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 1
LucidElement

Piri Reis Map

14 posts in this topic

This topic hasnt been done in a while, so I would like to restart it. I am control copying the basis of the Piri Reis Map Mystery then I would like to add some experts from Fingerprints of the God's Book and see how you respond to it. I think this is fascinating.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The Piri Reis map remains one of the strangest ancient discoveries of modern times.

  • Its age has been confirmed
  • The map shows antarctica at a time it had not been discovered

Many ancient artifacts were found during the topkat palace, Turkey, reorganization among them was the Piri Reis. The map drew immediate attention as it was one of the earliest maps of America, and the only 16th century map that shows South America in its proper longitudinal position in relation to Africa. The map is drawn on gazelle skin and was compiled in 1513 by Ottoman-Turkish military admiral and cartographer Piri Reis. The half of the map which survives shows the western coasts of Europe, North Africa, and the coast of Brazil. Various Atlantic islands, including the Azores and Canary Islands are shown, as is the mythical island of Antillia and possibly Japan.

The most puzzling aspect of the map is its depiction of Antarctica. According to the history books, the first confirmed sighting of Antarctica occurred in 1820 by the Russian expedition of Mikhail Lazarev and Fabian Gottlieb von Bellingshausen. The Piri Reis map not only shows a land mass near present day Antarctica, but it depicts Antarctica’s topography as not being masked by ice and in great detail. It has been estimated that Antarctica has been covered with ice for around 6000 years.

Many people have raised the question, how could a Turksih admiral from half a millennium ago map a continent’s topography that has been covered with ice for thousands of years? Reports have been published claiming that the Ottoman Empire had knowledge of some form of ancient Ice Age civilization. However, these claims are generally considered to be pseudo-scholarship, and the scholarly opinion is that the region sometimes thought of as Antarctica is more likely Patagonia or the Terra Australis Incognita (Unknown Southern Land) widely believed to exist before the Southern Hemisphere was fully explored.

On the map, Piri Reis gives resource credit to a map drawn by Christopher Columbus, which has never been discovered. Geographers have spent several centuries unsuccessfully searching for a “lost map of Columbus” that was supposedly drawn while he was in the West Indies. After the discovery of the Piri Reis map, an unsuccessful investigation was launched to find the lost Columbus source map. The historical importance of the Piri Reis map lies in its demonstration of the extent of Portuguese knowledge of the New World in 1510. The Piri Reis map is currently located in the Library of the Topkap Palace in Istanbul, Turkey, but is not currently on display to the public.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

FINGERPRINTS OF THE GOD'S

1.) The Piri Reis Map, which is a genuine document, not a hoax of any kind, was made at Constantinople in AD 1513.

2.) It focuses on the western coast of Africa, the eastern coast of South America and the northern coast of Antartica.

3.) Piri Reis could not have acquired his information on this latter region from contemporary explorers because Antartica remained undiscovered until AD 1818, more then 300 years AFTER he drew the map.

4.) The ice-free coast of Queen Maud Land shown in the map is a colossal puzzle because the geological evidence confirms that the latest date it could have been surveyed and charted in an ice-free condition is 4000 BC.

5.) It is not possible to pinpoint the earliest date that such a task could have been accomplished, but it seems that the Queen Maud Land littoral may have remained in a stable, unglaciated condition for at least 9000 years before the spreading ice-cap swallowed it entirely.

6.) There is no civilization known to history that had the capacity or need to survey that coastline in the relevant period: between 13,000 BC and 4,000 BC.

The Piri Reis Map seems to contain surprising collateral evidence in support of the thesis of a geologically recent glaciation of parts of Antarctica following a sudden southward displacement of the earth''s crust. Moreover since such a map could only have been drawn prior to 4000 BC, its implications for the history of human civilization are staggering. Prior to 4000 BC there are supposed to have been no civilzations at all.

1) Civilization first developed in the Fertile Crescent of the Middle East.

2.) This development began after 4000 BC< and culminated in emergence of the earliest true civilizations (Sumer and Egypt) around 3000 BC, soon followed by the Indus Valley and China.

3.) About 1500 years later, civilizations took off spontaneously and independently in the Americas.

4.) Since 3000 BC in the Old World and about 1500 BC in the New) civilization has steadily 'evolved' in the direction of ever more refined, complex and productive forms.

5.) In consequence, and particularly by comparison with ourselves, all ancient civilizations (and all their works) are to be understood as essentially primitive (the Sumerian astronomers regarded the heavens with unscientific awe, and even the pyramids of Egypt were built by 'technological primitives') The evidence of the Piri Reis Map appears to contradict all of this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is said that Piri Reis map was badly drawn because it has two Amazon rivers, ignoring the fact that beside Amazon river in South America we have more big rivers: Orinoco river and La Plata river.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) Antarctica was not always covered with ice and was at one time much warmer then it i today.

2) It was warm because it was not physically located at the South Pole in that period. Instead it was approximately 2000 miles farther north. This would have put it outside the Antarctic Circle in a temperate or cold temperate climate.

3) The continent moved to its present position inside the Antarctic Circle as a result of a mechanism known as 'earth-crust displacement'. This mechanism in no sense to be confused with plate-tectonics or continental drift, is one whereby the lithosphere, the whole outer crust of the earth, may be displaced at times, moving over the soft inner body, much as the skin of an orange if it were loose, might shift over the inner part of the orange all in one piece.

4) During the envisaged southwards movement of Antarctica brought about by earth-crust displacement, the continent would gradually have grown colder, an ice-cap forming and remorselessly expanding over several thousands of years until it attained its present dimensions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Piri Reis Map does not depict Antarctica, but South America:

We can dismiss Mallery as an authority, but does this mean that Hapgood was also wrong to identify the land at the bottom (south) of the map as Antarctica? To see it as such, one must ignore the placenames written in this area, as transcribed in Ayşe Afet İnan’s The Oldest Map of America, Drawn by Pirî Reis (1954, Ankara). They include "Rio de laplata", "San Matias", "Porto Deseado" and "Porto San Julean". These are clearly the Río de la Plata, Golfo San Matías, Puerto Deseado and Puerto San Julián. In other words, this is a depiction of the coast of Argentina, twisted through 90° to fit onto the parchment! There is no depiction of Antarctica here.

Link

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

This all works great if the 500,000 year old ice cores from Antartica are ignored and the incredibly slow pace of tectonic movement is ignored. These are pretty big things to ignore or explain away. And it's highly likely that Antartica was last ice free millions of years ago, though I guess the age of Atlantis can always be put back a few million years to suit geological fact. Then there woud be the problem that homosapiens weren't around back then.

Edited by Kaa-Tzik
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lucid, rather than having us all repeat facts and arguments we may have already posted several times in regards to this map -- some within the past few weeks -- it's much simpler for you and us for you acquaint yourself with the search function.

-- Jaylemurph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) Antarctica was not always covered with ice and was at one time much warmer then it i today.

2) It was warm because it was not physically located at the South Pole in that period. Instead it was approximately 2000 miles farther north. This would have put it outside the Antarctic Circle in a temperate or cold temperate climate.

3) The continent moved to its present position inside the Antarctic Circle as a result of a mechanism known as 'earth-crust displacement'. This mechanism in no sense to be confused with plate-tectonics or continental drift, is one whereby the lithosphere, the whole outer crust of the earth, may be displaced at times, moving over the soft inner body, much as the skin of an orange if it were loose, might shift over the inner part of the orange all in one piece.

4) During the envisaged southwards movement of Antarctica brought about by earth-crust displacement, the continent would gradually have grown colder, an ice-cap forming and remorselessly expanding over several thousands of years until it attained its present dimensions.

1) It's been covered by ice for at least the last 25 million years.

2) It settled in its current position at the South Pole from c.40 million years BP.

3) Your evidence for earth-crust displacement of "the whole outer crust of the earth" instead of plate tectonics is what exactly?

cormac

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Piri Reis map is a zombie. It alweays rises back no matter how many times it's been killed.

It also doesn't show Antarctica.

Tired of this zombie. Next time I see it, off goes the head.

Harte

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the origins of the map had been resolved. Or debunked. Or whatever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thousands of times. Thus the zombie reference.

harte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Santa Clause doesnt live there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the Arctic.

The Antarctic, as everyone knows, is the home of his brother, Santa Phrase.

Sheese! :rolleyes:

Harte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lucid, rather than having us all repeat facts and arguments we may have already posted several times in regards to this map -- some within the past few weeks -- it's much simpler for you and us for you acquaint yourself with the search function.

-- Jaylemurph

different topic starter Murph. It regarded the map but different ideas and opening statements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted this like a dozen times before, but here it is again:

http://www.unexplain...showentry=23172

pirireis1a.gif

Edited by Abramelin
1 person likes this

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 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.