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 -
Van Gorp

Is this Atlantis ... at the coast of Spain?

2,216 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Hanslune
9 hours ago, Pettytalk said:

We also agree that you and a couple of your buddies are not worth cutting up much; too dense to feel the blade cutting.

Oh my talk about being dense. The fight is between the many Atlantis believers - you guys cannot agree on what Atlantis was, when it was, or where it was.

Please work on that and once you come to consensus let us know......lol

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
9 hours ago, Pettytalk said:

Just stop, as you don't understand Plato. Go and read Plato at least 100 times over, and then come back and give it a whirl again, as you currently have mud all over your face.

Why? Aren't you Plato? Did you forget your are attempting to role-play him? You should have said 'you don't understand me'...lol

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener

Atlantis was an imaginary place in a political allegory story by Plato. 

It does not physically exist. 

It never has. 

NOBODY talked about Atlantis until.. what... Victorian times ? If there was ANY physical "Atlantis", people would have talked about it before that. 

To say NOTHING of the million-strong Atlantean army that was supposed to have trolled through Europe in order to attack Athens. 

No legends. No Mythology. No Folklore. 

No Atlantis. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
38 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

NOBODY talked about Atlantis until.. what... Victorian times ? If there was ANY physical "Atlantis", people would have talked about it before that. 

I agree with you completely except on this one comment. There was some discussion about Atlantis before Victorian times where such babble increased dramatically.

A Roman fellow name Crantor spoke about it

You can read about him here under 'interpretations'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantis#Ancient

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

I agree with you completely except on this one comment. There was some discussion about Atlantis before Victorian times where such babble increased dramatically.

A Roman fellow name Crantor spoke about it

You can read about him here under 'interpretations'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantis#Ancient

Yes. But Crantor was an idtiot. His peers laughed at him, and poked him cruelly.

He was immortalised in the 1970's song by Jilted John... 

But we know he's a moron,

Crantor is a moron

We know he's a moron

Crantor is a moron

Yeah yeah..... 

Edited by RoofGardener
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
33 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Yes. But Crantor was an idtiot. His peers laughed at him, and poked him cruelly.

He was immortalised in the 1970's song by Jilted John...

Was it that Crantor? lol

Well being an idiot or not he certainly did say something. So as I noted earlier you were very correct except for that small exception.

I would add that outside of the Med. area no one spoke of it at all. Chinese etc., etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cormac mac airt
Posted (edited)

Phoenician settlements/trading centers (white arrows) existing contrary to the alleged claim that they were telling everyone else sailing west past Cadiz was impossible: 

1701245420_PhoeniciansettlementsfromCadizwestward3.thumb.jpg.cf678428692de65dae4b63d022bd76a4.jpg

cormac

Edited by cormac mac airt
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Harte

They may have claimed that in order to keep a monopoly on the goings on there.

Harte

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Trelane

This thread has existed longer than Atlantis. Unfortunately.

  • Haha 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cormac mac airt
7 minutes ago, Harte said:

They may have claimed that in order to keep a monopoly on the goings on there.

Harte

They probably did. The point in the above is that it suggests the Phoenicians lied to the Greeks, at least about the western areas being impassable, and the Greeks bought it hook, line and sinker. Imagine that. 

cormac

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Harte

Sounds about right to me. The Phoenicians were a cagey bunch.

I once read about a theory that they were behind the Sea Peoples invasions. They cornered the market on grain once that was over - and the Sea People never tried to invade them. Never attacked at all.

Harte

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cormac mac airt
2 hours ago, cormac mac airt said:

They probably did. The point in the above is that it suggests the Phoenicians lied to the Greeks, at least about the western areas being impassable, and the Greeks bought it hook, line and sinker. Imagine that. 

IMO the above also suggests that the Phoenicians may have lied about many other things dealing with what was to eventually become Plato’s Atlantis story and further suggests that Egypt wasn’t remotely involved in the story at all. 

cormac

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pettytalk
16 hours ago, Hanslune said:

Oh my talk about being dense. The fight is between the many Atlantis believers - you guys cannot agree on what Atlantis was, when it was, or where it was.

Please work on that and once you come to consensus let us know......lol

The many proposed variant Atlantis theories are not much different than this, as the principle is the same...speculating far out possibilities and enjoyment for the imagination.

https://www.futurity.org/theoretical-physics-916012/

What are theoretical physicists actually up to?

Theoretical physics is a lot like sex, Nobelist Richard Feynman once quipped. “Sure, it may give some practical results, but that’s not why we do it.”

The prevailing stereotype outside—and inside—the sciences is that theoretical physicists have their gaze firmly fixed on their navels and play in a sandbox of their own creation.

It’s time to throw that stereotype out the window (and note how it falls to Earth with constant acceleration. Thanks, theoretical physics!)

Sure, theoretical physics can get weird, and some theories are pretty far out, but inquiry is always driven by a hunger to understand the universe fundamentally.

The physicists in Brandeis’ High Energy and Gravitational Theory Group research bizarre principles like holography, which postulates that all the information in the universe is stored on a two-dimensional surface, and we are mere projections of that information. And then there’s quantum entanglement, which even Einstein called “spooky.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pettytalk
4 hours ago, cormac mac airt said:

IMO the above also suggests that the Phoenicians may have lied about many other things dealing with what was to eventually become Plato’s Atlantis story and further suggests that Egypt wasn’t remotely involved in the story at all. 

cormac

Pettytalk says that I made it all plain about inventing stories coming out of Egypt, but one must read and understand all the dialogues. However there is definitely a couple of specific reasons also, for using the land of Egypt, and the Nile's Delta region in particular, as it has to do with the land of Goshen.  

Plato's Phaedrus.

PHAEDRUS: Yes, Socrates, you can easily invent tales of Egypt, or of any
other country.
SOCRATES: There was a tradition in the temple of Dodona that oaks first
gave prophetic utterances. The men of old, unlike in their simplicity to young
philosophy, deemed that if they heard the truth even from ’oak or rock,’ it
was enough for them; whereas you seem to consider not whether a thing is
or is not true, but who the speaker is and from what country the tale comes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pettytalk
7 hours ago, cormac mac airt said:

They probably did. The point in the above is that it suggests the Phoenicians lied to the Greeks, at least about the western areas being impassable, and the Greeks bought it hook, line and sinker. Imagine that. 

cormac

It's obvious you guys are putting much reasoning effort into what is described. 

Plato's Timaeus.

Many great and wonderful deeds are recorded of your state in our histories.
But one of them exceeds all the rest in greatness and valour. For these histories
tell of a mighty power which unprovoked made an expedition against the whole
of Europe and Asia, and to which your city put an end. This power came forth
out of the Atlantic Ocean, for in those days the Atlantic was navigable; and
there was an island situated in front of the straits
which are by you called the
Pillars of Heracles; the island was larger than Libya and Asia put together, and
was the way to other islands, and from these you might pass to the whole of
the opposite continent which surrounded the true ocean;....

For which reason the sea in those parts is impassable
and impenetrable, because there is a shoal of mud in the way; and this was
caused by the subsidence of the island.

If the premise is that the Atlantic was navigable because there was not a shoal of mud in the way as a barrier, how was it navigable to begin with, when there was something more massive and permanent barring the way? The larger than Asia and Libya combined, Atlantis landmass was still barring the way before it "sank". Logic would necessitate an even less navigable Atlantic, when the massive landmass was in the way of sailing ships, rather than just temporary "floating" mud, since this mud would have easily settled back down from where it was raised, and in a very short period of time.

If there is to be any truth to the story, the truth is that the shoal of mud (sand shoals) is a symbol and just another horos, a boundary marker, given by Plato for further localizing Atlantis for us. And a navigable Atlantic, meaning the crossing of the Atlantic, "in those days" is referring to the future days of when it became official, and common practice to sail across the Atlantic from the Old world to the New world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pettytalk
17 hours ago, Hanslune said:

Why? Aren't you Plato? Did you forget your are attempting to role-play him? You should have said 'you don't understand me'...lol

Apparently you have not considered the second and third person method of speaking and writing. My father would often say to me, "papa loves you," And it is the same as saying "I love you."  But it's pretty pathetic on your part for being able only to make these senseless and baseless comments.

And I may be pathetic myself, to answer here, just to point out basic writing techniques to someone who claims to be an academic.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pettytalk
10 hours ago, Trelane said:

This thread has existed longer than Atlantis. Unfortunately.

Truth can never rest short. And unfortunately it is rather silly to go on with an Atlantis in Spain, although not as silly than some of the other longer running threads around here.

But really, are you insinuating that Plato was not the originator of the story, but rather UM? Do you have any historical data to back that up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Peter Cox
30 minutes ago, Pettytalk said:

Truth can never rest short. And unfortunately it is rather silly to go on with an Atlantis in Spain, although not as silly than some of the other longer running threads around here.

But really, are you insinuating that Plato was not the originator of the story, but rather UM? Do you have any historical data to back that up?

I was under the impression that Solon herd it from an Egyptian priest. Making Egypt the originator of the story. Well I suppose with all your claims about reincarnation you would know better. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
4 hours ago, Pettytalk said:

Apparently you have not considered the second and third person method of speaking and writing.

Nope you forgot who you were pretending to be - that was very funny. Yes you are still not Plato and lying about it has made you look like a fool.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
5 hours ago, Pettytalk said:

 given by Plato for further localizing Atlantis for us.

You mean 'given by me', remember you claim to be Plato - please stay in character please. LOL

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Windowpane
2 hours ago, Peter Cox said:

I was under the impression that Solon herd it from an Egyptian priest. Making Egypt the originator of the story. Well I suppose with all your claims about reincarnation you would know better. 

As you rightly say, Plato wrote that Solon had heard the story from an Egyptian priest 

(Timaeus 20d-20e; 24e–25a -http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0180%3Atext%3DTim.%3Asection%3D20d

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0180%3Atext%3DTim.%3Asection%3D20e;

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0180%3Atext%3DTim.%3Asection%3D24e;

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0180%3Atext%3DTim.%3Asection%3D25a).

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantis#cite_ref-21)

But it's widely accepted that this was merely a literary framing device on Plato's part.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
atalante
On 8/23/2019 at 11:07 PM, cormac mac airt said:

The above completely ignores the fact that the oldest seismic event corresponding to the Lacus Ligustinus occurred in 218 BC which is about 130 years AFTER Plato died.

https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3263/9/8/334/htm  (29 July 2019)

cormac

Cormac,
You severely misunderstood, and misrepresented, a paper that you cited in post #1760 about seismic events for the Iberian peninsula.   This paper shows that the two largest concentrations of earthquakes (including most of not only the earliest, but also the strongest ones, as listed in Table 2 of the paper) have been near the southern shores of Spain and Portugal.  This paper proposes that the sea floor may be delaminating there.
 
 
Figure 4 displays the evolution on the number of earthquake events catalogued for the different historic periods of interest discussed here. It is evident that independently of the nature of seismic information (written sources, archaeological or geological), there is a clear incompleteness of the record of seismic events before the year 1500 CE, and especially for those that occurred prior to 1000 CE. This is a typical artifact present in nearly all the seismic catalogs for the Mediterranean region [33].
 
 
Figure 2 illustrates the distribution of the 51 catalogued events around the Iberian Peninsula identifying the Betic Cordillera (southeast) and the Pyrenees (north) as the two main zones where the convergence between the two large tectonic plates of Eurasia and Africa trigger the ongoing seismotectonic activity. A third important zone is the Gulf of Cádiz and the southern Portugal offshore area, “locus” of nucleation of strong historical earthquake-tsunami events in response to the suspected lithospheric delamination of the Atlantic oceanic floor beneath the Iberian Peninsula (Figure 2) [17,18].
 
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cormac mac airt
8 minutes ago, atalante said:
Cormac,
You severely misunderstood, and misrepresented, a paper that you cited in post #1760 about seismic events for the Iberian peninsula.   This paper shows that the two largest concentrations of earthquakes (including most of not only the earliest, but also the strongest ones, as listed in Table 2 of the paper) have been near the southern shores of Spain and Portugal.  This paper proposes that the sea floor may be delaminating there.
 
 
Figure 4 displays the evolution on the number of earthquake events catalogued for the different historic periods of interest discussed here. It is evident that independently of the nature of seismic information (written sources, archaeological or geological), there is a clear incompleteness of the record of seismic events before the year 1500 CE, and especially for those that occurred prior to 1000 CE. This is a typical artifact present in nearly all the seismic catalogs for the Mediterranean region [33].
 
 
Figure 2 illustrates the distribution of the 51 catalogued events around the Iberian Peninsula identifying the Betic Cordillera (southeast) and the Pyrenees (north) as the two main zones where the convergence between the two large tectonic plates of Eurasia and Africa trigger the ongoing seismotectonic activity. A third important zone is the Gulf of Cádiz and the southern Portugal offshore area, “locus” of nucleation of strong historical earthquake-tsunami events in response to the suspected lithospheric delamination of the Atlantic oceanic floor beneath the Iberian Peninsula (Figure 2) [17,18].
 

Nope, once again you're mangling the facts and ignoring what I said in the preceding quote, which was in part: 

Quote

the oldest seismic event corresponding to the Lacus Ligustinus occurred in 218 BC which is about 130 years AFTER Plato died.

An "incompleteness" of the record of seismic events doesn't mean that the event of 218 BC didn't happen. What it DOES mean is that there is no support for you jumping on the "Atlantis in Spain" bandwagon as there is no seismic or geological support for your fantasy. Particularly as the older events are not associated with the Lacus Ligustinus.

cormac

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cormac mac airt
Posted (edited)

1026872000_Seismicevents.jpg.c14ec2e773bbda38dd68e30affee2713.jpg

Let's put these in their correct timeframe, shall we: 

6 black:  218 - 209 BC  Lacus Ligustinus

6 orange:  218 - 209 BC

7 black:  40 -60 AD

8 black:  260 - 280 AD

11 black:  881 AD

15 orange:  1356 AD

32 orange:  1722 AD (under study)

34 orange:  1755 Lisbon event

cormac

Edited by cormac mac airt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
10 hours ago, Pettytalk said:

Pettytalk says

Speaking in 3rd person is not a good sign. :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.