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.


- - - - -

Piri Reis Map


  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#16    Bosanchero

Bosanchero

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,450 posts
  • Joined:09 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manchester

Posted 30 January 2007 - 07:34 AM

once again
FOR ITS TIME MAP IS MORE THAN EXCELENT

Edited by Bosanchero, 30 January 2007 - 07:35 AM.

Heaven won't have me and Hell's afraid I'll take over

View Postwhen.i.am.queen., on Jan 10 2007, 06:57 AM, said:

Here is a crazy thought

... perhaps.....not?

#17    Leonardo

Leonardo

    Awake

  • Member
  • 14,989 posts
  • Joined:20 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

  • Hell is a guilty conscience

Posted 30 January 2007 - 01:40 PM

Quote

yes sir ... land masses change all the time... islands dissapear in water rasing.. some apear....

picture perfect was PERFECT PERFECT for the time of maps creation... and to say that someone who spent so much to get his hands on so many maps made an translation errorr is obsurd


So it's more absurd to assume human error than to assume a huge, continental-sized, land mass has somehow disappeared within the time frame of human existence? I find my interpretation of absurd to be different to yours.

Even assuming the land mass was meant to be present in the shallower waters around the southern tip of the South American continent means the latitude of the mass has been misplaced by some 15-20o north, that's a huge mistake for any cartographer.

Reis never created this map from his own travels, he plagiarised older maps. So any errors on the originals would have been represented on his map - I stated that in my original post. The map of the well known parts of the world was reasonably good as were other maps of comparable age. The use of this map to suggest there was a great land mass in the southern Atlantic in human memory - now lost - or that this is a representation of the Antarctic coast free of ice is absurd. Yes, small islands can appear/disappear in short geological time spans due to tectonic or volcanic activity, but not a land mass that stretches out across half the Atlantic Ocean!

In the book of life, the answers aren't in the back. - Charlie Brown

"It is a profound and necessary truth that the deep things in science are not found because they are useful; they are found because it was possible to find them."  - J. Robert Oppenheimer; Scientific Director; The Manhattan Project

"talking bull**** is not a victimless crime" - Marina Hyde, author.

#18    Bosanchero

Bosanchero

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,450 posts
  • Joined:09 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manchester

Posted 31 January 2007 - 03:17 AM

Quote

So it's more absurd to assume human error than to assume a huge, continental-sized, land mass has somehow disappeared within the time frame of human existence? I find my interpretation of absurd to be different to yours.

Even assuming the land mass was meant to be present in the shallower waters around the southern tip of the South American continent means the latitude of the mass has been misplaced by some 15-20o north, that's a huge mistake for any cartographer.

Reis never created this map from his own travels, he plagiarised older maps. So any errors on the originals would have been represented on his map - I stated that in my original post. The map of the well known parts of the world was reasonably good as were other maps of comparable age. The use of this map to suggest there was a great land mass in the southern Atlantic in human memory - now lost - or that this is a representation of the Antarctic coast free of ice is absurd. Yes, small islands can appear/disappear in short geological time spans due to tectonic or volcanic activity, but not a land mass that stretches out across half the Atlantic Ocean!



saying that some of the chinese maps had mistakes ?? i would completle agree with someone who would make that assumption... however i find it hard to belive that Translation would be WRONG... all i am saying is if u spend so much time and money u would want the finall product to be CORECT or at least to the best of your ability ... however in case u never heard original.gif part of map that stretches from brazil south is a map of south pole UNDER THE ICE.... satelite images taken of the south pole stand as proof original.gif

Heaven won't have me and Hell's afraid I'll take over

View Postwhen.i.am.queen., on Jan 10 2007, 06:57 AM, said:

Here is a crazy thought

... perhaps.....not?

#19    Razer

Razer

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,360 posts
  • Joined:26 Dec 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Edge

Posted 31 January 2007 - 03:27 AM

Quote

part of map that stretches from brazil south is a map of south pole UNDER THE ICE.... satelite images taken of the south pole stand as proof original.gif


No they don't, the map does not line up with the coast of antarctica above or under the ice.  

The map was a halfway decent attempt to piece together the maps that were available at the time.  It is obvious however that the map is severely flawed in many aspects.  To use it as a source to push some fanciful notions about antarctica is the rediculous at best.

Edited by Razer, 31 January 2007 - 03:28 AM.


#20    Pax Unum

Pax Unum

    < 420 Conspirator >

  • Member
  • 18,702 posts
  • Joined:06 Feb 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Suburbia

  • "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle

Posted 31 January 2007 - 04:05 AM

Quote

however in case u never heard original.gif part of map that stretches from brazil south is a map of south pole UNDER THE ICE.... satelite images taken of the south pole stand as proof original.gif

Quote

An alternate view is that the "Antarctic" coast (depicted on the Piri Reis map) is simply the eastern coastline of South America skewed to align east-west due to the inaccurate measurement of longtitude or to fit it on the page. Close examination of the coastline supports this view, revealing depictions of the basins at the mouth of the Strait of Magellan and the Falkland Islands. The annotations on the map itself, stating that this region is hot and inhabited by large snakes do not fit with the likely climate and fauna in Antarctica in the 1500s. Similarly the map states that "spring comes early" to the islands off the coast, which is true of the Falkland Islands but not of any islands close to the Antarctic mainland.


LINK->Piri Reis map

Edited by Pax Unum, 31 January 2007 - 04:07 AM.


#21    Bosanchero

Bosanchero

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,450 posts
  • Joined:09 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manchester

Posted 31 January 2007 - 04:28 AM

Quote

No they don't, the map does not line up with the coast of antarctica above or under the ice.  

The map was a halfway decent attempt to piece together the maps that were available at the time.  It is obvious however that the map is severely flawed in many aspects.  To use it as a source to push some fanciful notions about antarctica is the rediculous at best.




Halfway Decent  ????

The Piri Reis map shows North America, South America, Greenland and Antarctica which had not yet been discovered.

read "The Oldest Map of America" might help you out ....
or http://www.prep.mcneese.edu/engr/engr321/preis/notes.htm



Heaven won't have me and Hell's afraid I'll take over

View Postwhen.i.am.queen., on Jan 10 2007, 06:57 AM, said:

Here is a crazy thought

... perhaps.....not?

#22    Harte

Harte

    Supremely Educated Knower of Everything in Existence

  • Member
  • 8,763 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Memphis

  • Skeptic

Posted 31 January 2007 - 03:55 PM

Quote

Halfway Decent  ????

The Piri Reis map shows North America, South America, Greenland and Antarctica which had not yet been discovered.

read "The Oldest Map of America" might help you out ....
or http://www.prep.mcneese.edu/engr/engr321/preis/notes.htm


Your own link shows that these had been discovered, and what part of "...it doesn't correspond to Antarctica..." do you not understand?

I suggest you look a little more deeply into this. Here's a couple of things I've read about it.

The Portugese had just signed a treaty that gave them possesion of lands east of a certain longitude at that time.  How coincidental that the longitude in question lies along the coast of S. America. Could this map be a means of claiming lands that they weren't actually due?

This fact is even mentioned on the map itself.  From your link:

Quote


The Portuguese infidels do not go west of here. All that side belong,, entirely to Spain. They have made an agreement that [a line]two thousand mile., to the western side of the Strait of Gibraltar should be taken as a boundary. The Portuguese do not cross to that side but the Hind side and the southern side belong to the Portuguese.


Note that the sheet the map is drawn on is missing the lower left corner.  Yet the map itself does not appear torn.  Apparently the map was drawn on this misshapen piece, and the southern tip of S. America had to be curved around to fit the sheet.  The coast of the "curved around" part of the map actually matches up fairly well with that part of S. America, if you rotate it back into it's proper orientaion.

I had mixed feelings about quoting from the map.  See, the map itself is full of ridiculous statements:

Quote


These coasts are named the shores of Antilia. They were discovered in the year 896 of the Arab calendar. But it is reported thus, that a Genoese infidel, his name was Colombo, be it was who discovered these places.
Antilia is a mythical utopian island. The "year 896" part is a claim that Columbus was "rediscovering" already-known lands, a claim which has no substance.

Quote

And in this country it seems that there are white-haired monsters in this shape, and also six-horned oxen. The Portuguese infidels have written it in their maps. . . . . This country is a waste. Everything is in ruin and it is said that large snakes are found here. For this reason the Portuguese infidels did not land on these shores and these are also said to be very hot.
(This note on the map corresponds to the area you are calling Antarctica.  Sound like Antarctica to you?)

Quote


And this caravel having encountered a storm was driven upon this island. Its name was Nicola Giuvan. And on this island there are many oxen with one horn. For this reason they call this island Isle de Vacca, which means, Ox Island.
QUOTE

These monsters are seven spans long. Between their eyes there is a distance of one span. But they are harmless souls.


A mish-mash of useful and useless information.

Harte

I've consulted all the sages I could find in yellow pages but there aren't many of them. - The Alan Parsons Project
Most people would die sooner than think; in fact, they do so. - Bertrand Russell
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong. - Thomas Jefferson
Giorgio's dying Ancient Aliens internet forum

#23    Bosanchero

Bosanchero

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,450 posts
  • Joined:09 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manchester

Posted 31 January 2007 - 05:24 PM

Quote

The Portugese had just signed a treaty that gave them possesion of lands east of a certain longitude at that time.  How coincidental that the longitude in question lies along the coast of S. America. Could this map be a means of claiming lands that they weren't actually due?


Map was created by Turks NOT portugese.... and i belive it was April 1500 that first Portuguese reached coast of "Brazil" it was not until 1530 that
setlements were built here... note map was created in 1513 i guess whole coast of s america was explored map in detail and sent to Turkish Admiral
in such a short amount of time....P.S. Turks were Highly "Hated" by christians of europe ( so highly unprobeable???) and just to show how christian europe was POPE gave brazil teritory to portugal...

Quote

I had mixed feelings about quoting from the map.  See, the map itself is full of ridiculous statements:
Antilia is a mythical utopian island. The "year 896" part is a claim that Columbus was "rediscovering" already-known lands, a claim which has no substance.

right now its 1427 muslim year i belive.. so this would place the map at the time of columbus ....




one thing i will say is i completly forgot about is the Treaty of Tordesillas and i thank you for reminding me.... i might have to change my stance about this map after all  ph34r.gif



Heaven won't have me and Hell's afraid I'll take over

View Postwhen.i.am.queen., on Jan 10 2007, 06:57 AM, said:

Here is a crazy thought

... perhaps.....not?

#24    Bosanchero

Bosanchero

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,450 posts
  • Joined:09 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manchester

Posted 31 January 2007 - 05:26 PM

/me Admits he's Wrong

Heaven won't have me and Hell's afraid I'll take over

View Postwhen.i.am.queen., on Jan 10 2007, 06:57 AM, said:

Here is a crazy thought

... perhaps.....not?

#25    ethereal scout

ethereal scout

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 139 posts
  • Joined:27 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United Kingdom

Posted 31 January 2007 - 05:45 PM

Don't know if this link is of any use:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doggerland

What it refers to is that the North Sea (between the UK and continental Europe) was once land and was apparently inhabited - the area flooded when the last ice age ended (according to the link).

To me this suggests that there was a period in far flung history when the sea level was quite a bit lower than now - and when the ice age ended it all flooded.

Don't know when the last ice age ended but seeing as so many religions have a 'flood myth' - to me its quite logical to assume that this is what they could have been refering to.

no doubt many civilisations would have been situated somewhere close to the sea, in the same way many major cities today are located near the coast, if the sea level then increased many would have been flooded.

Don't know what bearing this brings to the map stuff - haven't been through it.


#26    Bosanchero

Bosanchero

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,450 posts
  • Joined:09 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manchester

Posted 31 January 2007 - 09:03 PM

Quote

Don't know if this link is of any use:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doggerland

What it refers to is that the North Sea (between the UK and continental Europe) was once land and was apparently inhabited - the area flooded when the last ice age ended (according to the link).

To me this suggests that there was a period in far flung history when the sea level was quite a bit lower than now - and when the ice age ended it all flooded.

Don't know when the last ice age ended but seeing as so many religions have a 'flood myth' - to me its quite logical to assume that this is what they could have been refering to.

no doubt many civilisations would have been situated somewhere close to the sea, in the same way many major cities today are located near the coast, if the sea level then increased many would have been flooded.

Don't know what bearing this brings to the map stuff - haven't been through it.



lol once again we know why many cultures have Flood myths... because they build their civilizations on river banks (or elswhere close to the water)
and lets face it if u build near water u should expect a flood sooner or later original.gif

Heaven won't have me and Hell's afraid I'll take over

View Postwhen.i.am.queen., on Jan 10 2007, 06:57 AM, said:

Here is a crazy thought

... perhaps.....not?

#27    ethereal scout

ethereal scout

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 139 posts
  • Joined:27 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United Kingdom

Posted 31 January 2007 - 09:52 PM

Quote

lol once again we know why many cultures have Flood myths... because they build their civilizations on river banks (or elswhere close to the water)
and lets face it if u build near water u should expect a flood sooner or later
grin2.gif

ha! everybody thinks flood myths are some mystic mysterious stories involving Gods and retribution.....naw, just a lesson in where not to build your house.

"But if we sin by drinking liquer to excess, won't God bring a flood upon us and wash us all into the sea?"

"hhmmm, thats a thought......better build higher up the hill then"




#28    Bosanchero

Bosanchero

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,450 posts
  • Joined:09 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manchester

Posted 31 January 2007 - 10:26 PM

Quote

grin2.gif

ha! everybody thinks flood myths are some mystic mysterious stories involving Gods and retribution.....naw, just a lesson in where not to build your house.

"But if we sin by drinking liquer to excess, won't God bring a flood upon us and wash us all into the sea?"

"hhmmm, thats a thought......better build higher up the hill then"



actually NO original.gif
building higher up the hill isnt a smart idea either... lack of water = No Crops,, Drinking water,, or anything lol...
there really isnt a Perfect location for building a civilization original.gif unless u find a small river inland original.gif


back to the map now original.gif




for those that dont know we were talking about where the old civilizations build their setlements ....

Heaven won't have me and Hell's afraid I'll take over

View Postwhen.i.am.queen., on Jan 10 2007, 06:57 AM, said:

Here is a crazy thought

... perhaps.....not?




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users