i think atlantis is near the bahamas for a few reasons. one is that there is a j looking road underwater. and another is that there are pryamid looking things underwater. i believe that atlantis was technology advanced. before there civilazation went down hill or something bad happen to them i think they hid there records. some of you may have heard there is a camber under the syphinx, aka the hall of records i believe that is where atlantis hid some of their records there and amongst other places too. if you have any other ideas or agree with me please post.


p.s. who believes that the crystal skull found near a mayan temple was made by atlantis?

some links/pics would be nice
also do you mean sphinx?

Atlantis wasnt on earth it was on mars

no it wasn't on mars, it was on uranus

lol can't help it.. that was like sooooo good to pass up

lol

There are many beliefs where Atlantis is, but none have any undeniable published truths or facts yet. Sure I have a desire to believe in Atlantis and I do not deni in it's exsistance, but also I must look at the lack of evidence so far. Maybe there is some type of cover up or not who knows. There are pyramids all over the world, how can you say that a pyramid under water has to be Atlantis? There are Pyramids in Australia so does that mean Australia might be Atlantis?

Incidentally, the underwater pyramid was the final nail in the coffin for me. I was beginning to doubt Charles Berlitz's accounts when I came accroos his claim of having sonar mapped an underwater pyramid.

Get this: Charles Berlitz did do a sonar map of the ocean floor. He did find a 'pyramid'...of sorts. What he actually did was futz around with the height and width adjustments on the sonar. When you look at the sonar scan, it looks like a distinct pyramid, but when one looks at the distances measured, on finds that this 'pyramid is actually a ONE FOOT RISE OVER 100 FEET!

There is absolutely no way that this was a mistake on Berlitz's fault. This is a clear example of intentional deception on his part.

i know there are pyramids all over the world. im saying that atlantis would be an ideal place in the bahamas. there is volcanic activity under the water. the reason we dont have that much evidence of atlantis is because the lava covered much of there civilization. i have evidence that atlantis or some other advanced civilization did exist. the picture i have is a crystal skull. the skull is rated 7 for hardness. they said that with are technology it would take some 300 years to make. it might just be me but who would spend 300 years on a skull.

How is a crystal skull proof of an old civilization? And how do you know the Atlantis people made it? Do you have any real proof?

they dated it back before christ was born. im not saying atlantis did so the skull either. some other civilization could have done it who knows.

The area of the Bahamas is not composed of basaltic lava flows. Whatever was there, it wasn't covered over by lava.

There is a difference between continental (or ex-continental) stone and structure, and ocean-born stone and structure (such as that around the crustal border zones). It would be relatively easy to detect something like a continent in the ocean, or an island in the Bahamas, that was once above water. There is nothing to indicate that such a structure exists in that location (and, considering the massive amount of traffic in that area, be assured, it is quite throughly mapped).



You are referring to the Michelle-Hedges skull. It has not been dated through objective means due to the quartz properties. Michel-Hedges claimed to have found it in a dig with his daughter, however he did not make this claim till about 12 years after the dig. None of the people who accompanied Michel-Hedges recall him finding any such thing as athe skull. What we do have solid evidence of, however, is a ticket receipt, a sales form, and a pick-up order from Southbys of London, for a quartz crystal skull, of German manufacture, sold for 400 pounds sterling to Michel-Hedges approximately a month before he made his announced concerning the skull.

In other words, the skull is a hoax.

I did not think they could carbon date the skull. Anyway I thought they put the skull under the microscope and found no evadence of tool work.
Researchers found that the skull had been carved against the natural axis of the crystal. Modern crystal sculptors always take into account the axis, or orientation of the crystal's molecular symmetry, because if they carve "against the grain," the piece is bound to shatter -- even with the use of lasers and other high-tech cutting methods.
Well whoever made it was a master craftsmen and I take my hat off to them.

your too funny. I think Atlantis is something cool and i would have loved to have been there. But how can it dissapear in one night

It strikes me that we can look at Atlantis in two ways. We can either imagine that Plato's Timaeus (and the unfinished Critias) is intended to be an historical document, or we can assume that Plato was being metaphorical.

If we look at Plato's description of Atlantis as an historical account then there is no question about the identity of Atlantis: described as larger than "Libya and Asia put together" and past the Pillars of Hercules, the only possible place which fits those criteria is continental America. Of course, whatever information Plato had available about Atlantis was far from reliable.Plato heard the story from his relative Critias the younger, who in turn heard the story from his grandfather, Critias the elder, who had heard it from his father Dropides, who had heard it from his friend Solon the Lawgiver. Solon heard it from an old Egyptian priest (possibly Senchis the Saite), who knew of the records of Atlantis, but of course had no personal experience. Plato was therefore getting his information about Atlantis seventh-hand - hardly reliable. So, there's no way we should trust the details Plato gves us about Atlantis, in which case it could be any number of places: continental America, the West Indies, the Azores, the Madieras, the Canaries... all of which have turned up some evidence (of varying degrees of reliability) of ancient civilisations.

On th other hand, if we look at Plato's accounts of Atlantis as metaphorical, which indeed the rest of the text suggests that they are, then we have to ask what they are a metaphor for. Almost certainly, since Plato is trying to make points about the relative youth of Athenian culture, and the frailty of culture if society does not behave, the metaphor is either a complete fabrication and represents a non-existent society used to drive home Plato's moral points, OR he is speaking of a genuine pre-Athenian culture whose downfall was believed to have been a reult of their misbehaviour.

In either case the detail about metaphorical Atlantis are padding, designed to fix in the mind firmly the splendour of this fallen race. If Plato invented Atlantis for his own purposes then it can never be found, because it doesn't exist. If Plato drew upon knowledge of an ancient culture and simply gave it the name "Atlantis" then it has already been found - it is the mass of prehistoric structures and archaeological discoveries which litter the Mediterranean, and indeed the world.

That's your clue right there. Under an electron microscope, you will always see marks, whether it was done by hand on by power tools. The only way that there would be no marks would be if the crystal naturally grew into that form, and then you would see the natural growth marks of the quartz. As it turns out, however, the skull bearns the circular marks of an orbital buffer.



He actually made a series of other skulls as well.

http://www.morien-institute.org/yonaguni.html
heres the japanese underwater monument