Ancient 2500 yr Old Map Shows The Lost City of Atlantis is The Eye of The Sahara

originally posted by: Byrd

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye
a reply to: Byrd

Yes look for other info. But I like to look at something by myself, first. Work through the logic independently, uniquely first, so I'm not just a sheep following the heard, sort of thinking. Then form my own conclusions. Then bump it against what everyone else has concluded. Not, first. This way my thinking is not being controlled by any other agenda, overt, or covert.

Here's where we differ. I prefer to do a quick check to see if anyone's already answered a question. And if I have time, I review it... but I have to spend time doing other things (for money) so I don't have many free hours for doing investigations.

The fact that it's modern and recent was enough. I don't need to identify it precisely because it's a very obvious thing, it's along a road that's traveled at least sometimes, in an area that was traveled many times by caravans and tourists. If something that long had been ancient, we'd have heard about it from many sources and it would be a destination (a "wonder" like the Roman causeways.)

I looked around for other pipe lines in Africa that use the same ideology of marking the location of buried pipe lines using large concrete, or stones of the same size or similar size that use two rows of offset spacing. Well, I just couldn't find any. All of the others are above ground on pedestals. Others are buried but only use sign posts every so many feet showing where the pipe is buried. If you ask me, the expense of marking a pipeline in the observed manner, is absolutely, insane. No wonder the original company went broke.

Terrain, materials, expertise, equipment all vary from project to project. Weather, money resources can constrain and change many details. I don't expect any two artifacts to look exactly the same (if you look at West Texas oilfields, no two pump sites look exactly the same.)

Your going to get LEAKS. Now, does your great mind see the columbo moment??

From this point there are possibilities but when you run them out, they end up illogical.

Did you figure into your equation that the pipeline has been shut down and is no longer in use? I may be imagining it but I thought that I read that.

Here's where we differ. I prefer to do a quick check to see if anyone's already answered a question.

Looking for the answers quickly inside the box, your going to get box answers. Looking for answers slowly in the box, is going to get you a box answer. But, to get to the truth, your going to have to, at some point, start looking outside the box!

What interest me is why you bother wasting your time with nonsense like this. Why would you go out of your way trying to shoot down obvious non sense. If its true or not true, time will be the judge. Not you, not me.

Moving on...........

a reply to: All Seeing Eye

Looking outside the box can lead to misinterpreting things. As for why you could ask that of yourself. Why are you attempting to use google earth when you know nothing about the area? Have you ever been there? What makes you think you are more qualified than the people that actually went to the site?

What do you think you can prove? So far you just keep saying well this could be and that could be. Atlantis was a myth its an allegory used by Plato to teach morals. Plato made up Atlantis as a thought experiment to show how hubris brings you down.

Also, his bias shows through by making the home team win against them. This is why Athens beats Atlantis in a war.

originally posted by: Byrd

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous

originally posted by: Byrd

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous
This may not come to anything, but something interesting I came across.

en.wikipedia.org...

This mountain is about 200 kilometer North West of the Richat structure. Close, but really not very close.

Still, it is basically made of magnetite.

It has a blue color, which would probably make it stand out enough to attract visitors. When they arrived, they would find that the rocks are magnetically attracted to each other. (I'm thinking that would probably pique their interest.)

I believe you're confusing magnetite with lodestones. While lodestones are naturally occurring magnetite, not all magnetite is magnetic. en.wikipedia.org...

Ok. That makes more sense. It did seem odd for natural magnets to be so common.

So magnetite to an ancient person would basically just be another kind of rock.

Ah-yup. Australia's got big deposits of it and so does the US (and a lot of other areas.)

If Atlantis had depended on a specific mountain for all its iron, being unaware of any other means, then it could start an iron age, but then see that age come to an end when the city collapses.

Fun for fiction, I guess. But it doesn't seem likely at this point, if Kediet_ej_Jill is made of a substance an ancient would view as merely black colored rocks.

If a theory takes you down too many rabbit holes, then you're probably better off simply staying above ground.

It would be polishable for gems (like hematite) so it could have some value... as for an Iron Age, you have to have the supporting technology (furnaces that are hot enough and some sort of forging ability)

Did you ever see the old tv show, "Connections"? Or play the computer game, Civilization?

I wouldn't take that game as being authoritive (although I have over 1000 hours logged on it with Steam.)

That was sort of an eye-opener for me although I knew the principles... that any tech is built on necessary older tech.

Not all technologies we learned in the last few hundred years needed to happen in the order they happened.

For example: electrical theory could develop entirely independent of internal combustion engines.

However some things are prerequisites. Can't build a musket if you don't have a material (such as steel) that is strong enough to hold the exploding gun powder without breaking.

So forging iron is preceded by ovens and the ability to make tools of a certain hardness and making compounds like bronze.

There are actually two ways to smelt Magnetite.

One is the normal way, where you burn charcoal and the carbon monoxide strips oxygen away from the Magnetite, yielding pure iron.

However, if you have a way to create hydrogen, you can smelt iron using that chemical at temperatures below 570 degrees C.

This article is kind of technical, but if you skip to the formulas, it shows the reaction with Hydrogen to get pure iron.

onlinelibrary.wiley.com...


In the pre bronze age, iron all by itself would be better than flint, even if you couldn't make it into steel. It's not better than bronze, though. To brittle.

And you have to have the supplies and population to support this. It needs a fairly sizeable population and stable farming (so people have time to do something other than hunt and build shelters) and access to the materials.

When they borrow technology (or steal it), it comes from a culture that's already done those steps.

Mammoth hunting would probably provide enough supplies.

Size of population matters less than the degree of specialization. To get high quality steel in a Medieval society, you would need full time dedicated smiths. Not part time smith/general purpose workers who are expected to participate in the day to day grind of gathering/farming for food.

The fact ice age cultures didn't experience explosive population growth (like agri societies do), suggests they didn't need a favorable young to old ratio. (Or nobody was living to old age, which would be visible in the skeletons.)

Acquiring food must not have been the culture's primary pursuit.

Although I don't strongly believe the Eye of the Sahara is the location, it's interesting to consider that the Laurentide Ice sheet in North America was up to 2 miles thick in some areas.

That much mass should have put some pressure on the continent pushing it downward.

Wouldn't be surprised if some other land mass somewhere else got pushed up.

Or maybe something more complicated? Maybe other landmasses had varied responses, some pushed up, and others pushed down?

There is also the matter of the oceans sitting lighter on their oceanic floors, due to being lower.

a reply to: dragonridr

Looking outside the box can lead to misinterpreting things.

It can also lead to reinterpretation. As more evidence comes to light, the original conclusions must be reconsidered. That would be called, Integrity.

Why are you attempting to use google earth when you know nothing about the area?

Not much at all in the history books about new discoveries, or any ancient history, at all. Why are you attempting to stifle people from looking, is the real question.

Early history

Mauritania’s contributions to the prehistory of western Africa are still being researched, but the discovery of numerous Lower Paleolithic (Acheulean) and Neolithic remains in the north points to a rich potential for archaeological discoveries.

www.britannica.com...

Let the "discoveries" continue..

Atlantis was a myth

Plato is not the only reference to this story. You can find the information if you look.

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye


Plato is not the only reference to this story. You can find the information if you look.

Plato is the only reference to the story of Atlantis. What other sources are you calling out as being real?

originally posted by: Guyfriday

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye


Plato is not the only reference to this story. You can find the information if you look.

Plato is the only reference to the story of Atlantis. What other sources are you calling out as being real?

ATLANTIS: OTHER SOURCES (II) Not only Plato gives us news of Atlantis. There are also several Greek, Egyptian, Jewish and Indian

vedavyasamandala.com...

Pre-Platonic Ancient Writings Pertinent to Atlantis

fathersergio.wordpress.com...

a reply to: All Seeing Eye

So then the answer was no. The Sea people were not the people from Atlantis, nor were any of the other links. The story about Hecataeus could have merit, but there isn't any evidence to back up the tale that he saw the same temple as Solon.

All biblical sources that we have currently should be listed as suspect since they have been tampered with so badly due to political reasons in the past. Gnostic writings that have been discovered in recent years might be the exception though. This being said, the Book of Enoch doesn't have Atlantis in it.

From your second link, none of those writers are pre Platon so they should be discounted as pre-platonic writings on the matter.

So??? Now what?

a reply to: Guyfriday

All biblical sources that we have currently should be listed as suspect since they have been tampered with so badly due to political reasons in the past.

So has Plato's half finished story! You may not believe it but there is a group of folks who want the pat to stay buried. Well, maybe you do know...

originally posted by: Guyfriday
a reply to: All Seeing Eye

So then the answer was no. The Sea people were not the people from Atlantis, nor were any of the other links.

It's interesting to mention them, though. They were mysterious, and nobody can establish with certainty where they came from.

They weren't Atlanteans, but they appear to have sailed in from outside the "Pillars of Heracles".

Their existence, and role in the Bronze Age Collapse highlights the degree to which people living in ancient times didn't always know everything about stuff. (And in later legends, details might be filled in with some creative license. )

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous

originally posted by: Guyfriday
a reply to: All Seeing Eye

So then the answer was no. The Sea people were not the people from Atlantis, nor were any of the other links.

It's interesting to mention them, though. They were mysterious, and nobody can establish with certainty where they came from.

They weren't Atlanteans, but they appear to have sailed in from outside the "Pillars of Heracles".

Their existence, and role in the Bronze Age Collapse highlights the degree to which people living in ancient times didn't always know everything about stuff. (And in later legends, details might be filled in with some creative license. )

The Atlantis Navy was a union of the 10 allotments. 1200 ships that probably flew the flag of the allotment, or, the Jolly Roger after the command structure collapsed. That Navy had to go somewhere..

a reply to: All Seeing Eye

Seriously, where do you get this information? Piracy was an issue in the Mediterranean since as long as sailing was a thing. The Sea People could have been made up of them, or it could have also have been made up of the remanences of the Minoan Empire.

Bronze age collapse (where the sea people are mentioned) is like 1000 BC. Atlantis would be like 9250 BC. So a remnant of Atlanteans would need to have held on to their ethnic identity for 8000+ years, but forget before 3000 more years had passed.

If the Berbers are a remnant, then perhaps the Islamic conquest caused them to forget. The Guanches of the Canary Islands/Azores might be Berbers, or Berber cousins. (Their memory was wiped out to the point where only a few words of their language survive.)

en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous

It's interesting to mention them, though. They were mysterious, and nobody can establish with certainty where they came from.

They weren't Atlanteans, but they appear to have sailed in from outside the "Pillars of Heracles".

Their existence, and role in the Bronze Age Collapse highlights the degree to which people living in ancient times didn't always know everything about stuff. (And in later legends, details might be filled in with some creative license. )

The ancients who were affected by the Sea Peoples (Egypt, for instance) certainly knew about them. Greece, however, was not an organized state at the time and wasn't really on their path.

As with history in general, most people knew (and today know) only the history of their own country (and not in any detail) and maybe some facts about a prominent world nation. For example, most Americans couldn't tell you anything about the history of Canada or Costa Rica (or Mexico, for that matter... including those whose ancestors came from Mexico. I know more about the Aztecs than most because I've been reading scholarly works about them recently.)

The Bronze Age Collapse is framed as a disaster, but it was a fairly slow one and not everywhere... and certainly not all at once.

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous
Bronze age collapse (where the sea people are mentioned) is like 1000 BC. Atlantis would be like 9250 BC. So a remnant of Atlanteans would need to have held on to their ethnic identity for 8000+ years, but forget before 3000 more years had passed.

If the Berbers are a remnant, then perhaps the Islamic conquest caused them to forget. The Guanches of the Canary Islands/Azores might be Berbers, or Berber cousins. (Their memory was wiped out to the point where only a few words of their language survive.)

en.wikipedia.org...

It was pointed out that Plato's 9000 years was actually in Lunar years, not Solar. A Lunar year is 1/12 solar year. 9000LY=750SY

400BC + 750SY = 1750BC Give or take. You historians can play with those numbers.

a reply to: Byrd

As with history in general, most people knew (and today know) only the history of their own country (and not in any detail) and maybe some facts about a prominent world nation. For example, most Americans couldn't tell you anything about the history of Canada or Costa Rica (or Mexico, for that matter... including those whose ancestors came from Mexico. I know more about the Aztecs than most because I've been reading scholarly works about them recently.)

Completely agree with this logic. Its a horrible shame the one place that brought all those histories into one place where scholars could have access to all those histories, was taken from mankind. The Library of Alexandria.

It is most widely believed that the Library of Alexandria was destroyed in a fire that was started when Caesar burned the Egyptian fleet during the Alexandrian Warn in 48 B.C.[11] Instead, Many Islamic scholars believe that Umar's order burned the library, a powerful 7th century Caliph from Mecca, after the Muslim conquest of Alexandria 641 A.D. Others believe that Emperor Theodosius burned it in 390 A.D. Finally, many believe it was destroyed during the recapture of Alexandria by Aurelian during the revolt of Queen Zenobia of Palmyra in 269 A.D.

dailyhistory.org...

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye

Completely agree with this logic. Its a horrible shame the one place that brought all those histories into one place where scholars could have access to all those histories, was taken from mankind. The Library of Alexandria.

A more in-depth reading list would reveal that this notion is not very accurate.

The Library had originals of books that were copied many times over and distributed to thousands of libraries, both personal and temple and other. Books get lost or discarded as they are no longer useful... which may mean no one in the family wants them (we have a personal library of around 10,000 books (result of collecting books for about 40 years) and none of the kids will want these old books, so they'll be donated and discarded, etc.)

When writing a history or a critique, you don't preserve the original. You're doing something original so you refer to the source. If your book updates things (like histories) then the other copies will go out of circulation and vanish.

Example: I doubt very much if there are any copies of the history book that I was taught from in the 5th grade.

Scholars who wanted to read the books from the Library often sent people down there to copy the books and bring them back (or buy paid copies.) So the knowledge actually flowed out from the Library and was used all over the world... used and updated. While there were unique books there, the most important ones were preserved in commentaries or in scholarship that emerged from those proto-ideas.

So the really important science in the Library got out and was used and improved.

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye
It was pointed out that Plato's 9000 years was actually in Lunar years, not Solar. A Lunar year is 1/12 solar year. 9000LY=750SY

400BC + 750SY = 1750BC Give or take. You historians can play with those numbers.

A lunar month is not a year and there are ~12.5 in one solar year (although traditionally, taking 1 lunar month as = 4 weeks, there are 13)

If Plato had meant lunar cycles or months he'd have said so. He clearly started 9,000 years. Which was, however, simply another way of saying "a very long time ago" (just as "40 days and 40 nights" simply means "a long time" and is not to be taken literally)


Edt: of course, if you are saying the Richat structure sank into the Atlantic ocean around 1,750BC, then that's long after the end of the African Humid Period. So we can conclude that Atlantis was, at the time of its demise, just a pile of rocks in a desert, much as it is today. And a place that had no contact with any other human culture.

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye
It was pointed out that Plato's 9000 years was actually in Lunar years, not Solar. A Lunar year is 1/12 solar year. 9000LY=750SY

400BC + 750SY = 1750BC Give or take. You historians can play with those numbers.

A lunar month is not a year and there are ~12.5 in one solar year (although traditionally, taking 1 lunar month as = 4 weeks, there are 13)

If Plato had meant lunar cycles or months he'd have said so. He clearly started 9,000 years. Which was, however, simply another way of saying "a very long time ago" (just as "40 days and 40 nights" simply means "a long time" and is not to be taken literally)


Edt: of course, if you are saying the Richat structure sank into the Atlantic ocean around 1,750BC, then that's long after the end of the African Humid Period. So we can conclude that Atlantis was, at the time of its demise, just a pile of rocks in a desert, much as it is today. And a place that had no contact with any other human culture.

As I said, play with the numbers. Personally I believe Atlantis was "established" at that 9000 year date. The destruction happened around 4000-4500. It may have reconstituted after that date and went to war afterwards, not having its central command structure was doomed to failure. It appears they tried to command from the navy aboard ship.

Follow this link for more timeline confusion.
atlantipedia.ie...

My own personal opinion on the myth of Atlantis and the many other ancient kingdom and flood myths around the world, is that it is a remnant story from a global kingdom that existed in the last ice age and was more than likely the source of all the pyramids and myths of God's that seeded knowledge to various cultures and created many of the empires of the ancient world.

Just in the last few decades, genetic testing has begun to show that people in the ancient world actually got around far more than we used to think and at the time of the ice age the sea levels were lower, there were land and ice bridges between the continents. Such land bridges would make global sea travel far easier than currently, because they could simply sail hugging the land.

I also think that the mammoths those people hunted were the source of a lot of their power and probably some were raised and trained, which would easily explain the ease those ancient people seemed to have in constructing megalithic structures.

Of course when the mammoth died, so did their ability to build massive structures. With the loss of the ice and land bridges, the global trade of the proto empires were cut off from each other and the cultures went through a minor devolution from their former glory.

As far as advanced technology, it is a common fact that ancient cultures like the Greeks were using some electricity and magnetism in their culture and lives including the ancient temples. Modern scientists who admit is true of course will also be quick to say that they used it but didn't really understand it, not the way we do.

They say that because the ancients didn't have our advanced equipment send equations, If they were able to create (electricity) and use (magnetism) I personally would say they understood it just fine.