Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Did anyone ever heard of Lemeria


  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

#1    Hi-Ro

Hi-Ro

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 3 posts
  • Joined:06 Apr 2005

Posted 06 April 2005 - 04:06 AM

Could some one tell me about this race because I want to hawaii and told me I was a lermerian decendent.....  Take me seriously I know it sounds funny but could someone tell me alittle true about this......


#2    FranzJosef

FranzJosef

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 4 posts
  • Joined:02 Apr 2005
  • Location:Midwest

Posted 06 April 2005 - 04:40 AM

From "A Short History of Lemuria":

QUOTE
The legend of Mu is found on islands all over the Pacific Ocean.  For thousands of years the Polynesians have handed down the story of a continent in the Pacific that was motherland of mankind.

The name of Mu somehow sounds like an uninteresting contraction of a more exotic name.  In contrast, the word Lemuria invokes a picture of a land at the dawn of time, a land forgotten in our histories but not in our dreams.

The name Lemuria resulted from a Nineteenth Century controversy over Darwin's Origin of the Species.  Defenders of Darwin had trouble explaining how certain species became distributed over large areas.  Zoologists had a particularly difficult time explaining the distribution of the lemurs.  The lemur is a small primitive form of primate found in Africa, Madagascar, India, and the East Indian archipelago.  Some zoologists suggested a land mass in the Indian Ocean, between Madagascar and India, millions of years ago.  An English zoologist, Phillip L. Schlater, proposed the name Lemuria (LEMURia) for this former land of the LEMURS in the Indian Ocean.

Earnst Heinrich Haeckel (1834-1919), a German naturalist and champion of Darwin, used Lemuria to explain the absence of fossil remains of early man: If man originated on a sunken continent in the Indian Ocean, all the fossils of the missing link are now under the sea.  To quote Haeckel: "Schlater has given this continent the name of Lemuria, from the semi-apes which were characteristic of it." ...


Continued at:

http://www.hawaiian.net/~larryw/html/lemuria.html






#3    Adramaleck

Adramaleck

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 343 posts
  • Joined:03 Feb 2005
  • Location:East Coast

  • I don't mind the sun sometimes, do you?

Posted 07 April 2005 - 02:30 AM

Well, if the legend of lemuria is real, we are all lemurian decendents, it was said to be the cradle of life or the 'real' garden of eden, as opposed to africa.

The first humanoids had knees that go both ways, and feet that allowed them to walk both backwards and foward.  They had 4 arms and an eye in the back of their head as well.. they were hermaphroditic and laid eggs.  They could communicate telepathically.  Eventaully they figued out that sex feels good, so they started doing everything they could, even other animals.  We formed from a combination of them and a monkey.

Sound weird? Well, it is.

the looks, though, are somewhat similar to indian gods such as shiva... odd coincidence, especially because they were said to be in the same general area.

*shrugs*


#4    Essan

Essan

    Recruitment Agent for the 'B' Ark

  • Member
  • 2,365 posts
  • Joined:18 Mar 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The other side

  • Stop Climate Change: Plant a Rain Forest Today!

Posted 07 April 2005 - 12:01 PM

In the days before we learnt about plate tectonics, and it was assumed that continents have always been in the same places, the only possible explanation for the similarity in fossils between Africa and SE Asia was a landbridge between the two.  This was dubbed 'Lemuria'.

But since we now know that continents move we also know that 'Lemuria' - which was never more than a geological hypothesis - never existed.

End of story.

Andy

Weather & Earth Science News
The independent climate blog

#5    Adramaleck

Adramaleck

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 343 posts
  • Joined:03 Feb 2005
  • Location:East Coast

  • I don't mind the sun sometimes, do you?

Posted 08 April 2005 - 02:34 AM

QUOTE(Essan @ Apr 7 2005, 08:01 AM)
In the days before we learnt about plate tectonics, and it was assumed that continents have always been in the same places, the only possible explanation for the similarity in fossils between Africa and SE Asia was a landbridge between the two.  This was dubbed 'Lemuria'.

But since we now know that continents move we also know that 'Lemuria' - which was never more than a geological hypothesis - never existed.

End of story.

View Post



Mmm, I agree with you, but there still is a chance it could have occured then later flooded on the indo-australian plate.

user posted image

Edited by Adramaleck, 08 April 2005 - 02:34 AM.


#6    marduk

marduk

    Government Agent

  • Banned
  • 4,264 posts
  • Joined:04 Nov 2004
  • Location:England (the south will rise again)

Posted 09 April 2005 - 01:01 PM

No there isn't
Lemuria was never a real place. It was a hypothetical place put forward to explain the similarity in lemur monkeys hence lemur ia
Madame Blavatsky claimed to be in mental contact with lemurian ascended masters who had moved to tibet.
Everytime someone suggests a belief in lemuria they are in fact expressing a belief in the ravings of Madame Blavatsky
There isn't so much as one sentence of lemurian writing in existence nor are there any other archeological remains.
what does that tell you adralameck
Lemuria and ECD are both of the same ilk.
At least ECD was based on a scientific principle worth some attention
which makes it more credible
We all know that it isn't possible though, lemuria less so

Edited by marduk, 09 April 2005 - 01:01 PM.

Posted Image
If you want to know the truth make sure you can handle it before you ask

#7    Adramaleck

Adramaleck

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 343 posts
  • Joined:03 Feb 2005
  • Location:East Coast

  • I don't mind the sun sometimes, do you?

Posted 09 April 2005 - 06:26 PM

What's your problem man, I agreed that he was right, but that there was a possiblity

pos·si·bil·i·ty   Audio pronunciation of "possibility" ( P )  Pronunciation Key  (ps-bl-t)
n. pl. pos·si·bil·i·ties

   1. The fact or state of being possible.
   2. Something that is possible.
   3. possibilities Potentiality for favorable or interesting results: The idea has great possibilities.

that it, or something like it could have existed and later been flooded.

I didn't say it was true.

Quit being such an ass.

--Edit:

Just realized the dictionary defined the word by using the word =/ BAD dictionary! *hits it on the nose with a newspaper*

Edited by Adramaleck, 09 April 2005 - 06:27 PM.


#8    marduk

marduk

    Government Agent

  • Banned
  • 4,264 posts
  • Joined:04 Nov 2004
  • Location:England (the south will rise again)

Posted 09 April 2005 - 06:28 PM

Sounds to me that you're saying that there is a possibility that lemuria existed.
There isn't

Posted Image
If you want to know the truth make sure you can handle it before you ask

#9    Adramaleck

Adramaleck

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 343 posts
  • Joined:03 Feb 2005
  • Location:East Coast

  • I don't mind the sun sometimes, do you?

Posted 09 April 2005 - 06:35 PM

QUOTE(marduk @ Apr 9 2005, 02:28 PM)
Sounds to me that you're saying that there is a possibility that lemuria existed.
There isn't

View Post



Not of the magnitude it's made up to be, but there may well have been a land mass there.


#10    marduk

marduk

    Government Agent

  • Banned
  • 4,264 posts
  • Joined:04 Nov 2004
  • Location:England (the south will rise again)

Posted 09 April 2005 - 06:41 PM

But surely the only reason that you believe that there could possibly have ever been a landmass there is because you heard that lemuria is in that position.
Otherwise why not pick out the atlantic.
Lemuria didn't exist and there has never been a landmass there. As essan explained continental drift proves that the two opposing coastlines were joined. When they seperated fresh seabed was created by being pushed up by the lithosphere. Areas are only raised up in areas that plates push together.
They are pulling apart ergo no landmass. Ever

Posted Image
If you want to know the truth make sure you can handle it before you ask

#11    antares

antares

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 295 posts
  • Joined:24 Jun 2003
  • Location:USA

  • Cor Scorpii

Posted 09 April 2005 - 07:31 PM

Marduc, some sources claim that Lemuria was not a single landmass, but several small ones (similar to the Indonesian islands) and the chain of these big islands originated from volcanic activity along the boundaries of the Pacific plate and what is known now as the Australian plate.  So geologically I think that it is very possible that Lemuria existed...



#12    marduk

marduk

    Government Agent

  • Banned
  • 4,264 posts
  • Joined:04 Nov 2004
  • Location:England (the south will rise again)

Posted 09 April 2005 - 07:38 PM

QUOTE(antares @ Apr 9 2005, 08:31 PM)
Marduc, some sources claim that Lemuria was not a single landmass, but several small ones (similar to the Indonesian islands) and the chain of these big islands originated from volcanic activity along the boundaries of the Pacific plate and what is known now as the Australian plate.  So geologically I think that it is very possible that Lemuria existed...

View Post


Okay so you're saying that you have not read at all about where the name lemuria comes from or you are a big fan of madame blavatsky ?
choose  w00t.gif

Posted Image
If you want to know the truth make sure you can handle it before you ask

#13    antares

antares

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 295 posts
  • Joined:24 Jun 2003
  • Location:USA

  • Cor Scorpii

Posted 09 April 2005 - 07:47 PM

There are several other sources except Blavatsky that also talk about Lemuria. They don't call it Lemuria, they call it: The Mother land, MU, Arnahem...
I have never read Blavatsky's Secret Doctrine, so my information is not coming from her sources... And I do know where the name Lemuria is coming from, that's why I prefer to refer to it as "The mother land"...


#14    marduk

marduk

    Government Agent

  • Banned
  • 4,264 posts
  • Joined:04 Nov 2004
  • Location:England (the south will rise again)

Posted 09 April 2005 - 08:07 PM

QUOTE(antares @ Apr 9 2005, 08:47 PM)
There are several other sources except Blavatsky that also talk about Lemuria. They don't call it Lemuria, they call it: The Mother land, MU, Arnahem...
I have never read Blavatsky's Secret Doctrine, so my information is not coming from her sources... And I do know where the name Lemuria is coming from, that's why I prefer to refer to it as "The mother land"...

View Post


Mu: The idea of this continent first appeared in the works of the antiquarian Augustus Le Plongeon (1826–1908), a 19th century traveler and writer who conducted his own investigations of the Maya ruins in Yucatán. He announced that he had translated the ancient Mayan writings, which supposedly showed that the Maya of Yucatán were older than the later civilizations of Atlantis and Egypt, and additionally told the story of an even older continent of Mu, which had foundered in a similar fashion to Atlantis, with the survivors founding the Maya civilisation. (Later students of the Ancient Maya writings argue that Le Plongeon's "translations" were based on little more than his vivid imagination.)

Lemuri, Mu, Arnahem, the motherland, whatever you want to call it never existed in that area of the world.
There is no factual evidence to support it anywhere.
No relics
No writings
Nothing
It would be like believing in a carpenters son who walks on water and raises the dead.
Purely a matter of personal belief supported by no physical evidence !



Posted Image
If you want to know the truth make sure you can handle it before you ask

#15    antares

antares

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 295 posts
  • Joined:24 Jun 2003
  • Location:USA

  • Cor Scorpii

Posted 09 April 2005 - 08:26 PM

QUOTE
Lemuri, Mu, Arnahem, the motherland, whatever you want to call it never existed in that area of the world.
There is no factual evidence to support it anywhere.
No relics
No writings
Nothing
It would be like believing in a carpenters son who walks on water and raises the dead.
Purely a matter of personal belief supported by no physical evidence !


Well if it is submurged under the water it will be hard to have any relics, writings and evidence, right?

Heinrich Schliemann went hunting for ancient Troy believing that everything that Homer said in his Iliad is true. He did not have any relics or physical evidence except a fictional tale from an ancient greek poet. Many archeological discoveries today do confirm ancient legends.

Unfortunatelly the science do not have always physical evidence of the phenomena it studies. In many cases the nature of the phenomenon is revealed by indirect data, but to get back to the topic...

I did not say that Lemuria existed, I said it is possible that it existed, and there is noting in the plate tectonic theory that will restrict  formation and destruction of a chain of volcanic islands.
My personal belief is that this place existed long time ago on our planet, but that's another story...





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users