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 7
stevemagegod

Atlantis

2,243 posts in this topic

Hahahaa!! Atlantis was lost alright, it sank beath the waves, IF it really existed in the first place.

That theory of Flem' Ath (spelling?) is nice, but based on distorting about anything Plato said.

Atlantis has been 'found' about anywhere on the globe.

...and that's just by Puzzler alone.

--Jaylemurph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ANtartica is not completly covered in ice, though there is a good deal of it.

THe only evidence for habitation of Antartica goes back to the dino days.

OMG, now someone will start telling us about the Reptiliods that disgiuse themselves as humans !!

OK, believe me, it's all true : their king was Jim Morrison, the "Lizard King".

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...and that's just by Puzzler alone.

--Jaylemurph

You - as a linguist - should at least have corrected my spelling, ok?

beath = beneath.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly! And those waves are now frozen ice. Antarctica was once in a temperate climate.

Check some scientific sites about ancient sea currents, the climate, and so on, and don't just believe anything that matches your daydreams.

It did indeed have a temperate climate once, but that was MANY millions of years ago, however much Flem likes to ignore that fact.

.

Edited by Abramelin
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those folks who subscribe to the theory of the poles shifting (the solid surface of the earth occasionally 'floating' on the liquid portion of the core) it would be possible that Antartic was ice-free at least in part about 11,000 years ago. The last alledged pole shift took the North pole from somewhere in Hudson Bay to its current position. The location of the South pole would likewise have changed with Antartica being located roughly 2000 miles closer to the Equator. This might account for the Piri Reis maps showing Antartica as it would be without ice. However if ice cores from all of Antartica can be shown to be of million plus years old that would certainly shoot that theory down. Plato's version of Atlantis tells of it being larger than Libya and parts of Asia Minor and being "West of the Pillars of Hercules". That pretty much shoots down islands in the Mediteranean and Antartica. If you're a pole shift believer the most likely place for Atlantis would be in the Carribean Sea area which would have been pretty much directly West of Gibraltar (pillars of hercules) if the pole was in Hudson Bay. Edgar Cayce puts a remnant of Atlantis as showing up in 1968(?) when the Bimini Road was discovered. Who knows at this point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This might account for the Piri Reis maps showing Antartica as it would be without ice.

It didn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Millions of years ago, well outside the timeframe of even the earliest humans.

cormac

Humans are millions of years old.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ANtartica is not completly covered in ice, though there is a good deal of it.

I agree.

THe only evidence for habitation of Antartica goes back to the dino days.

Source please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It didn't.

In reality it does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In reality it does.

No, I doesn't.

And I can give these short answers as long as you like to post your few-words claims.

You just say 'this is true'. Well, fine, I will say it isn't.

Get my point?

But I will help you here.

You read a theory that is far out, and supports whatever you always dreamt of.

But you do not really understand the science that contradicts that theory - and you do not really understand the theory you love in the first place - , so you just skip the contradicting science, and say: "it is all true'.

Well, then I say: no, it's not.

.

Edited by Abramelin
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I doesn't.

And I can give these short answers as long as you like to post your few-words claims.

You just say 'this is true'. Well, fine, I will say it isn't.

Get my point?

If your point is that you have no evidence, I think I get it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If your point is that you have no evidence, I think I get it.

My point was: you just say : "it's there", or "it exists".

And you don't back it up with anything.

So I can safely assume you don't have evidence either (and btw, I read Flem's book).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...and that's just by Puzzler alone.

--Jaylemurph

Jay,

Struck a nerve there.

It was I that told the Puzz to try and find Atlantis in Greek mythology, knowing full well it wasn't there.

I didn't know who I was dealing with.

The Puzzler has become one of the forums most educated personages on certain aspects of Greek mythology.

Anyway, you gotta admit she did a huge amount of work.

She still won't admit that Atlantis never existed though.

Harte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I'm getting from this conversation, only parts of the earth floated on the crust. I thought the whole shebang would float at once, which is what should happen.

Earlier it was said that the N. Pole had shifted but as far as I know that was a shift of about 400 miles. Therefore the southern end of the globe would only have shifted 400 miles as well, not 2000. The Carribean Sea is not directly west of Gibraltar and would only have been directly west of Gibraltar if the Americas had floated about 1600 miles south and Europe and Africa stayed where they were.

Lakeview rud

For those folks who subscribe to the theory of the poles shifting (the solid surface of the earth occasionally 'floating' on the liquid portion of the core) it would be possible that Antartic was ice-free at least in part about 11,000 years ago. The last alledged pole shift took the North pole from somewhere in Hudson Bay to its current position. The location of the South pole would likewise have changed with Antartica being located roughly 2000 miles closer to the Equator. This might account for the Piri Reis maps showing Antartica as it would be without ice. However if ice cores from all of Antartica can be shown to be of million plus years old that would certainly shoot that theory down. Plato's version of Atlantis tells of it being larger than Libya and parts of Asia Minor and being "West of the Pillars of Hercules". That pretty much shoots down islands in the Mediteranean and Antartica. If you're a pole shift believer the most likely place for Atlantis would be in the Carribean Sea area which would have been pretty much directly West of Gibraltar (pillars of hercules) if the pole was in Hudson Bay. Edgar Cayce puts a remnant of Atlantis as showing up in 1968(?) when the Bimini Road was discovered. Who knows at this point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I no that this theory is not new but remember when the Nazi's where trying to find evidence of a master race or at least Atlanteans? Well their idea of Aryans are blond hair and blue eyes. Well one of the theory's out their is that Atlantis is located around the Black Sea Region. Well new genetic samples argue that Blue Eyes is a relativity new trait only about 10,00 years old and was a mutation in a single man and then spread rapidly throughout Europe. And everyone who has Blue Eyes is related through a single common ancestor. Well Atlantis was a world wide Empire could it be possible that Atlantis genetically altered man to have Blue Eyes, and since it was a world wide Empire the gene for Blue Eyes spread throughout Europe?

I think your theory is worth looking into, but I'm somewhat skeptical of the Black Sea Atlantis theory. I think blue eyes moved into Europe due to cultural ideas of beauty. Men and women with blue eyes were considered more attractive and therefore got to breed more.

I don't think Atlantis was a world wide empire, any more then Troy, or Tyre were world wide empires.

The entire story is clearly meant to be a political statement about Athens and her enemies. That Athens will not be beaten by anyone, even if they had already conquered Asia, Africa and the rest of Europe.

Exactly! And those waves are now frozen ice. Antarctica was once in a temperate climate.

Using that reasoning then Greenland is a much more likely target then Antarctica. It is a lot closer and can be mistaken for an smaller island more easily.

It didn't.

I agree. The Piri Neis map only shows the Western Coast of South America where it is supposed to be Antarctica. The map maker just ran out of room on the map and so went the other way.

The entire story is bogus in that a handful of shepards were supposedly able to defeat a gigantic army that had beaten everyone else and then to seal the humiliation the Atlantian city/island was destroyed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

here is one Cool representation of the geogological time line for antartica

it got covered in ice 40 Million years ago, long before hominids even evolved (which is around 4 million years ago).

Edited by The Spartan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think Atlantis was a world wide empire, any more then Troy, or Tyre were world wide empires.

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.

"... 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.

Using that reasoning then Greenland is a much more likely target then Antarctica. It is a lot closer and can be mistaken for an smaller island more easily.

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.

Furthermore, we have the historical map that proves Atlantis is Antarctica.

Athanasius_Kircher%27s_Atlantis.gif

2wphwf9.png

Edited by Agonaces of Susa
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

"... 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.

'Scuse me, what historical record?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Qoais, yes that very strange theory suggests that the entire solid portion of the earth (above the liquid iron core) is capable of movement when there are forces great enough to get it started. I don't have any idea what would be necessary but suggested in another thread that the weight of ice on the North American continent during the last Ice Age might have been enough. Proponents of this theory suggest that the magnetic north pole has shifted several times over the last 100,000 plus years. The last location of true North was supposedly the last location of magnetic north supposedly in Hudson Bay. That would be some 1500 or 2000 miles of distance. The magnetic north is currently making its way toward our current North Pole and last I heard it was increasing its velocity to something like 25 to 40 km per year. (Not sure on that figure but it was in a Nat. Geographic magazine)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

"... 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.

That is an interpretation of Flem' Ath.

You can believe what you heart desires, but we are here not discussing religion.

And NO historical record talks about Antarctica as an Atlantian Empire.

If it does, you can certainly show us with a quote, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

"... 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.

Since, it is your interpretation alone for Antartica to be the site for Atlantis, have you ever read about the geological timeline for the ice continent, which has been proved from numerous ice cores samples taken all over the continent.

What makes you think that humans ..to be precise ..hominids had developed even long before 40 million years (which is the time the continent got covered in ice)??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'Scuse me, what historical record?

Exactly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And NO historical record talks about Antarctica as an Atlantian Empire.

Are you saying that Plato and Athanasius Kircher were not historical figures and persons of historical record?

Edited by Agonaces of Susa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly.

I see, and this record would be contained in...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since, it is your interpretation alone for Antartica to be the site for Atlantis

I wish it were my "interpretation alone." You must have a very high opinion of me to give me credit for the truth.

What makes you think that humans ..to be precise ..hominids had developed even long before 40 million years (which is the time the continent got covered in ice)??

Archaeological evidence and paleontological data and dating.

I see, and this record would be contained in...?

Every library on Earth.

Edited by Agonaces of Susa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 7

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.