Almost all Zoroastrian pseudepigrapha is now lost, and of the attested texts—with only one exception—only fragments have survived. Pliny's 2nd or 3rd century attribution of "two million lines" to Zoroaster suggest that (even if exaggeration and duplicates are taken into consideration) a formidable pseudepigraphic corpus once existed at the Library of Alexandria. This corpus can safely be assumed to be pseudepigrapha because no one before Pliny refers to literature by "Zoroaster,"[35] and on the authority of the 2nd century Galen of Pergamon and from a 6th century commentator on Aristotle it is known that the acquisition policies of well-endowed royal libraries created a market for fabricating manuscripts of famous and ancient authors.[35]

No one before Pliny mentions him.

As far as Plato plagiarizing him, since it was brought up, here's what wiki says:

Among the named works attributed to "Zoroaster" is a treatise On Nature (Peri physeos), which appears to have originally constituted four volumes (i.e. papyrus rolls). The framework is a retelling of Plato's Myth of Er, with Zoroaster taking the place of the original hero. While Porphyry imagined Pythagoras listening to Zoroaster's discourse, On Nature has the sun in middle position, which was how it was understood in the 3rd century. In contrast, Plato's 4th century BCE version had the sun in second place above the moon. Ironically, Colotes accused Plato of plagiarizing Zoroaster,[38][39] and Heraclides Ponticus wrote a text titled Zoroaster based on (what the author considered) "Zoroastrian" philosophy in order to express his disagreement with Plato on natural philosophy.[40]

Source for both excerpts: Wiki Page
Note the use of the word "ironically."

That word is used because it seems Plato's work actually predated the Zoroastrian "On Nature" that Colotes later accused Plato of plagiarizing.

Sorry, nothing there to support your view.

You might know of better information, though. If so, please link me to it.

Harte

Originally posted by bottleslingguy
reply to post by Hanslune

---

...and then they flew over to South America to teach them how to do it right?

Originally posted by Hanslune

Originally posted by bottleslingguy
reply to post by Hanslune

---

...and then they flew over to South America to teach them how to do it right?

Probably not, but maybe they put a few notes and tips on working in stone on a pottery sherd, placed it in a jar, sealed it and threw it in the ocean....and prayed.

or

Those southern native Americans were clever chaps and figured it out by themselves

edit on 6/2/12 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by The Benevolent Adversary

Originally posted by LostWorldsORG
reply to post by predator0187

---

... So I decided to take a more typical sensationalist approach I see in mainstream media every day. Looks like it worked because tens of thousands of people have now seen this story and shared it on facebook, etc. I've written this same article multiple times but no one was interested when the headline read "shell ring"....I think a grand total of 30 people read it. But call it "ancient walled city" and people click on the headline and read it. This has been very educational for me.

i found this staement to be extremely amusing. i guess p.t.barnum really had it right. though it might seem sadly telling about the present state of intellectual life on this planet it really shows that we humans are not so different from the 'lower' animals. we also like 'bright and shiny' objects that stimulte our curiousitly.

thanks op for bring this to our attention; all new to me and worthy of more reflection.