Atlantis

[questionmark]

I had the exact same feeling.

Basically saying that what you are spouting here is crap? Looks like you do not only post links without knowing the content but that you don't read posts either (or read them but lack comprehension).

[Harte]

I agree actually, that science is not always right and I've said it so many times already, that the timelines have to be changed for things to fit the way we're supposed to accept that they actually were. I thought I understood that quantum physics did refute Einstein's theory of relativity, but I can't say as I've totally researched the subject so I can't say for sure.

Qoais,

Just for your info, Quantum Theory doesn't refute anything concerning Relativity Theory.

Einstein, however, did not believe Quantum Theory was correct.

Einstein's scientific objections to QT have since been shown to be incorrect and groundless.

But, as our "friend" here has already pointed out - Einstein didn't know everything.

After all, he agreed with Hapgood.

I mean, whether the Piri Ries map shows Antarctica or not, what I'd like to know, is how he knew there were mountains up the west coast of S. America? I don't think anyone has answered that yet.

I didn't realize that you had asked.

The west coast of S. America doesn't even appear on the map.

If you look closely at the part that (I assume) you're calling mountains, you'll see neckless natives with fire for hair, unicorns and other sorts of fantasy critters.

How'd he know these things were in South America?

Harte

[Qoais]

Then I take it you don't know about all the thousands of mummies that tested positive for tobacco and cocaine.

Oh yes, I'm quite aware of them (not thousands though) and argued that case myself at one point. I totally believe the woman who tested them as she was very, very careful to keep out any contaminants, but that didn't stop her detractors from calling her a liar and causing her to lose her status.

And also our dating techniques are flawed.

My biggest pet peeve - absolutely.

I am not familiar with Cayce's work although I am told it has to do with the paranormal.

Personally, I'd call it more "spiritual", but yes, you could say paranormal.

Now please answer my earlier question as to how a country can face itself

[Abramelin]

Why bother, all he does is google and post, he cannot explain his own evidence.

And that is what most of us want here: Google to your heart's desire, but at least be a bit critical about what you find.

Not just post, and throw it in front of our feet, saying: "Hey, look here !!"

He never reads his own 'proof', hahahaha!!

Well, WE DO.

[Harte]

Oh yes, I'm quite aware of them (not thousands though) and argued that case myself at one point. I totally believe the woman who tested them as she was very, very careful to keep out any contaminants, but that didn't stop her detractors from calling her a liar and causing her to lose her status.

If you read her results, and her subsequent interviews, you would know that she herself stated that her findings cannot be used to claim ancient contact with South America.

Please link us to any of her detractors slandering her as you claim.

Also, I'd be interested in any evidenmce you have that her career suffered in any way whatsoever for this research.

I believe, if you look, you'll find it did not.

In fact, she wasn't even the lead scientist on this research team (he's dead now, IIRC, and his career didn't suffer either.)

Harte

[Agonaces of Susa]

Just for your info, Quantum Theory doesn't refute anything concerning Relativity Theory.

Scientists say otherwise.

Albert, D.Z., and Galchen, R., Was Einstein Wrong?: A Quantum Threat to Special Relativity, Scientific American, Mar 2009

[Agonaces of Susa]

Oh yes, I'm quite aware of them (not thousands though) and argued that case myself at one point.

Over 3000 have been tested so you're not aware of them.

"I continued to work on it [cocaine mummies] because I wanted to be sure of my results, and after 3000 samples, I was absolutely certain that the tobacco plant was known in Europe and Africa long before Columbus." -- Svelta Balabanova, forensic toxicologist, 1996

[Qoais]

Harte

Just for your info, Quantum Theory doesn't refute anything concerning Relativity Theory

Just something I was reading, but was thinking to try to find more on the subject.

http://home.sprynet.com/~owl1/qm3.htm

Neckless Natives? Those marks look like this to me ^^^^^ and that's how I draw mountains!!

[Qoais]

Over 3000 have been tested so you're not aware of them.

"I continued to work on it [cocaine mummies] because I wanted to be sure of my results, and after 3000 samples, I was absolutely certain that the tobacco plant was known in Europe and Africa long before Columbus." -- Svelta Balabanova, forensic toxicologist, 1996

That's not what I meant. She didn't have 3000 mummies. She had 3000 "samples" of stuff to check for cocaine. I'm not even sure Egypt has 3000 mummies - period. (Could be wrong though)

Edited November 17, 2009 by Qoais

[Agonaces of Susa]

That's not what I meant. She didn't have 3000 mummies. She had 3000 "samples" of stuff to check for cocaine. I'm not even sure Egypt has 3000 mummies - period. (Could be wrong though)

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

Over 1 million animal mummies have been found in Egypt

Edited November 17, 2009 by Agonaces of Susa

[Qoais]

Putting this out of context - just to show the number of mummies involved:

So the only way for Rosalie David to check out her theory about fakes was to travel to Munich to see for herself the seven mummies that were the cause of all the fuss.

Showing the number of samples involved:

DR SVETLA BALABANOVA - Institute of Forensic Medicine, Ulm:

"I continued to work on it because I wanted to be sure of my results, and after 3000 samples I, was absolutely certain that the tobacco plant was known in Europe and Africa long before Columbus."

DR SVETLA BALABANOVA - Institute of Forensic Medicine, Ulm:

"The first positive results, of course, were a shock for me. I had not expected to find nicotine and cocaine but that's what happened. I was absolutely sure it must be a mistake."

NARRATOR:

Balabanova ran the tests again. She sent fresh samples to three other labs. But the results kept being confirmed. The drugs were there. So she went ahead and published a paper. The reaction was a sharp reminder that science is a conservative world.

DR SVETLA BALABANOVA - Institute of Forensic Medicine, Ulm:

"I got a pile of letters that were almost threatening, insulting letters saying it was nonsense, that I was fantasising, that it was impossible, because it was proven that before Columbus these plants were not found anywhere in the world outside of the Americas."

http://www.larryjzimmerman.com/lost/coctrans.htm

[Agonaces of Susa]

Putting this out of context - just to show the number of mummies involved:

So the only way for Rosalie David to check out her theory about fakes was to travel to Munich to see for herself the seven mummies that were the cause of all the fuss.

Showing the number of samples involved:

DR SVETLA BALABANOVA - Institute of Forensic Medicine, Ulm:

"I continued to work on it because I wanted to be sure of my results, and after 3000 samples I, was absolutely certain that the tobacco plant was known in Europe and Africa long before Columbus."

DR SVETLA BALABANOVA - Institute of Forensic Medicine, Ulm:

"The first positive results, of course, were a shock for me. I had not expected to find nicotine and cocaine but that's what happened. I was absolutely sure it must be a mistake."

NARRATOR:

Balabanova ran the tests again. She sent fresh samples to three other labs. But the results kept being confirmed. The drugs were there. So she went ahead and published a paper. The reaction was a sharp reminder that science is a conservative world.

DR SVETLA BALABANOVA - Institute of Forensic Medicine, Ulm:

"I got a pile of letters that were almost threatening, insulting letters saying it was nonsense, that I was fantasising, that it was impossible, because it was proven that before Columbus these plants were not found anywhere in the world outside of the Americas."

http://www.larryjzimmerman.com/lost/coctrans.htm

So how do you explain the thousands of so-called "anomalies?"

Did the tobbacco and coca plants evolve wings and fly to Egypt?

But we have no fossil record of the plants's presence there or anywhere else outside their native habitats.

Poorly dispersing taxa cannot simply magically raft across the Atlantic, navigate the Pillars of Heracles, and miraculously end up in Egyptian mummies only and nowhere else.

Edited November 17, 2009 by Agonaces of Susa

[Qoais]

Agonaces - in the previous post, I was merely crossing the T's and dotting the I's. You seem to want everything to be exact, so I was showing that there were not 3000 mummies that were worked on, but 3000 samples. Just to keep things straight.

While I myself agree with what you say, there are others in here that will tell you that the nicotine came from another plant that WAS indigenous to Egypt and Europe and Asia.

[Agonaces of Susa]

Agonaces - in the previous post, I was merely crossing the T's and dotting the I's. You seem to want everything to be exact, so I was showing that there were not 3000 mummies that were worked on, but 3000 samples. Just to keep things straight.

I follow you.

While I myself agree with what you say

Cheers.

there are others in here that will tell you that the nicotine came from another plant that WAS indigenous to Egypt and Europe and Asia.

There is more evidence of invisible pink unicorns aboard Noah's Ark than there is of that.

Edited November 17, 2009 by Agonaces of Susa

[Qoais]

So what is your theory or hypothesis? Since we have no found artifacts proving the existence of a culture that could travel the ocean at 11,500 years ago, do you think there was? I think the Egyptians could travel the ocean at about 5000 years ago, but I'm not so sure about 11,500 years ago.

[Agonaces of Susa]

So what is your theory or hypothesis? Since we have no found artifacts proving the existence of a culture that could travel the ocean at 11,500 years ago, do you think there was? I think the Egyptians could travel the ocean at about 5000 years ago, but I'm not so sure about 11,500 years ago.

I believe Plato. 9,600 B.C.

"She founded your city [sais] a thousand years before ours [Athens], receiving from the Earth and Hephaestus the seed of your race, and afterwards she founded ours, of which the constitution is recorded in our sacred registers to be eight thousand years old." -- Plato, Timaeus, 360 B.C.

And I suspect there was transatlantic voyages and spaceflight millions of years ago.

"When I heard that the just and renowned Arjuna after having been to the celestial regions, had there obtained celestial weapons from Indra himself then, O Sanjaya, I had no hope of success. When I heard that afterwards Arjuna had vanquished the Kalakeyas and the Paulomas proud with the boon they had obtained and which had rendered them invulnerable even to the celestials, then, O Sanjaya, I had no hope of success." -- Dhritarashtra, Mahabharata, 8th century B.C.

Edited November 18, 2009 by Agonaces of Susa

[Qoais]

Correction:

"She founded your city [sais] a thousand years before ours [Athens], receiving from the Earth and Hephaestus the seed of your race, and afterwards she founded ours, of which the constitution is recorded in our sacred registers to be eight thousand years old." -- Plato, Timaeus, 360 B.C.

It is the priest talking here - so when he says "she founded your city a thousand years before ours he is referring to Athens being a thousand years older than the Egyptian city. That's one of the points regarding the story of Atlantis that are a bone of contention. How is it that Egypt has a history of a country a thousand years older than herself?

In other words, supposedly the Atlanteans were attacking the Athenians who, at that time in history were only a few farmers and hunter/gatherers, while at that same time, Egypt herself, or the city state the priest is referring to, wouldn't be in existance yet for another thousand years. Therefore, Athens could not have been protecting something that didn't exist yet.

[questionmark]

Correction:

"She founded your city [sais] a thousand years before ours [Athens], receiving from the Earth and Hephaestus the seed of your race, and afterwards she founded ours, of which the constitution is recorded in our sacred registers to be eight thousand years old." -- Plato, Timaeus, 360 B.C.

It is the priest talking here - so when he says "she founded your city a thousand years before ours he is referring to Athens being a thousand years older than the Egyptian city. That's one of the points regarding the story of Atlantis that are a bone of contention. How is it that Egypt has a history of a country a thousand years older than herself?

In other words, supposedly the Atlanteans were attacking the Athenians who, at that time in history were only a few farmers and hunter/gatherers, while at that same time, Egypt herself, or the city state the priest is referring to, wouldn't be in existance yet for another thousand years. Therefore, Athens could not have been protecting something that didn't exist yet.

Besides there is a little drawback to the story, in Solon's time there was no temple in Zau (Egyptian name for Sais). The Temple we know of was an Isis temple in Plutarch's time.

[Swede]

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

Erm, so cats and ibis were also utilizing these products?

[Swede]

In addition, the following may be of interest;

http://www.thehallofmaat.com/modules.php?name=Articles&file=article&sid=45

[Agonaces of Susa]

Correction:

"She founded your city [sais] a thousand years before ours [Athens], receiving from the Earth and Hephaestus the seed of your race, and afterwards she founded ours, of which the constitution is recorded in our sacred registers to be eight thousand years old." -- Plato, Timaeus, 360 B.C.

It is the priest talking here - so when he says "she founded your city a thousand years before ours he is referring to Athens being a thousand years older than the Egyptian city. That's one of the points regarding the story of Atlantis that are a bone of contention. How is it that Egypt has a history of a country a thousand years older than herself?

In other words, supposedly the Atlanteans were attacking the Athenians who, at that time in history were only a few farmers and hunter/gatherers, while at that same time, Egypt herself, or the city state the priest is referring to, wouldn't be in existance yet for another thousand years. Therefore, Athens could not have been protecting something that didn't exist yet.

Yes. Sorry that was a typo. And I had to run before I could proof read it...

[Agonaces of Susa]

Besides there is a little drawback to the story, in Solon's time there was no temple in Zau (Egyptian name for Sais).

You have no evidence of that. History is not what you make believe, rather it is what the historical record demonstrates.

"Moreover, great stone obelisks stand in the precinct [sais]; and there is a [crater] lake nearby, adorned with a stone margin and made in a complete circle; it is, as it seemed to me, the size of the [crater] lake at Delos which they call the Round Pond. On this lake they enact by night the story of the god's sufferings, a rite which the Egyptians call the Mysteries. I could say more about this, for I know the truth, but let me preserve a discreet silence." -- Herodotos, historian, Book II: 169-171, ~440-420 B.C.

The Temple we know of was an Isis temple in Plutarch's time.

They are the same temple...

Plutarch refers to "the shrine of Minerva at Sais (whom they consider the same with Isis)."

In other words Athena and Isis/Neith are the same, just as Plato claimed.

Pretty funny how all the historical evidence confirms Plato's account of Atlantis.

Edited November 18, 2009 by Agonaces of Susa

[Qoais]

I'm sure this is what Swede was getting at:

Sources of Nicotine

Whilst nicotine is an abundant alkaloid in tobacco plants (Nicotiana tabacum) it is also present in relatively small amounts in some Old World plants including Belladonna (Atropa bella-donna), Celery (Apium graveolens) and Jimsonweed (Datum stramonium). [26] Nicotine and its metabolites have also been identified in human remains and in pipes from the Near East and Africa. However the only direct evidence of habitual tobacco use in the Ancient world has been found in the Americas. [6]

Balabanova has reviewed early evidence for the origins of tobacco in Europe and Asia prior to Columbus’ voyages to the Americas. [27] Pre-Christian pipes made from clay, wood, bronze and iron have been found in Switzerland, France and Germany. "Bauerntabak", literally farmers tobacco, was described in several European herbals written in the sixteenth century and was classified, along with Nicotiana tabacum as either a type of “bilsenkraut” or as a kind of Hyoscyamus. From the seventeenth century farmers tobacco became known as Nicotiana rustica and was erroneously accepted as being of American origin when wild and domesticated varieties were already known in Europe prior to Columbus. Farmers tobacco may have had Asiatic origins, Conrad Gesner considered in 1561 that it had been imported from Syria and it has also been maintained that the Persians were also aware of this type of tobacco. Nicotiana fruticosa is also known to grow in regions of China, where it was domesticated and was known by its Chinese names “cay-thüóc-än” and “yen-yé”.

Additionally a species of tobacco, Nicotiana africana, has recently been identified as indigenous to Namibia in South West Africa. It is therefore not unreasonable to suspect that other species of tobacco may have grown in Egypt, or in the surrounding regions, and that this could account for the high amounts of nicotine identified in these Egyptian mummies.

http://www.thehallofmaat.com/modules.php?name=Articles&file=article&sid=45

Another possibility is that the presence of nicotine and the traces of tobacco leaves found in Ramses II mummy may have resulted from the use of tobacco sprays as an insecticide to conserve the mummies whilst they were stored in museums in the nineteenth century. [28] Mummies are prone to insect infestation following entombment or exhumation and museums continue to wage war against insect pests. In recent investigations at least three different species of beetle including Thylodrias contractus Mots, Tyrophagus sp. and Lassioderma serricorne (F.) have been identified from the mummy of Ramses II. Most speculation has centred on L. serricorne due to its common name, the tobacco beetle. This species was first recorded in the U.S.A. in 1886 but has several similar forms in the Old World and it is also often found as a pest in museum collections.

Tobacco has been used as an insecticide in Europe since 1763 and so it would not have been unusual for it to have been applied to the mummy of Ramses II for conservation. The mummy of Ramses II was subjected to a mercury bath to de-louse it whilst it was kept in the Cairo museum. [28] The preparation of the mummy began by “washing with a decoction of tobacco-leaves in a strong lye”. Mummies are also often moved around between museums and other storage locations where contamination may occur. So even though the post excavation history of a mummy may appear well documented this has not always been the case.

Although there is good evidence to indicate that nicotine may have been identified in mummies following its application as an insecticide there is an alternative explanation which Balabanova favours. This is that the origin of the nicotine is the result of a post mortem application to the mummy, which may have occurred during the process of embalming. [29] In this study Balabanova compared the amounts of nicotine identified in artificially and naturally mummified bodies from ancient Egypt with the amounts found in modern-day humans. The highest nicotine concentrations were found in artificially mummified Egyptians (mean value = 1330ng/g) compared with 47ng/g in natural mummies, 77ng/g in European bronze age remains and 38ng/g in modern day accident victims. However the ratio of nicotine to its metabolised component cotinine indicates that the high concentrations of nicotine in artificial mummies is due to the embalming process. Artificially mummified bodies contain on average 3.4% cotinine compared to 40.3% in natural mummified bodies, 34.3% in European bronze age remains and 596% in modern day accident victims. This is indicative that the nicotine in the artificial mummies was not through its consumption whilst they were alive but through its post mortem application.

[Agonaces of Susa]

I'm sure this is what Swede was getting at:

Sources of Nicotine

Whilst nicotine is an abundant alkaloid in tobacco plants (Nicotiana tabacum) it is also present in relatively small amounts in some Old World plants including Belladonna (Atropa bella-donna), Celery (Apium graveolens) and Jimsonweed (Datum stramonium). [26] Nicotine and its metabolites have also been identified in human remains and in pipes from the Near East and Africa. However the only direct evidence of habitual tobacco use in the Ancient world has been found in the Americas. [6]

That would indicate that the ancient Egyptians had more advanced botanical laboratories, tobbacco processing, and nicotine extraction capabilities than we do today.

Balabanova has reviewed early evidence for the origins of tobacco in Europe and Asia prior to Columbus’ voyages to the Americas. [27] Pre-Christian pipes made from clay, wood, bronze and iron have been found in Switzerland, France and Germany. "Bauerntabak", literally farmers tobacco, was described in several European herbals written in the sixteenth century and was classified, along with Nicotiana tabacum as either a type of “bilsenkraut” or as a kind of Hyoscyamus. From the seventeenth century farmers tobacco became known as Nicotiana rustica and was erroneously accepted as being of American origin when wild and domesticated varieties were already known in Europe prior to Columbus. Farmers tobacco may have had Asiatic origins, Conrad Gesner considered in 1561 that it had been imported from Syria and it has also been maintained that the Persians were also aware of this type of tobacco. Nicotiana fruticosa is also known to grow in regions of China, where it was domesticated and was known by its Chinese names “cay-thüóc-än” and “yen-yé”.

If true, all of this contradicts the myths and fairy tales that we are taught in school.

Additionally a species of tobacco, Nicotiana africana, has recently been identified as indigenous to Namibia in South West Africa. It is therefore not unreasonable to suspect that other species of tobacco may have grown in Egypt, or in the surrounding regions, and that this could account for the high amounts of nicotine identified in these Egyptian mummies.

http://www.thehallofmaat.com/modules.php?name=Articles&file=article&sid=45

If the Egyptians were in fact smoking tobbacco from Namibia, that means the extent of the Egyptian Empire included the whole of Africa.

Nicotiana africana is not native to Egypt nor is there any physical evidence it has ever been in Egypt.

Furthermore, Nicotiana africana wasn't discovered until the 1980s.

Another possibility is that the presence of nicotine and the traces of tobacco leaves found in Ramses II mummy may have resulted from the use of tobacco sprays as an insecticide to conserve the mummies whilst they were stored in museums in the nineteenth century. [28] Mummies are prone to insect infestation following entombment or exhumation and museums continue to wage war against insect pests. In recent investigations at least three different species of beetle including Thylodrias contractus Mots, Tyrophagus sp. and Lassioderma serricorne (F.) have been identified from the mummy of Ramses II. Most speculation has centred on L. serricorne due to its common name, the tobacco beetle. This species was first recorded in the U.S.A. in 1886 but has several similar forms in the Old World and it is also often found as a pest in museum collections.

Tobacco has been used as an insecticide in Europe since 1763 and so it would not have been unusual for it to have been applied to the mummy of Ramses II for conservation. The mummy of Ramses II was subjected to a mercury bath to de-louse it whilst it was kept in the Cairo museum. [28] The preparation of the mummy began by “washing with a decoction of tobacco-leaves in a strong lye”. Mummies are also often moved around between museums and other storage locations where contamination may occur. So even though the post excavation history of a mummy may appear well documented this has not always been the case.

If true, it would once again indicate that the ancients knew more about biology than we do.

Although there is good evidence to indicate that nicotine may have been identified in mummies following its application as an insecticide there is an alternative explanation which Balabanova favours. This is that the origin of the nicotine is the result of a post mortem application to the mummy, which may have occurred during the process of embalming. [29] In this study Balabanova compared the amounts of nicotine identified in artificially and naturally mummified bodies from ancient Egypt with the amounts found in modern-day humans. The highest nicotine concentrations were found in artificially mummified Egyptians (mean value = 1330ng/g) compared with 47ng/g in natural mummies, 77ng/g in European bronze age remains and 38ng/g in modern day accident victims. However the ratio of nicotine to its metabolised component cotinine indicates that the high concentrations of nicotine in artificial mummies is due to the embalming process. Artificially mummified bodies contain on average 3.4% cotinine compared to 40.3% in natural mummified bodies, 34.3% in European bronze age remains and 596% in modern day accident victims. This is indicative that the nicotine in the artificial mummies was not through its consumption whilst they were alive but through its post mortem application.

Since when does Balabanova favor that explanation? I remember her specifically denying that possibility.

Edited November 18, 2009 by Agonaces of Susa

[Mattshark]

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)

Sorry but pole shifting has no scientific basis, there is true polar wander and magnetic reversal, but that is it. It is a common mistake to make, but you must understand that it is, in fact, a mistake.

Polar wander

Magnetic reversal

No massive polar movement however, that is pure pseudo-science.

Also, no Antarctic covered in ice, no ice age and no frozen Arctic either.