it is worthy of consideration.



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 06:12 PM
link   
reply to post by micpsi
 


As Hercules is a mythological figure, his pillar too is mythological. The idetification of the Pillar of Hercules with the staits of Gibraltor is one possible interpretation of where this was. Apparently it was the Romans who made this identification, not Plato himself.

Thus I think that the location is open to interpretation and speculation. And other scholars have also suggested different locations:


According to a controversial theory by Italian journalist Sergio Frau, the Pillars of Hercules in fact referred to the area of water between "Greater Sicily" (including Malta, Sicily, and the surrounding islands joined by a land bridge) and Tunisia.


I think any kind of explanation of the location of a mythological pillar of a mythological figure must actually trace the origins of the mythology. And as argued earlier, one of those possible origins is the Hindu god Krishna. And this has also been explictly stated by an ancient Greek historian himself, so the connection is not fabricated.

[edit on 17-12-2009 by Indigo_Child]



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 06:48 PM
link   
reply to post by IntastellaBurst
 


I said this earlier on another thread, so as much as hate to I have to agree

with intastella.
Even if they used rebar steel in their structures, 10,000 yr's
would reduce a city to not in the currents of salt water. I also believe it
didn't just slip under the waves. Most likely the land mass even slipped
under a shelf. I know it will never been seen by human eyes again.
No matter what Casey or Nostradamus say.



posted on Dec, 18 2009 @ 03:47 AM
link   
Ramayana: Astronomical dating places it 9600 years ago

I was reading the article of the Astronomical dating of the Ramayana, which demonstrated without a reason of doubt that the Ramayana took place - wait for it - “9600 years” ago! That is exactly date that Plato mentions as when Atlantis existed and when the war between Atlantis and “Athens” took place. Now that is definitely not some coincidence.

The astronomical dating of the Ramayana and other Vedic texts is possible because the ancient Indians meticulously recorded astronomical data to date special events in their history, especially the birth of major kings etc. One of those special events was the birth of King Rama.


Dr. P. V. Vartak from Pune carefully studied the astronomical references in these texts and corroborated the same with historical and archeological evidences. All in all, it is possible to state that the dates as derived by Dr. P.V. Vartak are more accurate than the various other dates propounded by other scholars who have been carried away by the statements made by Western scholars who have been prejudiced against the richness of the Indian Civilization in the past and have always tried to attribute much later dates and consequently to denigrate the glorious past of India.

Dr. Vartak concludes that Ramayana must have occurred 9600 years ago, which is 7600 B.C approximately


The astronomical cofigurations given in the Ramayana by the author Valmiki can be used conclusively to date birth of king Rama:


Placing the Ramayana in the historical context is yet an unfinished task, as witnessed by endless debates among archaeologists, historians and literary pundits. The present analysis is a modest attempt to use astronomy, astrology and the science of time together in elevating the status of Ramayana from an epic to a chronological reality. Astonishingly, the ancient Indians had an accurate method of time easurement. They regularly and systematically recorded the `tithis’, days marked according to the phases of the Moon, the months, the seasons, solstices, equinoxes and the positions of astrologically relevant luminaries like the Sun, the Jupiter, the Venus, and so on. In other words, the timings of events were recorded in the astronomical format. To convert this coded information on heavenly positions into a simple calendrical timeline, all that is needed is a database of ephemeris. Sage Valmiki, the celebrated composer of the Ramayana records the birth of Rama in Uttarayana (the Divine Half-year), in the Chaitra month, in the bright fortnight, on the ninth day, in the Punarvasu nakshatra, on a Monday, and under Karka lagna. Valmiki further details the birth with various planetary positions in the zodiac : Sun in Mesha at 10 deg., Mars in Capricorn at 28 degree, Jupiter in Cancer at 5 deg., Venus in Pisces at 27 deg. and Saturn in Libra at 20 deg. These starry configurations are so unique that they have occurred only once so far in measurable history and this helps us to fix the important date, the birthday of Rama, as the 4th of December, 7323 BC.


Source

I think we have a solid theory here, backed up by a lot of evidence for the actual existence of Atlantis and the positive identiftication of its time, location and history, so this theory has to be taken seriously, especially by those who have a sincere interest in solving the mystery of Atlantis.

Let us look at the summary of the evidence presented so far:



  1. The Proto-Greeks were in India according to the archeaological, linguistic and textual evidence showing the Proto-Indo-Europeans to have originated in India
  2. The Greek god Hercules was the Hindu god Krishna and therefore the Pillar of Hercules was in the Indian subcontinent
  3. Plato's reference to Athens 9600 years is India. As Athens is derived from Athenia, who is identical with the Hindu river goddess Saraswati on the banks of which the Indus civilisation existed.
  4. The astronomical evidence categorically dates the Ramayana history 9600 years. In the Ramayana Sri Lanka and India are at war, Sri Lanka is a massive continent and naval power with dominion over Africa, Western Europe, Americas and many parts of the world. It sinks over night and is destroyed. Plato says 9600 years ago Atlantis attacked Athens, Atlantis was a massive continent and naval power, with dominion over Africa, Western Europe. It sinks over night and is destroyed.
  5. There is evidence to believe Sri Lanka was once part of a much larger landmass


CONCLUSION: Atlantis was a massive continent in the Indian Ocean, South of India which existed 9600 years ago, of which only Sri Lanka remains.

I think we might have solved the mystery of Atlantis! Spread the word!

[edit on 18-12-2009 by Indigo_Child]



posted on Dec, 18 2009 @ 09:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo_Child
In this case one of the conventions is the Aryan invasion of India in 1500BCE and the beginning of the Vedic period of India in 1200BCE. I am sure you are aware, as you cited Koenrad, that this convention is strongly challenged by many scholars today. On the grounds of the near total absence of evidence to support that this invasion or migration actually took place. Secondly, because the vast archeological evidence collected from the excavations of the Indus valley civilisation demonstrate that the Vedic literature and the Indus valley match. Some of the features:

SNIP

Indian society was vedic from the very beginning of its recorded history.
This clearly means, therefore, that the Indo-Aryans are indigenous to India. That is in turn consistent with the fact that the Vedic people never claimed a home outside of India and record their history in India going back more than 5000 years. Even Greek scholars record the same.

This establishes therefore that the Indo-Europeans originated in India, and migrated outside of India. Therefore, proto-Greeks must have originated in India and their distant memories and legends therefore must be Indian.

The supposed Aryan Invasion is certainly spurious, but that by no means indicates anything at all about the origins of proto-Greeks.

In fact, mtDNA analysis shows that proto-Greeks were likely related to Indians, because both lines originated just east of the Caspian Sea. However, they diverged there and took wildly differing routes to these two final destinations. (see the maps at this website

No, any relationship between any ancient Greek myth or legend and Vedic mythology had to come from contacts between these two peoples.

And, since there exists no evidence whatsoever of any ancient Greek legend of Atlantis, nor any such legend in Egypt, as was claimed by Plato's Critias, it's simply foolish to posit that the idea came from anything in Vedic literature.

Also, if you would consider bothering to read Plato's Critias and Timaeus, you'd see that it is equally foolish to make some claim about how he didn't mean Gibraltar. It is perfectly clear that he's talking about the Straits of Gibraltar. There is just no question about it. In fact, it's referred to as the Straits of Heracles in the Critias, and is described as the boundary between the Mediterreanean Sea and the Atlantic Ocean.

Plato could have placed Atlantis anywhere he wanted since he made the entire thing up anyway. But the area beyond Gibraltar was ideal for his story because what lay beyond was a giant mystery for the people of his culture.

Harte



posted on Dec, 18 2009 @ 12:52 PM
link   

The supposed Aryan Invasion is certainly spurious, but that by no means indicates anything at all about the origins of proto-Greeks.


Indeed it does. As there is no evidence for the foreign origin of the Aryans and there is evidence that the Indo-Aryans were already in India in 3000BCE and prior. It means that the Indo-Europeans originated in India and migrated out from India and went into Europe. This was likely during the decline phase of the Indus valley, when the Saraswati river dried up, leading to the Indians having to migrate. It is during this period where we can find Indo-European cultures appearing in Central Asia and Europe.

Remember, the Sanskrit texts actually mention the Greeks by name "Yavanas" of which "Ionion" is a corruption and they mention them as a group that existed in India. The clearest reference is in the Mahabharata text, which is dated to 3000BCE in Indian history.


And, since there exists no evidence whatsoever of any ancient Greek legend of Atlantis, nor any such legend in Egypt, as was claimed by Plato's Critias, it's simply foolish to posit that the idea came from anything in Vedic literature.

Also, if you would consider bothering to read Plato's Critias and Timaeus, you'd see that it is equally foolish to make some claim about how he didn't mean Gibraltar. It is perfectly clear that he's talking about the Straits of Gibraltar. There is just no question about it. In fact, it's referred to as the Straits of Heracles in the Critias, and is described as the boundary between the Mediterreanean Sea and the Atlantic Ocean.

Plato could have placed Atlantis anywhere he wanted since he made the entire thing up anyway. But the area beyond Gibraltar was ideal for his story because what lay beyond was a giant mystery for the people of his culture.


The only record of Atlantis we have is from Plato. He describes its location west of the straits of Hercules. It is clear Plato himself did not visit Atlantis, he said that he had learned about it from an oral tradition recorded by the Egyptians(a mystery school perhaps) He may have speculated that Atlantis was in the Atlanic ocean based on his interpretation of where the straits of Hercules was. It is possible he made it up, but it is also possible he did not make it up and was really channeling a real memory.

What should not be overlooked that the Ramayana does indeed mention a massive continent that is a naval power, with colonies all over the world anda major war between this massive continent and India, and that this continent sank overnight due to its misdeeds. And the fact that the astronomical evidence shows that this happened 9600 years ago is the clincher. It is identical with Plato's account of Atlantis and exactly identical with the date Plato ascribes to Atlantis. Thus there is very strong reason to believe that Atlantis is actually Sri Lanka and thus Plato did not make it up. It really existed.

[edit on 18-12-2009 by Indigo_Child]



posted on Dec, 18 2009 @ 02:57 PM
link   
India Acquired Language, Not Genes, From West, Study Says
The Indian subcontinent may have acquired agricultural techniques and languages—but it absorbed few genes—from the west, said Vijendra Kashyap, director of India's National Institute of Biologicals in Noida.
natgeo


High-resolution analysis of Y-chromosomal polymorphisms reveals signatures of population movements from Central Asia and West Asia into India
NAMITA MUKHERJEE , A L M U T N E B E L , A R I E L L A O P P E N H E I M a n d P A R T H A P . M A J U M D E R *
Anthropology and Human Genetics Unit, Indian Statistical Institute, B.T. Road, Kolkata 700 108, India
source



Origin of Hindu Brahmins
Sengupta et al. (2006) suggest a Paleolithic/Neolithic, pre-Indo-European, origin of most Hindu Y chromosomes.
source

Sahoo et al. (2006) online (Indian Y chromosome variation)
only J2 indicates an unambiguous recent external contribution, from West Asia rather than Central Asia.
source

haplogroup J2 in upper caste Hindus
More fascinating is the finding that the main haplogroup distinguishing the northern Indian brahmins from the lower castes is J2 (referred to as HG9). I have long argued that haplogroup J2, associated with the early Neolithic expansions was also the PIE lineage par excellence, and this certainly supports this theory. It may very well be that in early times, the Indo-Iranians emerged as J2-bearing Indo-Europeans diffused into the R1a1-bearing east, with the resulting J2/R1a1 then settling on the Iranian plateau and invading India from the north.
source





Correlation of Y-haplogroups J2 and J1 with Neolithic agro-pastoral economies
source

STR variance of haplogroup J2
the bigger the number the older it is...
source



The phylogenetic network furthermore permits the estimation of time in analogy to genetics, and we obtain tentative dates for Indo-European at 8100 BC ± 1,900 years
source

Indo-European Origins
source



posted on Dec, 18 2009 @ 05:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Indigo_Child
 


A good read as usual. But it has already been found that Atlantis is in fact a group of islands under the Atlantic ocean and the largest one being EGYPT. The proof is there rite in front of you...The pyramids, underground cities etc...
I believe it could have extended up to the Bermuda triangle.
As far as Lemuria goes, dont know...

Too much wishfull thinking can be hazardous!



posted on Dec, 18 2009 @ 06:34 PM
link   
reply to post by CuteAngel
 


No it hasn't. Atlantis has not been found, in fact Atlantis is still considered a myth.

I don't have any wish for Atlantis to be in Sri Lanka. Why would I want it to be? Only the evidence is suggesting that Atlantis is Sri Lanka. If you think the evidence does not, then I am welcome to any kind of criticism. If you have a better theory of where Atlantis is based, then please do suggest it. However, please base it on evidence. So far a few people who have posted in this thread have just posted a speculation, "I think it was in Bermuda" or "I think it was in the Sahara" Fine, there is no reason to reject the possiblity, but on what evidence is that speculation grounded.

I have read many Atlantis theories so far and I think the one I presented is one of the best evidence based ones so far. It is a new insight into Atlantis, if people want to stick to old ideas on Atlantis then they are welcome to, but that ain't going to bring us any closer to solving the mystery.



new topics

top topics



 
15
<<   2 >>

log in

join