Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 18
ISAEYEALLSEEING

Atlantis is a reality find out where here

2,202 posts in this topic

I believe that I live in Shangrila and vacation in Brigadoon. Yeah, a vacation every 100 years.

There you go. Because you believe it, it must be true. :lol:

cormac

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote

The islands in the North Sea aren't where Plato said Atlantis was nor did they subside at the time that Plato claimed, so really aren't relevant to the discussion of Atlantis.

Platoon describes it as lying outside the pillars, which most likely mean outside the mediterian sea. When he talks about atlantis he means the whole empire which was probably 20 atlantis islands or more in the atlantic ocean. When he talks about the size of libia and asia together. He could have meant that america was controlled by the atlantians. He never talks about the exact location of the atlantis main island and city.

It is just common sense, how could one single island controll the world without having other island outposts.

Platoon describes the empire exicted before 9600 bc, The new north sea civilization exicted from, and a proven fact that people settled and lived on these islands, from at lest 12.000 bc, maybe older. Around 6.000bc the islands of the north sea was wiped clean by a large tsunami. How does that not fit the timeframe?

Quote

However, close to half of the island of Santorini collapsed into the sea after the volcanoes eruption.

So what, still not the same. If these island was totally submerged in water we most likely would never heard of it. It would still be a myth and we would know nothing of the minoan civilisation.

Thank you for serious critics.

Edited by whitegandalf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote

The islands in the North Sea aren't where Plato said Atlantis was nor did they subside at the time that Plato claimed, so really aren't relevant to the discussion of Atlantis.

Platoon describes it as lying outside the pillars, which most likely mean outside the mediterian sea. When he talks about atlantis he means the whole empire which was probably 20 atlantis islands or more in the atlantic ocean. When he talks about the size of libia and asia together. He could have meant that america was controlled by the atlantians. He never talks about the exact location of the atlantis main island and city.

It is just common sense, how could one single island controll the world without having other island outposts.

Platoon describes the empire exicted before 9600 bc, The new north sea civilization exicted from, and a proven fact that people settled and lived on these islands, from at lest 12.000 bc, maybe older. Around 6.000bc the islands of the north sea was wiped clean by a large tsunami. How does that not fit the timeframe?

Quote

However, close to half of the island of Santorini collapsed into the sea after the volcanoes eruption.

So what, still not the same. If these island was totally submerged in water we most likely would never heard of it. It would still be a myth and we would know nothing of the minoan civilisation.

Thank you for serious critics.

Wrong, he says exactly where the island of Atlantis was. Which he claims was "in front of" the Pillars of Hercules and sufficiently so that when it subsided it made the entrance to the Mediterranean un-navigable. This does not describe the North Sea so the North Sea area could not have been Atlantis. And he further claims that Atlantis was destroyed c.9600 BC and NOT in c.6200 BC so you're reinterpreting what he wrote to support your idea. That's not how it works.

One single island didn't control the world since Atlantis, as written about by Plato, didn't exist.

This is also wrong since the island of Santorini/Thera collapsed c.1613 BC, well within recorded history, so we'd of course have heard about it or the impact from its disappearance. And it wasn't all of what existed of the Minoan Civilization so we'd still have discovered the Minoans anyway.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have some good points. The timeline is somewhat off. And it is strange that no archeological evidence for this has survived. There should be at least a couple of places that would have survived the rising water and tsunami. So far nothing proven by certainly that can link it with Hyperborea (Røst) and Atlantis (doggerland)..

But then again not impossible. I know that the archeology in norway is extremely poor funded and that the region nordland (hålogaland-holy land) and its islands, have been examined poorest of all 18 regions of norway. The possible Hyperborea remendents islands, where ruins could be found is also a off limited area, because of some rare birds. It is illegal to visit them. No people live there.

Also platoons tale, if true, could be somewhat inacurate, as it was probably was translated from egypt to greece. And the egyptians might have gotten it a bit wrong too, if this was thousands of years before it was written down and Platoon got it.

I also look at all the ancient texts and tale out there, especially the viking sagaes and tales and greek myth, as i find it more belivable and true than Platoon. They all point to something, that the todays archeology need to explain our past. Something is missing. Why did the Maya, Egypt and Sumer began their building and their writing exactly the same, so far apart? And why do they all say in their text and myth that they got help from a advanced godlike tribe that was destroyed by a flood?

What i am saying that if an iceland based civilisation did exist in the stoneage, it would be extremely hard to find it, wheteher in the mediterian, north sea or on the other side of the world, as the island and ruins must have sunken between 50 and 100m down the sea. If they lived on island and the sea was their resource, not farmers, only cattle and small gardens, their cities and settlements would have all been at the coast, and would have been all submerged by the rapid rising water in the period.

A iceland based civilization, like the minoans and their settlements, in the bronseage, would not have been submurged in the same degree and therefor much easier too find.

Edited by whitegandalf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heres a link of a sacred cave 33.000 years old, untouched by water and ice during last iceage, on one of the surving island of the possible hyperborea. It has cavepaintings, very interesting take a look, 4 fingers and two horns. The cave is on the island Trenyken, because of its tree mountains. The cave is called Helvete, which means Hell. Archeologst has discovered flutes and string instuments in the cave. One bone in the cave was dated to 1500 bc but it could have been in use much earlier. It is located 50m above water in the center mountain.

http://www.mythic-lo...m/Trenyken.html

325trenykfig.jpg

350trenyk_rund.jpg

Edited by whitegandalf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have some good points. The timeline is somewhat off. And it is strange that no archeological evidence for this has survived. There should be at least a couple of places that would have survived the rising water and tsunami. So far nothing proven by certainly that can link it with Hyperborea (Røst) and Atlantis (doggerland)..

But then again not impossible. I know that the archeology in norway is extremely poor funded and that the region nordland (hålogaland-holy land) and its islands, have been examined poorest of all 18 regions of norway. The possible Hyperborea remendents islands, where ruins could be found is also a off limited area, because of some rare birds. It is illegal to visit them. No people live there.

Also platoons tale, if true, could be somewhat inacurate, as it was probably was translated from egypt to greece. And the egyptians might have gotten it a bit wrong too, if this was thousands of years before it was written down and Platoon got it.

I also look at all the ancient texts and tale out there, especially the viking sagaes and tales and greek myth, as i find it more belivable and true than Platoon. They all point to something, that the todays archeology need to explain our past. Something is missing. Why did the Maya, Egypt and Sumer began their building and their writing exactly the same, so far apart? And why do they all say in their text and myth that they got help from a advanced godlike tribe that was destroyed by a flood?

What i am saying that if an iceland based civilisation did exist in the stoneage, it would be extremely hard to find it, wheteher in the mediterian, north sea or on the other side of the world, as the island and ruins must have sunken between 50 and 100m down the sea. If they lived on island and the sea was their resource, not farmers, only cattle and small gardens, their cities and settlements would have all been at the coast, and would have been all submerged by the rapid rising water in the period.

A iceland based civilization, like the minoans and their settlements, in the bronseage, would not have been submurged in the same degree and therefor much easier too find.

"Somewhat" is an understatement, since approximately 3400 years is the difference between the two.

Calling Atlantis "Doggerland" doesn't make it true. If you're going to use the name then you're limited to the location for same as well as written by Plato. Which is nowhere near the North Sea.

You need to get the name right. It's Plato not platoon. Plato was a person. A platoon is an army unit.

It wasn't translated from Egyptian to Greek as it never existed in Egyptian to begin with. And the earliest use of the word or it's closest match, Atlanteans, is used by Herodotus for a peoples of Northwest Africa. Which is also not the North Sea.

This is a fringe argument that has no basis in fact. The Sumerians started c.3200 BC, while the Egyptians started c.3100 BC. The Mayans didn't even exist at that time. As to the Flood story, it doesn't exist in Ancient Egypt and no such claim was ever made in regards to one.

Being hard to find is one thing, but you can't take a story out of its temporal and geographical location and attribute it to another time and place and pretend you're being relevant to the original story. You're not. Trying to rationalize Atlantis into existance is a great disservice to actual sites/settlements/etc. that we find evidence for IMO.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have some good points. The timeline is somewhat off. And it is strange that no archeological evidence for this has survived. There should be at least a couple of places that would have survived the rising water and tsunami. So far nothing proven by certainly that can link it with Hyperborea (Røst) and Atlantis (doggerland)..

But then again not impossible. I know that the archeology in norway is extremely poor funded and that the region nordland (hålogaland-holy land) and its islands, have been examined poorest of all 18 regions of norway. The possible Hyperborea remendents islands, where ruins could be found is also a off limited area, because of some rare birds. It is illegal to visit them. No people live there.

Also platoons tale, if true, could be somewhat inacurate, as it was probably was translated from egypt to greece. And the egyptians might have gotten it a bit wrong too, if this was thousands of years before it was written down and Platoon got it.

You seem to be taking some liberties with Hyperborea and Røst, as though the two are factually linked by both ancient Greece and modern historical research. Neither is the case. You may be familiar with the term but for the sake of those who are not, in Attic Greek "Boreas" means "North Wind." The prefix hyper means "beyond" or "above." The Greeks held that the North Wind (Boreas) resided in Thrace. Therefore, "Hyperborea" is a general geographical term meaning "lands beyond North Wind" (that is, beyond Thrace).

That's all it is. There is no marker in the term "Hyperborea" for a specific spot in Europe. Nothing in Scandinavia is specified. That's only a personal assumption you yourself are bringing to the table. A strict observance must be observed in digesting ancient Greek myth, and Hyperborea belongs to ancient Greek myth—not to a factual, specific location or to factual, specific people.

Why would Plato be writing about a region about which neither he nor his people knew anything of substance? Are we to believe the Athenians actually fought with ancient Norwegians in the Neolithic period? Now, our resident expert on Doggerland here at UM is the poster Abramelin. He certainly knows more than I, but I think he would refute your argument that Doggerland up and disappeared over night because of a tsunami. Rather, it was a slow and long-lasting geological event. Moreover, as I recall the last of Doggerland subsided around the mid-seventh millennium BCE. There were no Greek peoples at that time. I rather doubt the earliest speakers of Proto-Indo-European even existed yet.

Why do you keep calling Plato "Platoon"?

I also look at all the ancient texts and tale out there, especially the viking sagaes and tales and greek myth, as i find it more belivable and true than Platoon. They all point to something, that the todays archeology need to explain our past. Something is missing. Why did the Maya, Egypt and Sumer began their building and their writing exactly the same, so far apart? And why do they all say in their text and myth that they got help from a advanced godlike tribe that was destroyed by a flood?

What i am saying that if an iceland based civilisation did exist in the stoneage, it would be extremely hard to find it, wheteher in the mediterian, north sea or on the other side of the world, as the island and ruins must have sunken between 50 and 100m down the sea. If they lived on island and the sea was their resource, not farmers, only cattle and small gardens, their cities and settlements would have all been at the coast, and would have been all submerged by the rapid rising water in the period.

A iceland based civilization, like the minoans and their settlements, in the bronseage, would not have been submurged in the same degree and therefor much easier too find.

Plato and the Vikings are separated by at least 500 years of history. I rather doubt Plato knew of them, unless he had access to a time machine. Nothing of their culture or exploits could have been known to Plato, so Vikings are irrelevant to anything related to the Atlantis story. A strict adherence to timelines must be observed. The same goes for the Maya. By the time they were growing as a powerful federation in the mid-third century CE, Egypt was already long gone as a great power and was in its waning days even as a Roman province; Sumer was gone from the historical stage much, much earlier than that. While Sumer and early Egypt certainly might have influenced each other, there is no possible connection with Mesoamerica. And there's the simple fact that neither Sumer nor Egypt were great maritime cultures, so notions of Sumerians or Egyptians sailing to the Western Hemisphere is the stuff of movies and fringe books, but not reality.

Egypt has no flood myth beyond the mound of creation. In Egyptian mythology no flood ever wiped out mankind (or godkind).

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, meant indus valley civilization, not maya. he he

Here is a map over the last sea based civilization from the north sea and its settlements. 1000 years ago. The vikings. Many forget their eastern route trough the rivers, to the black sea and caspian sea. A stoneage north sea civ would have used the same routes for eksapnsion.

http://en.wikipedia....g_Expansion.svg

Edited by whitegandalf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, meant indus valley civilization, not maya. he he

Here is a map over the last sea based civilization from the north sea and its settlements. 1000 years ago. The vikings. Many forget their eastern route trough the rivers, to the black sea and caspian sea. A stoneage north sea civ would have used the same routes for eksapnsion.

http://en.wikipedia....g_Expansion.svg

I think we better discuss this in the Doggerland thread.

Because that thread is about the North Sea area, and is not about Altlantis.

The timeframe is wrong, the climate is wrong (though lots better than formerly assumed, but not 'Atlantis-like'), and there were no elephants like in Atlantis (though there were mammoths once, when it still was a frozen tundra).

Doggerland slowly but surely submerged due to post glacial readjustment and rising sea levels. Doggerland got hit by a gigantic and a days-lasting tsunami around 6150 BC, after which only Dogger Island remained for another 1000 years before it too submerged.

But yes, there are those who think Doggerland/Dogger Island was the origin of the West European megalithic culture. The problem is that the megalithic culture in Western Europe started around 3500 (maybe even 4000) BC, long after anything 'Dogger' was gone.

You should read that thread, WhiteGandalf.

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, meant indus valley civilization, not maya. he he

Here is a map over the last sea based civilization from the north sea and its settlements. 1000 years ago. The vikings. Many forget their eastern route trough the rivers, to the black sea and caspian sea. A stoneage north sea civ would have used the same routes for eksapnsion.

http://en.wikipedia....g_Expansion.svg

Which is still wrong as the Indus Valley Civilization (IVC) dates to c.2500 BC and there is no evidence that they had a flood myth such as you're describing. You're mixing timelines together that shouldn't be.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, i can see we cant come to an agreement and this will be my last post.

1. The earliest writing in the Idus Valley Civilization around 3000 bc (wikipedia). making the 3 civilization only 100 years a part. In ancient history, this is same time. As it could be even older writing not discovered yet by the civilizations.

2. The Greek and Platon did know of the North Sea and it was a known part of their world, because the trading routes between The North Sea and The meditarian was established during the whole bronseage. Scandinavian Amber has been found in Minoan and mediterian king graves. The Minoan and North sea Civilization in the Bronzeage was possible part of the same civilization culture as they both used the bull and two horns, spiral and a labyrinth as their main symbol. Their sword design was exactly the same. When the minoan civilization was destroyed, their sword making and design stopped, but the North sea civ continued to make the same sword with development over 1000years later.

3. The Noth sea civilization has had 4 large tsunamies floods, not 1. The first was around 23.000 bc or older, The second is the most known 6200 years ago, the tird was only 100 years later, the last was between 3000 bc to 1000bc.

4. The North Sea is in and a part of the Atlantic Ocean, and therefor relevant. Their enemies and trading partners would not have had a detailed updated map over the atlantis civilization cities and resources all the time. This was a military secret. They would probably only known the location of the closests atlantis cities or settlements. Their secrets, most important locations and technology, if revealed would be treason and punished with death.

5. This Hyperborea-Nordic is an old theory first invented by the italian Felice Vinci 30-40 years ago. And sice then many has written books about it.

6. Actually elephants can very fine survive in North Sea Islands as it (almost) never goes to minus degrees (today) and has green grass during the whole winter. The coldest during stoneage and bronzeage was probalbly 5 degrees in the winter. Dwarf elephants can also easily be transported by boat. The vikings transported their horses in their boats all the time. As i remember Platon were talking about dwarf elephants, not large ones, in atlantis.

7. The Noth sea had an proven developed culture and civilization before the viking time. During the whole bronzeage they had the best boats was deeply connetcted to trade and culture relation with the meditarian. This is proven. Just look it up. Especially linked with the minoans. see 2.

8. True. The egyptians has no creation myth with flood as i know it, but they tell of a flood that destroyed another civilization, and that survivers of that civilization, gave them help in building and engineering in the pyramids

Edited by whitegandalf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2. There has also been found much more swords around the north sea, than in the mediterian from the bronseage period. We also have the largest;) Dont rule us out.

02swords.jpg

Edited by whitegandalf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought a few months ago "they" found a few islands off the coast of Spain and that was thought to be atlantis?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didnt see that story I think have you a good link ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2. There has also been found much more swords around the north sea, than in the mediterian from the bronseage period. We also have the largest;) Dont rule us out.

02swords.jpg

what are these swords ???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it appears I have forgot to renew my domain so if you want to view most of the images a good friend of mine hosted them here

http://atlantisrediscovered.weebly.com/index.html

Nik

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm extremely uneducated with Atlantis. Bare with me. I have questions. I'm basing this off of Wiki's page. Terrible source I guess. But why would Wiki be spewing false information? Why do you believe Plato? If you believe Plato shouldn't you be listening to him? If you believe Plato why are some people even considering places that couldn't be flooded? The lost city of Zinj from the book/film Congo could work ignoring what Plato said. There's seems to be a slim chance that it dried up. It's a lot easier to find it if dried up and the likely hood of finding it increases greatly. If I Google the Pillars of Hercules it gives me the strait of Gibraltar and so did Wikipedia. Why are some peoples opinions being valued different then Platos? I see Plato didn't specify where the Pillars were but there's few choices. I suck at Atlantis. Wasn't he supposedly the first one to write about it? I hope they're scriptures lost in time describing Atlantis before Plato talked about it. There has to be. I hope so or I will have a hard time believing him. Unless I wanna say someone of a higher intelligence was helping Plato and picked him out to bust this.

Atlantis was conquering the western side of Europe and I suspect most of Northern Africa. So the way my brains thinking they started somewhere near North America or west of Spain. It could be North West Africa or Western Africa. Atlanteans worked there way East it appears starting at Spain and North West Africa then to Athens. They can't start near the Black Sea and walk/sail west to Spain and North West Africa then conquer then walk/sail back east to conquering everything leading to Athens. That doesn't make sense. Athens seems to be a prize here. Why not invade Athens first? Why's Athens being chose to conquer last? It's being totally ignored. Atlanteans conquered Western Europe and Northern Africa first. Why's Athens being ignored till the very end? Are they invading Africa first then Spain then East to Athens? Huh? Well then Atlantis is starting East in my mind. That doesn't make sense to me.

Why couldn't Atlantis be a new power in Western Europe/Africa that rose and people rebelled and Atlantis just took off invading everything East.

I really love the idea of the Caribbean or North America being Atlantis. They're things there underwater. But so are those Japanese sunken Pyramids.. Nobody can deny that there are things to be found on the bottom on the sea floor in the Caribbean. Atlanteans appear to be very technology advanced. I'm not sure how I got that idea but you better be farther ahead of others if your sailing across the Atlantic. Few islands exist to hop it.

Giant tsumanis created by earthquakes take the cake as to destroying the city in a day. The areas around New Orleans and hurricane Katrina can be compared. Maybe it was a combination of tsumanis and a hurricane after. But you have a lot of time for things to fully get destroyed if it's located near North America. Even if Atlantis was West of Spain or West of Africa there's no evidence that Atlantis existed until Plato told us.

If Atlantis is part of North America or the Caribbean wouldn't invading Atlanteans in Europe be Native American/Toltec/Hispanic people? Wouldn't some Atlantean people stay in Europe or Africa and procreate. You know make babies with the Europeans? Wouldn't there be evidence of this? Is there? Is there a chance that Atlantean people could be 'White' living in Atlantis near North America or the Carribean? I guess I can figure out a strange reason why.

Again I'm bad with Atlantis.

You know guys, maybe it was just to easy for Atlantis and someone of a higher intelligence took them down and life moved on.

Edited by kampz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Study Plato there are only two places Atlantis could have been, Crete or the lost city of Tartessos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If that's true the subject should be done with. Why isn't it? Did it sink? I'm looking now. It doesn't appear to have sunk. Just some floods like everywhere.

Edited by kampz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm extremely uneducated with Atlantis. Bare with me. I have questions. I'm basing this off of Wiki's page. Terrible source I guess. But why would Wiki be spewing false information? Why do you believe Plato?

Exactly, Plato was a philosopher, not a historian. The story of Atlantis was meant as an allegory for an Athenian audience. It has no basis in history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Study Plato there are only two places Atlantis could have been, Crete or the lost city of Tartessos.

Of the two, only Tartessos comes close to Plato's description.

Of course, Atlantis never existed in the first place because, if it had, it would have left behind evidence. Especially if, like Plato tells us, they conquered every country along the entire shore of the Med.

I mean, yeah, Atlantis might be gone, but where's all the conquered cultures from 10,000 BC? Why no evidence of any large trade structure from back then? Why no genetic evidence of an invasion of foriegners?

Why do people consider Plato to be some sort of historian? Is allegory just too fine a point for them to grasp?

Harte

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

docyabut2 - I'm sorry I'm wrong. Tartessos appeared to be devastated by a tsumani. That's what I'm looking for and especially in that location. I never knew that. Thank you. But I guess it isn't the correct spot right? Now if I can find some island that's been mostly or completely sunken. Water has been going up and down always. But usually up. Right now it's really up there. There's sunken ruins in the Caribbean and Mediterranean sea. Also in the seas off of Japan. Perhaps we haven't checked every where yet.

There's not many places left going looking in the direction of the west toward North and South America and the Caribbean. This is 9,600BC this is when the Great Pyramids were persumably made.

Plato was the first one to make this claim. There's 100,000 to 200,000 or more reports of cryptic animals. Sheesh. Why isn't there more stories of Atlantis that relate a lot to Platos account.

Edited by kampz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

docyabut2 - I'm sorry I'm wrong. Tartessos appeared to be devastated by a tsumani. That's what I'm looking for and especially in that location. I never knew that. Thank you. But I guess it isn't the correct spot right? Now if I can find some island that's been mostly or completely sunken. Water has been going up and down always. But usually up. Right now it's really up there. There's sunken ruins in the Caribbean and Mediterranean sea. Also in the seas off of Japan. Perhaps we haven't checked every where yet.

Land goes up and down all the time as well.

Your Japanese site (the Yonaguni "monument") went down. It sank around the 1st century AD due to tectonic action and was not covered by rising sea levels.

Also, it's rather obvious on close inspection that it is a natural formation, as similar formations riddle the island of Yonaguni.

Plus, if there was some ancient culture there, they certainly left no traces on the island itself, which the underwater formation lies just offshore of.

By the way, exactly the same thing regarding no trace of ancient cultures can be said about Bimini and the Bimini "road," which is also just offshore (of Bimini.)

Harte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well you can't deny that Bimini road could of been made by Atlantis. I know there's no proof at least yet. Either way I want to know who did it. And it's funny they made a Atlantis resort in the Bahamas. You can also have giant earthquakes creating giant tsunamis and then cleaning it up with a few F5 or powerful Hurricanes and what about the volcanoes? Something must of happened to the plates. In other places it's just not possible to have a combination of earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanos, hurricanes and then tornadoes to go along with the hurricanes.

These dates given to us can be way off. A lot of people are second guessing how the Great Pyramids and Puma Punku are being made. I can't figure out a way to drill a hole in diorite and make those grooves at Puma Punku. There's some pretty snazzy technology going on probably when Atlantis invaded Europe and Africa using Platos dates. You can't raise the entire ocean level over 180 feet without effecting every coastal area in the World. Everything should be getting ruined. Is there evidence of mass flooding around 9,600 BC? It's pretty big coincidence how Atlantis lost everything in one battle. How can that be possible unless some higher intelligence sabotaged them or gave Atlantis a giant hanicap during there battle with Athens.

Edited by kampz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well you can't deny that Bimini road could of been made by Atlantis. I know there's no proof at least yet. Either way I want to know who did it.

These dates given to us can be way off. A lot of people are second guessing how the Great Pyramids and Puma Punku are being made. I can't figure out a way to drill a hole in diorite and make those grooves at Puma Punku. There's some pretty snazzy technology going on probably when Atlantis invaded Europe and Africa using Platos dates. You can't raise the entire ocean level over 180 feet without effecting every coastal area in the World. Everything should be getting ruined. Is there evidence of mass flooding around 9,600 BC?

It's kind of pointless to equate the Bimini Road, which isn't evidenced as being man-made, with an island mentioned by Plato which isn't evidenced as having ever existed.

One has to assume that this is an accurate account on Plato's part in order to present it as a fact. Sadly for believers, none of Plato's story is evidenced as being a real story.

Mass flooding on the scale sufficient to drown an island as large as Plato describes in anything like the short timespan he mentions? Absolutely not.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 18

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.