Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Atlantis


stevemagegod

Recommended Posts

science has determined a continent cannot sink (whether he mans an actual continent I don't know, seemed he was talking about areas of land but I am not gonna quote him as saying 'continent')

A large portion of the Indo Australian plate is underwatwer right now, so I don't believe that science has determined this just yet.

Harte

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A large portion of the Indo Australian plate is underwatwer right now, so I don't believe that science has determined this just yet.

Harte

I read that tonnes of times in the reasons the continent of Atlantis couldn't have been, a continent cannot sink....so I would be interested to know actually if this is correct or not...surprising this comes from you of all people! You always seem to have me heading for the books... :geek:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I dunno where Abramelin went so I will wait for his answer to my Von Daniken question tomorrow now... :sleepy:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A large portion of the Indo Australian plate is underwatwer right now, so I don't believe that science has determined this just yet.

Harte

Tectonic plates are composed of both continental crust and oceanic crust, and do not sink in the way I think is being thought of here. They do sink at subduction zones where one tectonic plate overrides another forcing one of them downwards where it becomes digested and incorporated into the mantel material. Some of the melt forces it's way back to the surface in the form of the volcanoes we can observe that mark many of the plate boundaries such as The Pacific "ring of fire".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Zealandia may be a candidate for a sinking continent.

But it says this at Wiki Mu...

Today, some scientists dismiss the concept of Mu (and of other lost continents like Lemuria) as physically impossible, since a continent can neither sink nor be destroyed by any conceivable catastrophe, especially not in the short period of time required by this premise...

Very interesting Harte, glad you bought my attention to this. :tu::sleepy:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some of them....?

You just said Von Daniken said 'the Nazca lines cannot be viewed IN FULL but from the air.'

So, did you see some of them or all of them from your mountain? unsure.gif

Then go on to claim that what he said is not true because you saw some of them...but you did not see all of them IN FULL VIEW from the mountain. So how is what he said NOT TRUE as you state?

I said I was giving you a hand (maybe my english is not good enough, sorry).

I watched some of these pictures from the mountains I walked on.

Jesus, you go visit these lines for yourself.

And then walk the mountains nearby, something Von Daniken obviously never did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah, I reckon these guys seriously believe this stuff, like many of these fringe theorists, they are not telling you lies for the sake of themselves, they are telling you exactly what they think has gone down.

Sitchin, I believe, seriously believes in what he does.

They believe what they want to believe.

And they will tell you the 'facts' as they see them.

Where are these socalled aliens now, where is Nibiru?

It's bull, and I dont understand why an intelligent woman like you appears unable to get it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IIRC, the Indo Australian plate, at least the eastern part, has drifted over what they call an ancient subduction zone. That's a place where a chunk of crust from the very early days of the Earth is sinking into the mantle. This causes a slow-motion suction in the area and when a tectonic plate drifts over the area, it is pulled downward until it drifts past it.

IIRC, the Indo Australian plate was pulled under the sea several million years ago and will remain down there for several more million years until it drifts past the old subduction zone, at which point it will resurface and be habitable again (if, that is, the Earth itself is still habitable in those days.)

Harte

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IIRC, the Indo Australian plate, at least the eastern part, has drifted over what they call an ancient subduction zone. That's a place where a chunk of crust from the very early days of the Earth is sinking into the mantle. This causes a slow-motion suction in the area and when a tectonic plate drifts over the area, it is pulled downward until it drifts past it.

IIRC, the Indo Australian plate was pulled under the sea several million years ago and will remain down there for several more million years until it drifts past the old subduction zone, at which point it will resurface and be habitable again (if, that is, the Earth itself is still habitable in those days.)

Harte

I guess I am unaware of that information. I'll attempt to provide a link that will explain that complex zone where three plates(the I-A, Phillipine & Pacific) come together better and more concisely than I can.

http://www.platetectonics.com/oceanfloors/australian.asp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Zealandia may be a candidate for a sinking continent.

But it says this at Wiki Mu...

Today, some scientists dismiss the concept of Mu (and of other lost continents like Lemuria) as physically impossible, since a continent can neither sink nor be destroyed by any conceivable catastrophe, especially not in the short period of time required by this premise...

Very interesting Harte, glad you bought my attention to this. :tu::sleepy:

Ive heard of volcanic islands forming within a week or so and if one can form in that time why couldnt one disappear. The problem here might be in definition, as a continent cant sink but a large vulcanic island maybe could. With regard to larger landmasses the term "sink" might also be the problem. Some might say the sea level rose, others that the land sank. In descriptive terms its just an issue of perspective or semantics, though of course in scientific terms it theres a big difference.

Ive been looking at a map showing ocean depths and there are plenty of underwater mountain ranges that could have been above sea level before the ice melt occured.

www.planetaryvisions.com/Texture_map.php?pid=4128

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Read about it a few years ago in Scientific American.

The ancient subduction zone is no longer active. That is, subduction is no longer occurring there. It's just that a large chunk of (former) crust is drifting downward through the mantle in that spot where plates once were grinding through uplift and subduction (but no more.)

This has caused a "dimple" in the surface over which the tectonic plates "glide" (if you could call it "gliding!")

The part of the plate that holds the eastern end of the continent has drifted over it and the continent has been pulled under the ocean temporarily.

I wrote about this in 2006 over at ATS. The issue of Sciam was a special issue called Our Changing Earth. It's available as a digital version at Scientific American, but you have to buy it to read it.

Harte

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Puzzler,it would be interesting to read your freind Robins thesis if he would allow you to post it here or if the is somewhere else that it is posted i would appreciate it if you would direct me to it.also thatnks for the skyglobe post.jmccr8

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I said I was giving you a hand (maybe my english is not good enough, sorry).

I watched some of these pictures from the mountains I walked on.

Jesus, you go visit these lines for yourself.

And then walk the mountains nearby, something Von Daniken obviously never did.

But even if he did he can't see them ALL IN FULL VIEW can he from the mountain?

My name is not Jesus and you don't have to get frustrated. You made a comment that Von Daniken said he could only see them IN FULL from the air then you say that is not true because you can see SOME OF THEM from the mountain. Some of them is not all of them IN FULL VIEW is it???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They believe what they want to believe.

And they will tell you the 'facts' as they see them.

Where are these socalled aliens now, where is Nibiru?

It's bull, and I dont understand why an intelligent woman like you appears unable to get it.

Some people really believe crap...you only have to look at religious people. Are they all liars or distorting facts to suit their agendas that God is real? That is the level field I work on, not a lack of intelligence...

Lie is defined by this..."make a deliberatly false statement" according to my Collins Gem dictionary.

Calling facts as we see them is not lying. It's being blind to the truth. Being called a liar is quite a serious call in my books, it's one thing I really dislike being called, I find it very offensive to be told I have deliberately misled you for my own gains and is actually slander. I look at things much more logically and technically than most of you it seems. I use words accordingly to what they actually mean most of the time, I mean, really mean. Defining words is very important, so you cannot really convince me that Von Daniken lied when he says the Nazca lines can only be seen IN FULL VIEW from the air. Because in fact, they can only be seen IN FULL VIEW from the air. You can see SOME of them from the mountain, well, that's great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Puzzler,it would be interesting to read your freind Robins thesis if he would allow you to post it here or if the is somewhere else that it is posted i would appreciate it if you would direct me to it.also thatnks for the skyglobe post.jmccr8

Hi mate, Is in not on the internet, it is at his house here in town. I can access it though and ask him anything you want. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I meant It is not on the internet when I wrote that above..anyway I am going to get back on topic here because I always found it interesting ever since J showed me the article yonks ago...here is a link to a ScienceBlog with the article about all Blue Eyed people having a common ancestor and only coming into being around 10,000 years ago, someone requested a link earlier..

http://www.scienceblog.com/cms/all-blue-eyed-humans-have-common-ancestor-15361.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi mate, Is in not on the internet, it is at his house here in town. I can access it though and ask him anything you want. :)

Thank you Puzzler that would be very kind of you to do so if it isn't an inconvenience as i would find it and interesting read.jmccr8

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IIRC, the Indo Australian plate, at least the eastern part, has drifted over what they call an ancient subduction zone. That's a place where a chunk of crust from the very early days of the Earth is sinking into the mantle. This causes a slow-motion suction in the area and when a tectonic plate drifts over the area, it is pulled downward until it drifts past it.

IIRC, the Indo Australian plate was pulled under the sea several million years ago and will remain down there for several more million years until it drifts past the old subduction zone, at which point it will resurface and be habitable again (if, that is, the Earth itself is still habitable in those days.)

Harte

Interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But even if he did he can't see them ALL IN FULL VIEW can he from the mountain?

My name is not Jesus and you don't have to get frustrated. You made a comment that Von Daniken said he could only see them IN FULL from the air then you say that is not true because you can see SOME OF THEM from the mountain. Some of them is not all of them IN FULL VIEW is it???

OK, I will try again.

Von Daniken said (in his books) that none of these Nazca lines and pictographs can be seen from the ground or from nearby mountains, and can only be viewed from the air.

I said I walked those nearby mountains and some of these pictures are completely visible.

So, if Von Daniken had actually walked those same mountains, he would never have said that none of these pictures are visible from the nearby mountains.

And by stating that, he added to the mystery of the how and why of the lines and pictographs.

But yes, the best view is of course from high up in the air, no doubt about that at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, I will try again.

Von Daniken said (in his books) that none of these Nazca lines and pictographs can be seen from the ground or from nearby mountains, and can only be viewed from the air.

I said I walked those nearby mountains and some of these pictures are completely visible.

So, if Von Daniken had actually walked those same mountains, he would never have said that none of these pictures are visible from the nearby mountains.

And by stating that, he added to the mystery of the how and why of the lines and pictographs.

But yes, the best view is of course from high up in the air, no doubt about that at all.

OK then...if he said "that NONE of these Nazca lines" etc can be seen from anywhere else but the air OK...but you did say he said They can only be seen IN FULL from the air...(which I believe they can only all be seen IN FULL, meaning seeing them all at once, from the air.)

Tiny difference maybe but can change the whole scenario really. :yes: In once instance he would not be 'lying' but in another, would be 'lying'...

Edited to add... I personally think he said IN FULL from the air because I think he would be pretty stupid to say you can see NONE of these from the ground.

All my point is is that it is easy to form opinions of people through misinterpreting what they say, just as I showed that Hancock does not say the Pyramids were built in 11,000BC but were PLANNED then but built in the time frame that is generally accepted.

PS: That must have been exciting to see them for you. I would love to myself.

Edited by The Puzzler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK then...if he said "that NONE of these Nazca lines" etc can be seen from anywhere else but the air OK...but you did say he said They can only be seen IN FULL from the air...(which I believe they can only all be seen IN FULL, meaning seeing them all at once, from the air.)

Tiny difference maybe but can change the whole scenario really. yes.gif In once instance he would not be 'lying' but in another, would be 'lying'...

Edited to add... I personally think he said IN FULL from the air because I think he would be pretty stupid to say you can see NONE of these from the ground.

All my point is is that it is easy to form opinions of people through misinterpreting what they say, just as I showed that Hancock does not say the Pyramids were built in 11,000BC but were PLANNED then but built in the time frame that is generally accepted.

PS: That must have been exciting to see them for you. I would love to myself.

First I'd like to say that Von Daniken publicly admitted to have lied or stretched and distorted some facts, just to make people believe in the possibility that aliens visited us in the past and that these alines either started or influenced a number of ancient civilizations.

Second, I will have to re-read his book, "Chariots of the Gods" to know what he exactly said about these Nazca lines and pictographs. But you know what happens when you lend someone a book... in many cases you will never get it back, lol, and that is what happend to my copy of his book.

But right you are: it was absolutely amazing to fly over that area in a plane. Well, the whole of Peru is the place to be when you love spectacular architectual stoneworks, nature, history and all that. And don't forget the people living there now.

If you ever go to Peru, go walk the Inca Trail to Machu Pichu; I lived in a dream for like 4 days while hiking the Andean mountains, and your last experience on that trip is a visit to Machu Pichu. And then afterwards you go relax in Aguas Calientes, a little village at the bottom of the mountains where Machu Picchu is located. And don't forget to visit Ollantaytambo, Saqsayhuaman, Cusco, Ica, and so on.

I always wanted to go back (I lived there for half a year, and almost got married..), but now I know it will never happen: no money, only debts.......sigh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First I'd like to say that Von Daniken publicly admitted to have lied or stretched and distorted some facts, just to make people believe in the possibility that aliens visited us in the past and that these alines either started or influenced a number of ancient civilizations.

Second, I will have to re-read his book, "Chariots of the Gods" to know what he exactly said about these Nazca lines and pictographs. But you know what happens when you lend someone a book... in many cases you will never get it back, lol, and that is what happend to my copy of his book.

But right you are: it was absolutely amazing to fly over that area in a plane. Well, the whole of Peru is the place to be when you love spectacular architectual stoneworks, nature, history and all that. And don't forget the people living there now.

If you ever go to Peru, go walk the Inca Trail to Machu Pichu; I lived in a dream for like 4 days while hiking the Andean mountains, and your last experience on that trip is a visit to Machu Pichu. And then afterwards you go relax in Aguas Calientes, a little village at the bottom of the mountains where Machu Picchu is located. And don't forget to visit Ollantaytambo, Saqsayhuaman, Cusco, Ica, and so on.

I always wanted to go back (I lived there for half a year, and almost got married..), but now I know it will never happen: no money, only debts.......sigh.

I dream of visiting Machu Pichu, but yeah, I have those horrible irritating things called debts too...I love how the conquering Spanish never found it... :o)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IF Atlantis truly existed and IF Plato's story details are correct (those are two VERY big IF's!)then there is only one phenomenon which might be an explanation... crustal displacement. The theory goes (wild as it seems) that the earth's outer solid layer can "ride" on the earth's liquid core from time to time. The forces needed to do this must be enormous but other than that it would seem possible as no less a dude than Albert Einstein endorsed it as a possibility. I've seen a book which suggests that the magnetic north pole should be aligned with the true north pole and since its not, then a crustal displacement must have happened. Based on that the true North pole was once in Hudson Bay since the magnetic north has been moving from there towards our current North Pole for some time now. This shift was postulated as happening around 11,000 years ago (time of Atlatis' demise). I'll add my two cents in that at that time the ice sheets covered most of North America adding quite a bit of off-center weight. A scientist recently discovered an Iridium layer (indicating a comet or asteroid strike) in the time frame of about 11,000 years ago. He was looking for a reason why the N. American megafauna died off and wasn't buying the "hunted to extinction by humans" theory. An impact in the ice sheets might have provided that extra energy to get the shift going. Now as Jules99 pointed out all that's needed is for the water level to rise sufficiently, no continent need be subducted below another. I'll add a few more reasons why I like this theroy in the next post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IF Atlantis truly existed and IF Plato's story details are correct (those are two VERY big IF's!)then there is only one phenomenon which might be an explanation... crustal displacement. The theory goes (wild as it seems) that the earth's outer solid layer can "ride" on the earth's liquid core from time to time. The forces needed to do this must be enormous but other than that it would seem possible as no less a dude than Albert Einstein endorsed it as a possibility. I've seen a book which suggests that the magnetic north pole should be aligned with the true north pole and since its not, then a crustal displacement must have happened. Based on that the true North pole was once in Hudson Bay since the magnetic north has been moving from there towards our current North Pole for some time now. This shift was postulated as happening around 11,000 years ago (time of Atlatis' demise). I'll add my two cents in that at that time the ice sheets covered most of North America adding quite a bit of off-center weight. A scientist recently discovered an Iridium layer (indicating a comet or asteroid strike) in the time frame of about 11,000 years ago. He was looking for a reason why the N. American megafauna died off and wasn't buying the "hunted to extinction by humans" theory. An impact in the ice sheets might have provided that extra energy to get the shift going. Now as Jules99 pointed out all that's needed is for the water level to rise sufficiently, no continent need be subducted below another. I'll add a few more reasons why I like this theroy in the next post.

Check the thread called "Doggerland".

As far as I know, that land was destroyed by one of the most huge tsunamis in human history, 8100 years ago, caused by the Storegga Slde.

I don't know of any other large stretch of land, known by geologists, that got submerged in a catastrophic way.

But no real legends or myths survived to desribe what happened there long time ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This supposedly wacky theory seems to explain a few anomolies such as:

Why are the ice sheets of the last ice age predominantly on North America (the farthest ice sheets in Siberia are maybe 700 miles closer to the North Pole)?

Why was a mammoth found in Siberia frozen with springtime flowers/grasses still in its mouth?

Why did ancient man obsess about the stars by building megaliths to chart their movements( wouldn't you do too if they occasionally moved on you)? Also explains the almost universal flood myths.

Lastly it would account for Atlantis disappearing in "a day and a night" as the earth is not a true sphere being flatter at the poles and buldging out at the equator. Some changes of perhaps a mile could be possible.

Also, if North pole was in Hudson's Bay then Atlantis being "West of the Pillars of Hercules" would put Atlantis in the area of the Carribean Sea. An underwater city has supposedly been found off the western tip of Cuba and the so called Bimini Road is supposed to be an Atlantean remnant. Need to explore underwater in that area.

Link to comment
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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.