Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Need Assistance with the Theory of Atlantis

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Nov, 22 2004 @ 10:59 AM
link   
Salutations,

I'm currently in Collage for Geology and I have an assignment due for Dec. It's about Atlantis, and it's based more so on Plate tectonics and what could have caused the disappearance of an entire continent.

Any information that is related to this topic would be appreciated. It's said that Antartica is Atlantis, but I have to proove why this is. Or explain why it isn't.

Related links or information would be really useful and if you would guide or give me idea's would be really great.

Thank you so much.




posted on Nov, 22 2004 @ 11:40 AM
link   
The interesting thing is that the bigger atlantis revival was going on before wegenger's (arctic explorer and atmospheric scientist) plate tectonic theory was accepted (heck i think before wegenger was even around). It was generally thought back then that entire land masses subsided and rose, for whatever the reason and that this would explain panamanian land bridges, beringia, and, to the occultists, atlantis. It also lead to Lemuria. People noticed that lemurs only exist on madagascar and india, and not in between (more or less anyways i think). Without knowing about plate tectonics, people figured that there was a continent between these land masses that served as a 'land bridge' or some sort of connection (even if surrounded by some water) to allow this biogeographic distribution. Occultists, specifically theosophists and blatvatsky used this to support the idea of -another- Lost Continent, keeping the name Lemuria. There was also the 'Lost Continent' of Mu, spanning whats now polynesia (i guess the islands are remnants of a subsidence) and even 'Pan', a triangular continent off the coast of canada and alaska.

Of course, entire continents don't subside. Continental crust is less dense than oceanic crust and isn't going to magically 'sink' on its own.



posted on Nov, 22 2004 @ 12:09 PM
link   
Here are a couple of interesting links with a HUGE amount of information about the topic.

www.jmooneyham.com...
www.jmooneyham.com...

BTW The author of the website is a skeptic so don't really expect some waaaay out theories. His whole site is a goldmine for information both Mainstream and Obscure.



posted on Nov, 22 2004 @ 03:56 PM
link   
There was a mention on Biboni?? [ Check Spell on that ] South of Florida. Said to be part of Atlantis, now because of Continental Spreading, remnants were left behind. SOME Geologists say that the formation they have found were naturaly made while other speculate that it could not possibly be natural. Said to look like steps, or some type of road that was in the process of being created.

Is it possible for a quick event to take place? Not as in over hundred of years but with in hours????

The Flem-aths theory has been used to sudgest that it might be possible.

[[[ Some Info: The Flem-ath's theory is that approximately every 41,000 years there has b een a dramatic and catastrophic shifting of the entire crust of the earth with respect to the mantle core. It is suggested that the event of 11,600 years ago involved a maximum displacement of over 3000k (approximately 30* of rotation). A time-frame for the movement is not provided, but from my interpretation of the book it may have been very fast in geological context - perhaps hundres of years - perhaps much less. At this time Atlantis is assumed to have moved towards the south pole, while North America is assumed to have been moved away from the north pole. Other crustal displacments - of a similar magnitude- are suggested to have occurred at 52, 600 and 93,600 years ago.

The proposed mechansim behind these crustal displacements is related to build-up of thick ice-sheets in polar and near-polar regions. The idea of dramatic crustal displacements was originally proposed by Charles Hapgood in 1970.

Einstein made comments although it was stated that he had some doubts that the weight of the ice-caps would have been sufficient to move the crust ]]


For example, you put a water ballon in the freezer, let it freeze. Then you bring it out, thaw it just enough that the ice inside slips around.


Now how the hell am I to describe a procedure for testing the Crustal Displacment hypothesis using available and reasonable scientific techniques???????? Other than going to Antartica drilling in ice, looking for a lost civilization - laughs -


I'd like more than one type of test but even just one would be good.


I don't want to argue for or against this hypothesis. Or if anyone agree's. I need to sudgest a credible procedure for testing the hypothesis, one that should be effective whether the hypothesis is true or false.


~takes in a breath~


I need a big cup of coffee LOL

[edit on 22-11-2004 by EmrldFire]

[edit on 22-11-2004 by EmrldFire]



posted on Nov, 23 2004 @ 01:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by EmrldFire
[[[ Some Info: The Flem-ath's theory is that approximately every 41,000 years there has b een a dramatic and catastrophic shifting of the entire crust of the earth with respect to the mantle core.

I respectfully submit that at THIS point your prof is going to lower your grade catastrophically.


It is suggested that the event of 11,600 years ago involved a maximum displacement of over 3000k (approximately 30* of rotation). A time-frame for the movement is not provided, but from my interpretation of the book it may have been very fast in geological context - perhaps hundres of years - perhaps much less.

...which would have destroyed the ecology, the flora, the fauna, and melted the ice caps, too. If you will recall your ice ages, this is near the end of the last ice age and not in a Hypsithermal.


The proposed mechansim behind these crustal displacements is related to build-up of thick ice-sheets in polar and near-polar regions. The idea of dramatic crustal displacements was originally proposed by Charles Hapgood in 1970.

You'll really have problems here.
www.csicop.org...


Einstein made comments although it was stated that he had some doubts that the weight of the ice-caps would have been sufficient to move the crust ]]
Actually, he didn't. He didn't talk about geology.



I need to sudgest a credible procedure for testing the hypothesis, one that should be effective whether the hypothesis is true or false.


Huge blankets of volcano ash all over the globe in a layer that dates to that time period. Moving the continents THAT fast would have set off volcanos all over the place. Just look for the thick global layers of ash.

(of course, they're not there... but... you asked for the proof. That would do it. When plates move, they leave a lot of tracks behind.



posted on Nov, 23 2004 @ 01:21 AM
link   
Hmm... last one I read, Atlantis was in Greenland / Iceland area. Look up some stuff on the lost continent of Mu.

Another thing you should look at for plate tectonics is the sunken 'pyramids' off the coast of Yonaguni, Japan.


[edit on 23-11-2004 by Torus]



posted on Nov, 23 2004 @ 03:04 AM
link   
Don't use Atlantis. All it was based on were the writings of one man.



posted on Nov, 23 2004 @ 03:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Unnamed_One
Don't use Atlantis. All it was based on were the writings of one man.


Not all of them have the same name the continent of Mu is a great example. Thats a Lost Continent just not called Atlantis you would expect it to be called many things by different people.



posted on Nov, 23 2004 @ 05:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by EmrldFire


I'm currently in Collage for Geology.
Be sure to spellcheck your assignment. Little things do count.

Any information that is related to this topic would be appreciated. It's said that Antartica is Atlantis, but I have to proove (sic) why this is. Or explain why it isn't.


First, forget the idea that a continent sunk. An island could have (Krakatoa, for example) but if an entire continent had subsided in the last 11,000 years there would be geological evidence (sea floor cores). Glomar looked for this worldwide, didn't find any anomalous data. A continent could have been innundated temporarily by asteroidal megatsunami; use search on your login panel to search for the ATS thread 'Was Atlantis Destroyed By An Asteroid?' for links. Plato and his predecessors had to come up with a reason why the Atlanteans quit sailing. Maritime cultures often abandon trade routes that are unprofitable, and the Mediterranean by Plato's account was VERY unprofitable for the Atlanteans- whoever they were. They might have simply lost interest. Or caught smallpox.

You can always cop out and claim Plato was fantasizing. I think he was not.
Compare timelines between the Timaeus and Antarctic ice cores. Document public finds of ancient archaeological evidence from Antarctica (there aren't any).

Draw an arrow on a map West from the mouth of the Mediterranean and see what it hits. Surprise!

In other words; if your assignment is specifically Atlantis and Antarctica, it is easier to prove geologically Antarctica is not Atlantis than to prove it is. Of course, if you were to prove it is, you would become fabulously wealthy etc. but the odds are against you. Go for the science (ice cores vs. Timaeus) and follow your professors orthodoxy in your assignment- then dig in Antarctica when you graduate and let us all in on what you find


Best of Luck


PS- Do a web search on 'georeactor' to find out what causes continental drift and keeps everything warm down there. Eerie planet!



posted on Nov, 26 2004 @ 01:55 AM
link   
The word youre searching for is Bimini. The structures are commonly referred to as The Bimini Road. Whether they are man-made structures or natural is still debated, but their popularity can be attributed to Edgar Cayce. He made a prediction in the 1930s that a portion of Atlantis would rise near the Bimini. In the early 1960s the structures were actually discovered.

I unfortunately cant remember the source of my information, but it is believed that the continent of Atlantis suffered numerous natural disasters over its time (which could coincide with your events at 52,600 and 93,600 years ago). Each time it was believed that a piece of the continent was lost, with the last event destroying the island continent completely. It was said to have lasted a day and a night (Platos account).

A final theory (the one I personally believe holds some likelihood of truth) states that the Earth could have shifted due to the impact of a meteor near one of the poles, which would have caused natural disasters all over the planet (including flooding, such as that described in the Bible and numerous other cultures). There is evidence of flooding all over around 10,000 years ago. A pole shift could have caused this flooding plus the sinking of a large land body due to plate activity.

You could support the sinking of a continent using this as a starting point. There appears to be a lot of information (speculation and scientific) about pole shifts and their possible affects on the planet.

This might be a good place to start. As for Einstein

"In a polar region there is a continual deposition of ice, which is not symmetrically distributed about the pole. The earth's rotation acts on these asymmetrically deposited masses [of ice], and produces centrifugal momentum that is transmitted to the rigid crust of the earth. The constantly increasing centrifugal momentum produced in this way will, when it has reached a certain point, produce a movement of the earth's crust over the rest of the earth's body, and this will displace the polar regions toward the equator."



posted on Dec, 3 2004 @ 09:40 PM
link   
I posted this in another thread. I think these two books should clear up Atlantis.

" I've read two convincing books that Atlantean civilizations was actually Minoan civilization on Crete and Thera.


Unearthing Atlantis - Charles Pellegrino
Atlantis Destroyed - Rodney Castleden"



posted on Dec, 3 2004 @ 09:46 PM
link   
Are you sure you're in "collage"? I took geology in University from one of the fathers of the Continental Drift theory, Tuzo Wilson (ya, quite a while ago). Did you clear this topic with your prof? Otherwise, my advice, if you want your paper taken seriously, is to pick another topic.



posted on Dec, 3 2004 @ 09:54 PM
link   
Eeehhmm .which one ??the one in the Bahams,cyprus ,in the atlantic...or is there another new one....






top topics



 
0

log in

join