2241 replies to this topic

[Qoais]

Are there any pictures of this Sphinx?

[lakeview rud]

Have they verified the dating scientifically (on gobekli)? I ask that because generally any attempt to establish an organized culture prior to Sumeria tends to get the sh** pounded out of it by the orthodox scholars.  For example the Okinawan underwater pyramid was first described as a completely natural formation, then it went to being natural with people doing some carvings on it, then it went from being 10,000 years old (because it was underwater) to being only 2000 years old. I understand that its tough to prove out things that old but its hard to believe that Sumeria and Egypt just blossomed.  Best place to look for 10,000 year old civilizations or at least structures would be at sea levels of the Ice Age so maybe 200 feet below sea level?

[Qoais]

I have been trying to find a way to contact the director of the dig - Vecihi Ozkaya - but I'm not having much luck.  QM, where do you find it that this little animal thingy is a Sphinx?  Where does Schmidt say that this is it specifically?

[questionmark]

Qoais, on 17 November 2009 - 12:24 AM, said:

Are there any pictures of this Sphinx?

The only one I could find labeled as such is the lion above. There is no sphinx, it was a figure of speech by Schmidt taken out of context that the whole fringe pounced on. The earliest Sphinxes we know are Babylonian...6000 years later.

[Qoais]

Quote

We have archaeological evidence from 9,500 B.C.

Of what?  Triremes?  No.  Plato said Atlantis sunk 9000 years before Solon.  So about 11,500 years ago.  
Atlantis was supposedly out in the Atlantic Ocean.
Atlantis supposedly had huge ships - Triremes - in her harbours before she sank, from all other countries bringing her goods.

WHAT other countries?  There weren't any other countries per se 11,500 years ago and there sure weren't any cultures with Triremes 11,500 years ago.  

To get to Atlantis or for them to get to the mainland, they would have had to have ships that could stand the constant battering of the ocean, back and forth, to do trade.  Where is the evidence for anyone, anywhere at the time, having such ships?

Edited by Qoais, 17 November 2009 - 12:36 AM.

[questionmark]

lakeview rud, on 17 November 2009 - 12:27 AM, said:

Have they verified the dating scientifically (on gobekli)? I ask that because generally any attempt to establish an organized culture prior to Sumeria tends to get the sh** pounded out of it by the orthodox scholars.  For example the Okinawan underwater pyramid was first described as a completely natural formation, then it went to being natural with people doing some carvings on it, then it went from being 10,000 years old (because it was underwater) to being only 2000 years old. I understand that its tough to prove out things that old but its hard to believe that Sumeria and Egypt just blossomed.  Best place to look for 10,000 year old civilizations or at least structures would be at sea levels of the Ice Age so maybe 200 feet below sea level?

Göbekli is pretty accurately dated, give or take 1000 years. The most amazing thing is the instruments used to built that temple. It took the excavation team a long time to figure it out but at the end they could reproduce it. That whole thing was built with stone age tools.

On the French/German TV channel Arte they had a very interesting documentation about it a few months back with Schmidt making a demonstration and showing some unfinished pieces that have been abandoned.

[questionmark]

Qoais, on 17 November 2009 - 12:28 AM, said:

I have been trying to find a way to contact the director of the dig - Vecihi Ozkaya - but I'm not having much luck.  QM, where do you find it that this little animal thingy is a Sphinx?  Where does Schmidt say that this is it specifically?

I PMd his official e-mail to you

[Qoais]

questionmark, on 17 November 2009 - 12:58 AM, said:

I PMd his official e-mail to you

I've sent one off to him, thanks, we'll just have to wait and see what he says.  IF HE says anything!!

[DieChecker]

Agonaces of Susa, on 16 November 2009 - 09:07 PM, said:

It doesn't really matter what people think.  The historical record says that the Atlantean Empire in Antarctica had subjugated all of North Africa as far East as Egypt and even into Europe.

I suppose it only matters what YOU think? Got a little Hitler complex going on in your head eh?

Quote

"... the men of Atlantis [Antarctica] had subjected the parts of Libya within the columns of Heracles as far as Egypt, and of Europe as far as Tyrrhenia." -- Plato, Timaeus, 360 B.C.

You are ruining the quote with your self placed Antarctica definition.

Quote

You've obviously never read the Timaeus because Atlantis was bigger than Libya (North Africa) and Asia (the Middle East) combined, in other words Antarctica.

"... the island was larger than Libya and Asia put together." -- Plato, Timaeus, 360 B.C.

If you take the middle east "Asia" to be 1500 miles by 1500 miles and "Libya" to be the same, then that adds up to about 4 million square miles. Greenland is actually only a million square miles, but the sea ice could make it seem a lot bigger. Ancient geographers where about as acurrate as a blind man drawing the Olympic Rings. And Greenland is more hospitable and has a history of actual human occupation going back probably five to ten thousand years. (Inuit)

Agonaces of Susa, on 16 November 2009 - 10:05 PM, said:

1. The 360 B.C. description of Atlantis is a description of Antarctica.

"... in those days the Atlantic was navigable; and there was an island situated in front of the straits which are by you called the Pillars of Heracles; the island was larger than Libya and Asia put together, and was the way to other islands, and from these you might pass to the whole of the opposite continent which surrounded the true ocean; for this sea which is within the Straits of Heracles is only a harbour, having a narrow entrance, but that other is a real sea, and the surrounding land may be most truly called a boundless continent." -- Plato, Timaeus, 360 B.C.

Going from this quote the island is IN FRONT of the Pillars of Heracles. How is Antarctica in front of the Pillars of Heracles. Nothing is actully in Front of the pillars till you reach North America. Excepting some small islands like Bermuda and the Canary Islands.

[Qoais]

IN FRONT OF GIBRALTAR - STRAIGHT ACROSS THE POND IS WASHINGTON DC

Edited by Qoais, 17 November 2009 - 03:34 AM.

[Agonaces of Susa]

DieChecker, on 17 November 2009 - 03:24 AM, said:

I suppose it only matters what YOU think?

I never said it matters what I think.  Plato's Timaeus says what it says regardless of what you and I think.

Quote

Got a little Hitler complex going on in your head eh?

Please act mature and do not compare me to Hitler.  I'm pretty sure you wouldn't like it if I called you a Nazi.

[Qoais]

Quote

Agonaces of Susa
I never said it matters what I think. Plato's Timaeus says what it says regardless of what you and I think.

And so, just because Plato says it - it's a fact?  Are you going to come back with the answer that he tells us right up front that it's true?  So what?  This doesn't mean it IS true.  Actually, I would say that right up front, for the sake of his audience that knows what's what, he is saying it isn't true, that it's just a story he's making up.  He thus informs the audience by saying that Poseidon had a son named Atlas, and that the Atlas Mountains and the Atlas sea is named after him.  I think the august audience in the room that day all knew the genesis of their gods, and they would have all known that the Atlas Mountains and the Atlas Sea were named not after Poseidon's son, but after the name of the son of Iapetus.  That would have been their first clue.

Edited by Qoais, 17 November 2009 - 03:49 AM.

[DieChecker]

Agonaces of Susa, on 17 November 2009 - 03:34 AM, said:

I never said it matters what I think.  Plato's Timaeus says what it says regardless of what you and I think.

Please act mature and do not compare me to Hitler.  I'm pretty sure you wouldn't like it if I called you a Nazi.

He was just the most egotistical person who first came to mind. I guess I could say a Messiah complex, if that is more to your liking. Plato says an island that is in Front of the Pillars. Antactica is a complete miss there. The rest of Plato's narative has been know to be a political statement from about 15 seconds after he said it. There is no Plato's Atlantis. I dare you to post the entire quote from Plato and explain each of the details. How do these Atlanteans conquer the world? How do they lose to the protoGreek Athenians? The explaination that he was making a political statement to rub in the Egyptians faces makes a lot more sense. Especially since Plato was very political and used historical facts mostly to support his political and philosophical points. Also he was known to make up historical facts to support points if he did not have any other good historical references at hand. Much has been written about Plato. He is well understoood. Little has been written about Atlantis. And that is why it is considered mythical. You decide what is true and what was made up on the spot in the equivalent of "Face the Nation".

[The_Spartan]

Well, it was a complete waste of 1 hr in my life, to discuss on this, when the a new user in the orion Von Koch "Mould".
When asked for evidence to a particular subject or point, he is giving evidence, not related to the point in question, but as a general,which is of no use.
His evidence is so shaky, that he doesn't even bother to answer questions that he knows he cant answer.
he is a worthy successor to OVK!

[Agonaces of Susa]

DieChecker, on 17 November 2009 - 03:53 AM, said:

He was just the most egotistical person who first came to mind. I guess I could say a Messiah complex, if that is more to your liking. Plato says an island that is in Front of the Pillars. Antactica is a complete miss there.

Why is that?  

Do you think "in front of the pillars of Heracles" means inside the Mediterranean?

Because if you do, you're quite wrong about that.

The description of Antarctica is very specific.

"This power came forth out of the Atlantic Ocean, for in those days the Atlantic was navigable; and there was an island situated in front of the straits which are by you called the Pillars of Heracles; the island was larger than Libya and Asia put together, and was the way to other islands, and from these you might pass to the whole of the opposite continent which surrounded the true ocean; for this sea which is within the Straits of Heracles is only a harbour, having a narrow entrance, but that other is a real sea, and the surrounding land may be most truly called a boundless continent." -- Plato, timaeus, 360 B.C.

Antarctica is the only island continent on Earth that lies in the middle of "The True Ocean."



As you can see Antarctica is the only logical interpretation since Antarctica is the only place on Earth that fits that description.

Edited by Agonaces of Susa, 17 November 2009 - 06:17 AM.