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 -

James Cameron finds 'evidence of Atlantis'


UM-Bot

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

Notice I was responding to post 30 and not 28. I can't respond to all the cawing of the crows.

I notice you seem to have your post numbers and responses to the ones you are referring to pretty mixed up.   I was quoting your statement, which I put in above my questions, way before post 30 was made .

But you took the time to make two posts about it without answering two very simple questions.  

 I can see you get confused about lots of things ... so I will start again 

Do you realise that Atlantis had no advanced civilisation ? 

What is your source on the Atlantis story that made you think it was some advanced civilisation ? 

Edited by back to earth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, back to earth said:

 

I will put it again ; do you realise that Atlantis had no advanced civilisation ? 

No

3 minutes ago, back to earth said:

What is your source on the Atlantis story that made you think it was some advanced civilisation ? 

Plato and about every source I heard.

What are you thinking Atlantis is?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Swede said:

Indeed! Recreating unevidenced capabilities can admittedly be a rather challenging prospect. Such realities are further compounded by those pesky details such as empirical data.

.

Academia's inability to give credence to things it currently does not have a means to empirically quantify or classify will be it's undoing.:whistle:

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

Thanks.:rolleyes: The question becomes who is the determiner on what is 'rubbish'? And who is the official determiner of credibility? At one time it was the Catholic Church in many places. Who is it today, the materialist-scientists and skeptics?

Those that have the education, training, and experience to thoughtfully evaluate the provided, well-researched, documented, and credible data to support respective position(s). Such a categorization can include a wide variety of backgrounds, experiences, and qualifications. In short, thinking individuals. What is primarily entailed is the ability to separate personal delusions and fancies from verifiable and worthwhile information.

.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Jarocal said:

Academia's inability to give credence to things it currently does not have a means to empirically quantify or classify will be it's undoing.:whistle:

Right, if there were more to the universe than can be reached through the physical senses and physical instruments, it will forever not exist in their thinking.

To me the evidence already argues that the human consciousness can experience a reality not tangible to the physical senses and materialist science.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Swede said:

Those that have the education, training, and experience to thoughtfully evaluate the provided, well-researched, documented, and credible data to support respective position(s). Such a categorization can include a wide variety of backgrounds, experiences, and qualifications. In short, thinking individuals. What is primarily entailed is the ability to separate personal delusions and fancies from verifiable and worthwhile information.

.

So the answer to my question is materialist-science (scientism). Here is what I said to Jarocal above;

Right, if there were more to the universe than can be reached through the physical senses and physical instruments, it will forever not exist in their thinking.

To me the evidence already argues that the human consciousness can experience a reality not tangible to the physical senses and materialist science.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

No

That is correct .   You didnt . 

7 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

Plato and about every source I heard.

I would go with the 2nd one if I were you. 

7 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

What are you thinking Atlantis is?

A story .   If you read that story, and listen to the  many people who have studied it and researched it who post here, and follow their sources and links, you will realise That there was no advanced civilisation idea connected with Atlantis.  In the story, they were invaders of ancient Greece , not some seafaring people that bought  higher techno civilisation.

And if you had used Platos as the source you would know that !   So ... busted ! 

The advanced civilisation story came from people like Francis Bacon,  Ignatius L. Donnelly   and every woo woo since then that added to it according to their fantasies.  .... I mean their 'psychic archaeological research ' .   Its actually part of western racist ideas about  history and human development . . . .  if you actually look into some things and just dont take on any new age woo that seems to please you. 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Jarocal said:

Academia's inability to give credence to things it currently does not have a means to empirically quantify or classify will be it's undoing.:whistle:

Grin! It would appear that Papageorge1 may have missed your graphically represented sarcasm.

.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

Right, if there were more to the universe than can be reached through the physical senses and physical instruments, it will forever not exist in their thinking.

To me the evidence already argues that the human consciousness can experience a reality not tangible to the physical senses and materialist science.

yeeeeessss  .... thats why we have these things called psychology, philosophy,  etc .  

Jeeeeeeeeeeeeeze  !  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

So the answer to my question is materialist-science (scientism). Here is what I said to Jarocal above;

Right, if there were more to the universe than can be reached through the physical senses and physical instruments, it will forever not exist in their thinking.

To me the evidence already argues that the human consciousness can experience a reality not tangible to the physical senses and materialist science.

 

However, you have yet to provide credible evidence. On any level. The onus now lies upon you to provide such and validate the "concept" of "psychic archaeology".

.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

No

Plato and about every source I heard.

What are you thinking Atlantis is?

You have probably only read about Atlantis from more modern sources like Ignatius Donnelly, Helena Blavatsky, and Edgar Cayce. They attribute the advanced technology and racial superiority to Atlantis, not present in Plato's original, allegorical tale.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Swede said:

Which would appear to be one of your persistent difficulties. To be more succinct, there is no such even remotely credible field of study as "psychic archaeology". You are obviously overly influenced by utter rubbish.

.

I wonder how 'psychic archaeology' differs from imagination?

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Carnoferox said:

You have probably only read about Atlantis from more modern sources like Ignatius Donnelly, Helena Blavatsky, and Edgar Cayce. They attribute the advanced technology and racial superiority to Atlantis, not present in Plato's original, allegorical tale.

Yes there are two Atlantis' CPA (Classical Platonian Atlantis) and NAA (New Age Atlantis) they are two very different imaginary places and the only one Plato wrote about was CPA all the rest 'NAA' is 'uploaded content'.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Carnoferox said:

You have probably only read about Atlantis from more modern sources like Ignatius Donnelly, Helena Blavatsky, and Edgar Cayce. They attribute the advanced technology and racial superiority to Atlantis, not present in Plato's original, allegorical tale.

he wont respond to this or any comments and info like it ....... I mean , he cant respond to every ' cawing of the crows'   .....

 

...... especially when such 'cawing'    totally rips his case right open and sinks it !   :D  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, back to earth said:

he wont respond to this or any comments and info like it ....... I mean , he cant respond to every ' cawing of the crows'   .....

 

...... especially when such 'cawing'    totally rips his case right open and sinks it !   :D  

He never does, unfortunately. I would very much like to get some answers from him.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

I wonder how 'psychic archaeology' differs from imagination?

Instead of making stuff up and then having to prove it  ( difficult and easily bustable )

You go t an area full of archaeology ....  walk around a bit , go 'Ommmmmm'  ... here it is and dig . Anything you find is proof ... and you are proved wrong and embarrassed - ha haaar !  

 

"    It is difficult to test scientifically, since archaeological sites are relatively abundant, and all of its verified predictions could have been made via educated guesses

Then there is the great Glastonbury Abbey case ; proved psychic archaeology !  

Mainstream archeologists are far from nonplussed about the discovery, reminding people that F. Bligh Bond was an expert in medieval church architecture, that most of the site had already been dug out, and that the location of the chapel could be easily guessed from the existing data.[4][12] Archaeologist Stephen Williams said that "Culture is a patterned behavior, and medieval cathedrals are some of the most patterned pieces of construction in our culture... All he had to do was turn to almost any nearby structure, such as Salisbury Cathedral, less than fifty miles to the east, and see its Trinity Chapel behind the main altar and guess that Glastonbury would have one too

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychic_archaeology

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Carnoferox said:

He never does, unfortunately. I would very much like to get some answers from him.

dont say that ... you will get  answers  ...but not to the questions you asked        :D 

Edited by back to earth
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, back to earth said:

That is correct .   You didnt . 

I would go with the 2nd one if I were you. 

A story .   If you read that story, and listen to the  many people who have studied it and researched it who post here, and follow their sources and links, you will realise That there was no advanced civilisation idea connected with Atlantis.  In the story, they were invaders of ancient Greece , not some seafaring people that bought  higher techno civilisation.

And if you had used Platos as the source you would know that !   So ... busted ! 

The advanced civilisation story came from people like Francis Bacon,  Ignatius L. Donnelly   and every woo woo since then that added to it according to their fantasies.  .... I mean their 'psychic archaeological research ' .   Its actually part of western racist ideas about  history and human development . . . .  if you actually look into some things and just dont take on any new age woo that seems to please you. 

 

 

You are presenting one point of view on a very controversial subject, and speaking as an authority, right? I read Plato.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, back to earth said:

yeeeeessss  .... thats why we have these things called psychology, philosophy,  etc .  

Jeeeeeeeeeeeeeze  !  

 

 

No, I was referring to even spiritual dimensions beyond our familiar three-dimensions. 95% of the matter in the universe is beyond direct detection by our physical senses and instruments. Mystery abounds to science at this stage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Swede said:

However, you have yet to provide credible evidence. On any level. The onus now lies upon you to provide such and validate the "concept" of "psychic archaeology".

.

I said I was intrigued by psychic archeology and consider it, but not not that anyone can 'validate' it to others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Carnoferox said:

You have probably only read about Atlantis from more modern sources like Ignatius Donnelly, Helena Blavatsky, and Edgar Cayce. They attribute the advanced technology and racial superiority to Atlantis, not present in Plato's original, allegorical tale.

Nope, I've read many sources that have discussed Atlantis. And yes, they may well have been a more advanced race. These other sources were independent of Plato's understanding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, papageorge1 said:

Plato and about every source I heard.

You do know that Plato is the only source there is for Atlantis ?

Every story about Atlantis is somehow inspired by Plato's original story. 

I trust you also know that Plato's original story was a literary device, not an actual recounting of a historical place ?

People in his own time knew this and it wasn't really until the 19th century that people somehow didn't understand this anymore.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

I said I was intrigued by psychic archeology and consider it, but not not that anyone can 'validate' it to others.

If you can't validate it, why do you consider it valid ?

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, back to earth said:

  You found Bimini Road  ! ? ! !  :o

Yup, bimini II as I like to call it. It links to the 1st Bimini road through the hollow earth and its geographical location lines up across the globe with the pyramids. It must be true because Nur-ab-sal says so

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, ExpandMyMind said:

Plato provided a date? How could anyone even begin to properly estimate the a timeline of such a legend?

...as Plato made all this **** up, I think he'd be the /most/ trustworthy authority on the matter. Anyone decrying him puts themselves in the unenviable position of claiming to know more about Plato than Plato did, which is pretty untenable. But people here do it all the damn time.

--Jaylemurph

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • The topic was locked
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.