The Legends of Lemuria and Creation.

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 06:16 PM
link   
Most of you heard the legend of Atlantics, The island of advanced people that lived on an island in the Atlantic ocean that later was lost to a “Great Flood”. Come to find out there was also a little know Legend of the People of Lemuria, an advanced people that lived on a large Island in the Pacific Ocean during the same time period of Atlantics.

The Legend of Lemuria spans from many cultures. The Polynesians have storys of a “Mother Island (Mother land/ MU)” of mankind lost in the seas. The Samoans called the place Bolutu. An island bearing fruits and trees of plenty, once picked the tree would immediately replace the fruit. On Bolutu, men could walk through trees, houses, any physical object without any resistance. The Maoris of New Zealand talk of arriving long ago from a sinking island called “Hawaiki”. A vast Mountainous island lost to the sea. Lemuria is interesting because geologists have found large sections of land that use to connect all asia and islands in the pacific.

The Legend goes that lemuria sank and its inhabitants fled to Asia, India, Mesopotamia, Egypt and even the Americans, Story has it that the lemurias that fled to America established a underground city under a Mountain. This Mountain has later become known as Mt Shasta and is located in California. I’m from California have heard many strange stores of the Mt Shasta people that live underground. Mt Shasta is also a UFO hot spot where even my uncle has filmed strange lights in the sky and was even put on TV via the local news station.

What is interesting is nearly all cultures around the world, even isolated cultures, talk of a paradise of no labor. They talk of later losing their innocence, having to work and feel pain and later of a great flood. Is there really one location where all mankind came from and later migrated around the world? Could Lemuria be the starting place of mandkind? It really puts in question the stories of creation. It can’t be a coincidence that all these people have the same story from all around the world.

What if we were all at one time Spiritual beings of “light” like the legends have it and we lost that during an “event”. Mankind might have been from a higher frequency and now are in a lower physical frequency of consciousness, one that we return to when we die. This will help explain the old stories of innocent times of no pain, hunger, or death that we hear from all around the world. Who knows....
edit on 23-9-2011 by camaro68ss because: (no reason given)
edit on 23-9-2011 by camaro68ss because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 06:24 PM
link   
Mu was in the south pacific...Zeeland was in the north Atlantic. two different sunken continents.



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 06:25 PM
link   
Look up the spirit science series to get some potential new info. Episodes 12 is where you want to start.

I'd give a link but I'm on my phone.

PS - the entire series is pretty good. Worth the watch!!!



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 06:30 PM
link   
Apparently, there are some powerful quartz crystals from Lemuria.



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 06:44 PM
link   
Well there are odd ruins off of the coast of Japan
perhaps they have some link to the legend of lumeria



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 07:04 PM
link   
This is an interesting topic. I believe there is something in the pacific. I try to approach the subject with an open mind. I have went on my own researches and when I did some scanning of the pac ocean, there really doesn't seem to be any contenders.
So I went down different avenue. If we consider the time frame, which is completely outside the realms of mainstream academia, this would mean the earth had a different face.
I kept this in mind and here is one of my conclusions.

Parts of Mu sank due to the rising of the sea levels, the remnants would be found in what we call 'micronesia' and the galapagos islands. I may be on to something considering this is one of the places the myths still survives.

This is my other view and its the one I favor and the one I stick with. I believe mu has something to do with antarctica. Mu is described as a fruitful paradise, trees, animals the works. There are fossilized remnants of all of the above. Hitler, as disgusting as he was, he had a fascination with arcane knowledge and myths. This fascination lead him to many temples, sacred mountains and even ANTARCTICA. If the earth shifted, the poles were different, which leads me to believe the light and energy was distributed to the lands in a different way. What I'm trying to say Antarctica was ice free. If we want to know what it was like look at its neighboring lands. Afirica and South America would have been connected and I believe Antarctica had a jungle similiar to them since their jungles are very similar.
I believe the true Mu people did not fall with the island. the legend goes the island was sank, because of the leader a pure white skin and white haired leader became full of greed and arrogance. I believe Mu had all kinds of people by the way like egypt. But, I believe the people did flee to various parts, and they left bread crumbs for someone to follow. There are alot of places that have Mu legends that never reach the discussion table, west and central africa, california, and many other places.


This is just my take from reading and researching.....



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 08:49 PM
link   
The children of James Churchward and Augustus Le Plongeon still gather admiring glances



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 09:16 PM
link   
I always thought the idea of Lemuria first came about in the 19th century as a way to explain the distribution of Lemurs.
Wiki...
It has since been discredited.



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 09:20 PM
link   
reply to post by camaro68ss
 


Interesting thread...

I'm a believer in a possible lost or forgotten history of mankind. The area that intrigues me the most is the now submerged {By the last of the last ice melt off} shown below in the following animation I made for one of my threads on a related topic.



Now even though I believe there is a possible lost or forgotten history I doubt they ever reached our level of Technological prowess. The location in question could have had early civilizations or fairly sophisticated early cultures IMO. All lost as the oceans rose and reclaimed the land.

S & F



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 09:01 AM
link   
Oh dear. "Channeled history" strikes again.


Originally posted by camaro68ss
Most of you heard the legend of Atlantics, The island of advanced people that lived on an island in the Atlantic ocean that later was lost to a “Great Flood”. Come to find out there was also a little know Legend of the People of Lemuria, an advanced people that lived on a large Island in the Pacific Ocean during the same time period of Atlantics.


That comes from Blatavaski and friends, during the late 1800's



The Legend of Lemuria spans from many cultures.

Actually, it only springs from Victorian English culture.


The Polynesians have storys of a “Mother Island (Mother land/ MU)” of mankind lost in the seas. The Samoans called the place Bolutu. An island bearing fruits and trees of plenty, once picked the tree would immediately replace the fruit. On Bolutu, men could walk through trees, houses, any physical object without any resistance. The Maoris of New Zealand talk of arriving long ago from a sinking island called “Hawaiki”.

None of which were Lemuria, I'm afraid. If you look up "Bolutu" you will find that there's really not a lot of reference for them believing in this and the story about walking through objects is a very recent twist to the story. The Maoris don't seem to be the source of that.


The Legend goes that lemuria sank and its inhabitants fled to Asia, India, Mesopotamia, Egypt and even the Americans, Story has it that the lemurias that fled to America established a underground city under a Mountain. This Mountain has later become known as Mt Shasta and is located in California.

The "legend" started in 1894 with the publication of Frederick Spencer Oliver's "A Dweller On Two Planets."


What is interesting is nearly all cultures around the world, even isolated cultures, talk of a paradise of no labor. They talk of later losing their innocence, having to work and feel pain and later of a great flood.

Speaking as someone who studies mythology -- no, that's not accurate. Most cultures (before Christianity hits them) do NOT have a "paradise" beginning and a "loss of innocence" and only the ones that live in areas where they get floods sometimes have a flood mythology.


This will help explain the old stories of innocent times of no pain, hunger, or death that we hear from all around the world.

If you backtrack them, you will find that many of these stories are found only after Christian missionaries come into the area to teach people about Christianity.



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 09:03 AM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


The problem with that, Slayer, is that during the time of the lowered water levels (ice age) there is archaeological evidence of people all over the world. Water levels rose slowly (a foot per year) and any high tech society would have moved away and kept their tech.



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 10:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd
Speaking as someone who studies mythology -- no, that's not accurate. Most cultures (before Christianity hits them) do NOT have a "paradise" beginning and a "loss of innocence" and only the ones that live in areas where they get floods sometimes have a flood mythology.


mesopotamians do, zoroastrians do, hindus do, egyptians do and as i recall the chinese do. that is many if not most. the older ones have a few people and many animals taking refuge in a big earthen enclosure not a boat but it is unanimous that it was a very nice place that had a terrible flood.

anyone interested in THE great flood wold have enjoyed the featured lecture at sgem2011 [11th International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference]. seems like geologists are proving mythology is really history afterall.



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 11:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


The problem with that, Slayer, is that during the time of the lowered water levels (ice age) there is archaeological evidence of people all over the world. Water levels rose slowly (a foot per year) and any high tech society would have moved away and kept their tech.


Hi Byrd...

Again with the "Assumptions"

Where in any of that did I mention "High-Tech"? Also, what makes you assume {Again} from what I've written that I believe there were no other people all over the world?


Originally posted by SLAYER69
I'm a believer in a possible lost or forgotten history of mankind. The area that intrigues me the most is the now submerged {By the last of the last ice melt off} shown below in the following animation I made for one of my threads on a related topic.

Now even though I believe there is a possible lost or forgotten history I doubt they ever reached our level of Technological prowess. The location in question could have had early civilizations or fairly sophisticated early cultures IMO. All lost as the oceans rose and reclaimed the land.


Is it so hard to believe that during the period in question humans lived then as they do now along the coastlines? Is it also hard to believe that maybe humans had culture or early civilization in small pockets? No offense, but you've seemed to have made a decision for whatever reason to peg me as some sort of "Ancient Lost High Technology" advocate. I'm not.

Whether the oceans rose at a slow rate of a foot a year or sometimes rose quite rapidly by a few feet is still {From what I've read} hotly debated so therefore the verdict for me is still out.

I feel that the period in question is long enough to accommodate both scenarios occurring depending of such things as Ice dams {Which are known to have existed} collapsing releasing huge amounts of fresh water into the oceans {Which is known to have happened} so again, whether a foot a year or sometimes in periodic large flooding is really irrelevant because people cannot live under water.
edit on 24-9-2011 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 11:39 AM
link   
Anyone who refers to "Lemuria" as an actual legend or tries to connect it to ancient texts and history loses all credibility IMO. Lemuria was just a hypothetical construct by an 19th c. zoologist (Philip Sclater) as a means to explain how species of Lemurs (which he inaccurately lumped together with other species of primates) managed to be present on Madagascar and Southern India and a handful of other points. Continental drift has since replaced Lemuria as the explanation.



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 08:42 PM
link   


Is it so hard to believe that during the period in question humans lived then as they do now along the coastlines? Is it also hard to believe that maybe humans had culture or early civilization in small pockets?

Whether the oceans rose at a slow rate of a foot a year or sometimes rose quite rapidly by a few feet is still {From what I've read} hotly debated so therefore the verdict for me is still out.

I feel that the period in question is long enough to accommodate both scenarios occurring depending of such things as Ice dams {Which are known to have existed} collapsing releasing huge amounts of fresh water into the oceans {Which is known to have happened} so again, whether a foot a year or sometimes in periodic large flooding is really irrelevant because people cannot live under water.


They tended to live near rivers more - which is why the first civilizations arose along them due to the increased ability to grow food. However did they live on the coast yes but they also went inland.

Glad Slayer that you are not a 'High tech paster', the problem with glacier melt and sea rise is that the sea has a massive surface area and volume - you need 'zillions' of tons of water to raise the level just a bit.

There was a study done in the the 1920's by the Germans (I believe) which looked at beach recovery, ie finding what washes up on the beach from that which is lost in the sea. They found very limited amounts of stone tools came up, a few animal bones (from the North and Baltic sea). you may wish to see if such studies have been done in the South China Sea and elsewhere.



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 08:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Hanslune
 

I'm in noway defending the OPs premise. However there is a good deal of evidence for large flooding of coastlines from around the world at various times in Earth's history.

Here is a rather interesting article. I'm sure this sort of thing happened elsewhere.
Seas 'hide ancient relics'

Submerged sites of ancient communities could be hidden in the seas around the Western Isles, according to experts. Dr Jonathan Benjamin and Dr Andrew Bicket believe the islands' long and sheltered lochs have protected 9,000-year-old Mesolithic relics. Rising sea levels may have covered up to 6.2 miles (10km) of land on the west coast of the Outer Hebrides. The archaeologists are to give a presentation in Comhairle nan Eilean Siar's council chambers on Monday.


Also here are some other related articles about ocean or regional flooding.

Massive Canadian melt may have triggered flood

A British researcher has published a startling new theory that the remains of untold ancient settlements from a 100,000-year stretch of human history were submerged by the rapidly rising waters of the Persian Gulf around 6,000 BC — the result, in all likelihood, of a catastrophic, planetwide flood triggered in Canada. There's a consensus among scientists that the collapse of a kilometres-high glacial dam at the end of the last ice age caused a massive outflow of meltwater into the Arctic or North Atlantic Ocean near Hudson Bay, generating a sharp rise in sea levels around the world and profoundly altering the Earth's climate. Some scientists have even speculated that ancient myths about great floods — culminating in the biblical story of Noah's Ark — were inspired by the worldwide deluge.


Here is an interesting story I bookmarked a few years back.
Bursting Ice Dam Flooded the Ancient Ocean

LiveScience Staff Writer posted: 29 June 2006 02:00 pm ET

Near the end of the last Ice Age 8,000 years ago, an ice dam on North America's east coast broke, releasing a torrent of fresh water seven times more voluminous than all the Great Lakes combined. It all rushed into the Atlantic Ocean over the course of only a few months.

At around the same time, ocean circulation worldwide slowed to a crawl, plunging Europe into a second ice age that lasted centuries.

Scientists have long suspected the two events were linked, and now they have the evidence from sediment core samples to prove it.




Persian Gulf sites hint at prehistoric people

Emerging archeological evidence points to early human habitation 120,000 years ago in a Persian "Gulf Oasis" now underwater, suggests one archeologist.

In the upcoming Current Anthropology journal study, Jeffrey Rose of the United Kingdom's University of Birmingham, points to stone tools from 40 archeological sites throughout the Middle East to suggest that modern humans left Africa earlier than many model suggest (typically around 60,000 years ago), and populated Arabian coastal areas now underwater.



edit on 24-9-2011 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 09:18 PM
link   
Agreed, there are local floods but world wide the rise of sea levels would have been gradual. This would have allowed those not living a '0' to move away, or those living father inland - even a few hundred meters would have had time to move....which I believe was Byrd's contention.

People tended not to live directly on the sea coast due to storms and the salt wind, they prefer to live up a fresh water source with access to the ocean. (IMO) Which might make a subject of debate - as the finds of many middens must cause the question to be asked - how far inland were they?

This theory might have validity or it may have an appointment in Samarra later today.



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 09:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune
Agreed, there are local floods but world wide the rise of sea levels would have been gradual.



First off, I've never disagreed with that.
Second I've never believed the Earth's entire landmass was ever covered completely by water. I'm of the belief that those various very larger regional flooding events could be the source for many scattered "myths" about a "world wide" flood. {emphasis on the word "Myths" }

I'm curious why are so many academics so against the idea of submerged locations which may have had cultures or early civilizations? Seems to me that this sort of discussion would be of great interest to them.

I've never asked you. Do even think that's a possibility?



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 09:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Originally posted by Hanslune
Agreed, there are local floods but world wide the rise of sea levels would have been gradual.



First off, I've never disagreed with that.
Second I've never believed the Earth's entire landmass was ever covered completely by water. I'm of the belief that those various very larger regional flooding events could be the source for many scattered "myths" about a "world wide" flood. {emphasis on the word "Myths" }

I'm curious why are so many academics so against the idea of submerged locations which may have had cultures or early civilizations? Seems to me that this sort of discussion would be of great interest to them.

I've never asked you. Do even think that's a possibility?



Sure, there might even be some equal or greater than Catalhuyuk or Gobeki or even Jericho - but they haven't been found - yet. I haven't found that academics are against it, they simply don't accept something that has little evidence for it. Part of that may be the stain on such ideas caused by 'Atlantis' and the invasion of fringe in the 1970s. My generation would be from Arkansas, ie show me the evidence before I believe. Might ask Byrd what the latest generation's consensus might be. I 'd say they are open to the idea and with maritime and under sea archaeology more feasible (but still hideously expensive) you'll see more expeditions in those areas.



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 11:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Again with the "Assumptions"

Where in any of that did I mention "High-Tech"? Also, what makes you assume {Again} from what I've written that I believe there were no other people all over the world?


Ooops. You're quite right -- I was confusing someone else's position with yours.


I'm a believer in a possible lost or forgotten history of mankind. ...Now even though I believe there is a possible lost or forgotten history I doubt they ever reached our level of Technological prowess. The location in question could have had early civilizations or fairly sophisticated early cultures IMO. All lost as the oceans rose and reclaimed the land.


I think my problem here is that "hidden/lost history of mankind" is sort of a loaded phrase because it's been used in some very inane channeled works and is a frequent catchphrase on a few sites that I don't regard highly. I'm afraid that when you use that turn of words, sadly, I go bouncing all over everything else and dance on the assumption that you think there's some sort of high tech civilization that's been buried.


Is it so hard to believe that during the period in question humans lived then as they do now along the coastlines? Is it also hard to believe that maybe humans had culture or early civilization in small pockets?


No... and yes. As Hans said, rivers are actually better sites (more productive in terms of food that's easier to catch. Fruits, fish, mussels, birds, animals -- not as abundant along the shoreline.) And where you have civilization, you have culture/tradition/arts/ornaments that are preferred and they are used throughout that culture. To support a civilization, you need agriculture (because you can't support a city's worth of people on hunting and gathering.)

So I'm somewhat skeptical, BUT... would be open to evidence showing that there was such a thing. Large villages, yes... easy to believe. Cities with thousands of people... I find that somewhat harder to believe (but recognize that I can be wrong about this.)


Whether the oceans rose at a slow rate of a foot a year or sometimes rose quite rapidly by a few feet is still {From what I've read} hotly debated so therefore the verdict for me is still out.

Different rates in different areas, from what I've read.


I feel that the period in question is long enough to accommodate both scenarios occurring depending of such things as Ice dams {Which are known to have existed} collapsing releasing huge amounts of fresh water into the oceans {Which is known to have happened} so again, whether a foot a year or sometimes in periodic large flooding is really irrelevant because people cannot live under water.
edit on 24-9-2011 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)

The ice collapses wrecked the local environment... but worldwide didn't have that much of an impact. As far as we can tell, they generally moved further upland when low lying places got flooded.

Anyway, sorry for leaping to conclusions, there.

And I agree with what Hans has written.






top topics



 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join