Map of Atlantis and Lemuria.

[Piney]

3 hours ago, Orphalesion said:

We have a good idea of how the pyramids were built and how the stones were cut. It is not some unknown mystery! And you definitely don't need some deranged, Austrian "theosophist" to explain it.

Ukrainian...

[Piney]

15 minutes ago, Peter Cox said:

Its complete and utter codswallop. To believe Plato was talking of American and using Atlantis as an analogy is spitting in the face of the philosophy that Plato was trying to get across. The man was a philosopher and in such used analogies to stress the point of certain things. Much like many did in the bible (if you believe in that). 

There has been a insane American attitude among many of it's churches that Bible prophecies somehow apply to them. It's been going on since at least the 60s. This trash grew out of that trash

[Orphalesion]

16 minutes ago, Piney said:

Ukrainian...

Oh I was talking about Rudolph Steiner. Rudolph Steiner's deranged ideas aren't necessary to explain the pyramids.
 

[Peter Cox]

3 minutes ago, Piney said:

There has been a insane American attitude among many of it's churches that Bible prophecies somehow apply to them. It's been going on since at least the 60s. This trash grew out of that trash

From trash it came and I'm hoping to trash it shall return. Some peoples sense of self importance (all over the world) is astonishing. 

"Pick me pick me I'm important"...... Drives me mad. 

[Alchopwn]

12 minutes ago, Peter Cox said:

100% understand what you saying, however in the current day and age as in today (for those that believe in the days long past means days still to come), we can say with a very high confidence level that no event ever happened in the Atlantic that could have sunk an island / continent the size of the description given for Atlantis from the one and only source of Atlantis. Thus making the point that such a place in the last 12000 years did not exist out side the pillars of Hercules.

Well... for a given value of the Pillars of Hercules.  Where were they again?  Opinion seems to be somewhat divided on the matter, and how to interpret the info.  For example is the coast of Spain beyond the Pillars of Hercules ?  How do we square the Pillars of Hercules with the idea that Santorini was Atlantis? Yes, I am being a bit facetious here.

16 minutes ago, Peter Cox said:

Then you have to deal with all the facts about where the story of Atlantis comes from, and no matter how you try to spin it, only Plato wrote about (No Egyptian ever did) regardless of the story told it is only written by Plato. If Plato said a talking Unicorn told him about this magical place you would give it no more credibility than just a story much like you would for Middle Earth or Narnia. 

I do not believe i was being unfair knowing all we know today, if this was 300 years ago, you would be 100% correct, but its not. Its today and today I still say neither place ever existed based on science, history and what we can say for fact.

So now keeping in mind that ALL efforts to locate Atlantis go against the one and only source, then surly either we are completely bastardizing the story or we are disproving the only mention EVER and the original source of the tale of Atlantis - Do you see the issue here? Quoting Plato to prove Atlantis is like quoting George Lucas to prove star wars. 

The way Plato describes Atlantis in the Timaeus is as tho it is a real place.  He even goes so far as to say that he learned about it coming from the mouth of Solon the Lawgiver after his travels to Egypt.  As for Egyptians having a name for Atlantis, they may have had more than one; Etelente and Amenti both spring to mind. There is nothing to suggest that Plato is describing Atlantis as an ideal state or an example of something obviously fantastical.  I enjoyed the chutzpah of your line about George Lucas a lot, and I certainly don't think that Lemuria ever existed, and would disparage anyone who was convinced it did, as there is clear literary evidence about where it came from vis 19th century speculation about species migration.  Where Atlantis is concerned, I am less convinced that there is no kernel of truth to the story.  Perhaps that is fanciful, but people said Schlieman was fanciful, but he still found Troy where the texts said it would be.

[Trelane]

3 hours ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

ALL HAIL LORD MEGATRON!!!!!

[Peter Cox]

3 minutes ago, Alchopwn said:

Well... for a given value of the Pillars of Hercules.  Where were they again?  Opinion seems to be somewhat divided on the matter, and how to interpret the info.  For example is the coast of Spain beyond the Pillars of Hercules ?  How do we square the Pillars of Hercules with the idea that Santorini was Atlantis? Yes, I am being a bit facetious here.

The way Plato describes Atlantis in the Timaeus is as tho it is a real place.  He even goes so far as to say that he learned about it coming from the mouth of Solon the Lawgiver after his travels to Egypt.  As for Egyptians having a name for Atlantis, they may have had more than one; Etelente and Amenti both spring to mind. There is nothing to suggest that Plato is describing Atlantis as an ideal state or an example of something obviously fantastical.  I enjoyed the chutzpah of your line about George Lucas a lot, and I certainly don't think that Lemuria ever existed, and would disparage anyone who was convinced it did, as there is clear literary evidence about where it came from vis 19th century speculation about species migration.  Where Atlantis is concerned, I am less convinced that there is no kernel of truth to the story.  Perhaps that is fanciful, but people said Schlieman was fanciful, but he still found Troy where the texts said it would be.

Thank you for the reply. 

There are contradictions that state where the Pillars were: Wikipedia says:

"The Pillars of Hercules (Latin: Columnae Herculis, Greek: Ἡράκλειαι Στῆλαι, Arabic: أعمدة هرقل / Aʿmidat Hiraql, Spanish: Columnas de Hércules) was the phrase that was applied in Antiquity to the promontories that flank the entrance to the Strait of Gibraltar. The northern Pillar, Calpe Mons, is the Rock of Gibraltar. A corresponding North African peak not being predominant, the identity of the southern Pillar, Abila Mons, has been disputed throughout history,^[1] with the two most likely candidates being Monte Hacho in Ceuta and Jebel Musa in Morocco."

The other locations other than the Straight of Gibraltar would point to the Atlantic too (If my old Geography still serves me) thus meaning that the fact still stands for the Atlantic and we know nothing like Atlantis existed in the time period given in the location. 

I 100% agree and understand that he describes it as a real place, however he would not be the first writer to do so and he did it in a lot less detail than other authors writing about way more complex and detailed locations that were complete fabrications, either for entertainment purposes or to stress a point. 

The issues I have with it coming from Egypt is that they wrote down everything, yes loads is lost to the ages, but we would have found some mention of it as Atlantis. The other explanation (using a rational and logical brain) is maybe Solon did hear a story of sorts and decided to re-name and change it a bit, but then, that would make the very foundation of the only written source of Atlantis a lie, therefore how can we know the rest was not a lie too?  

To be honest I would love Atlantis to be real and find some proof of it, what a GREAT thing that would be, however thats the adventure kid in me, the logical person says take all the evidence of it being a real place IE: Plato against all the known factors we can prove to day and weigh the 2 up and I sit firmly on the side where its a story and once the book / dialogues are closed that is where the search for Atlantis should end, its sad to say it that way, but its the truest outcome to date it existed on the paper it was written on only. If proven otherwise then ill be the first to eat my words and would be a happy great day for me in doing so. 

Glad you enjoyed the "star wars" comment - a little humor is always good to keep things fun. 

[moonman]

I really don't understand how someone could be dense enough to see that map and think "Yep, that's what the Earth looked like, this is the proof".

The only thing this proves is that any fool can draw up whatever nonsense map they want, present it as truth saying it's "based on an ancient map" and a good number of idiots will believe it. This makes me sad. How did some people become so stupid and gullible?

Edited July 31, 2019 by moonman

[stereologist]

1 hour ago, Alchopwn said:

Perhaps that is fanciful, but people said Schlieman was fanciful, but he still found Troy where the texts said it would be.

Schliemann assigned an already known and suspected site to be the Troy of tales. Schliemann did not find Troy. He was invited to spend his money on someone doing a dig. He assigned a layer in a dig to the Troy of the stories. He guessed wrong.

https://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/the-myths-of-troy/

Quote

Calvert, however, did not have the money to do a major excavation. He tried to get funding, but failed. So he went to the famous rich guy who was fascinated with Troy and hit him up for the money. Calvert told Schliemann about Hisarlik. Schliemann then used his personal wealth to excavate Hisarlik, and he uncovered lots of evidence of ancient cities. In fact, there were at least nine layers of different cities of different ages in that mound (which he named Troy I – Troy IX).

In Troy II he found the mother load – a treasure of gold and silver jewelry. Schliemann claimed this was the treasures of Priam, proof that Troy II is the Troy of Homer’s Trojan War. It turns out, this is not true. The artifacts are too old and don’t match the late Bronze Age of the Trojan War. So Schliemann’s primary claim turned out to be false. Schliemann also took all the credit for the find himself, did not give Calvert any credit, and generated the myth that he discovered it all by himself. This is the myth that grew into the modern manifestation, which is used by Atlantis apologists as above.

As the Schliemann legend grew it evolved, making it more profound – claiming that the experts at the time did not believe him, even laughed at him. None of this is true.

Knowledge that Troy was a real city existed continuously from ancient times. There was never a consensus of scholars that Troy was only a myth. What was lost to knowledge sometime in the Dark Ages and had to be rediscovered by Calvert and Schliemann was the location of Troy. That’s it. Further, it was always known that the Hisarlik hill was an ancient city, and the locals even believed it was Troy.

Finally, Schliemann did not create modern archaeology or revolutionize it. He clumsily dug into Hisarlik, destroying evidence, poorly documenting the site. He did, to his credit, identify the nine city layers, and did find the large cache of treasure, but anyone just digging up the site would have discovered that. Later archaeologists had to go back to more carefully explore the site.

Further still – Schliemann was wrong in his main claim. He did not find the Troy of the Trojan War. His discovery, in fact, did not change the consensus on the remaining question of how much of the Trojan War is true. It still remains unknown.  The different accounts have many conflicting details, and it was already a foggy legend by Homer’s time. The legends do seem to be based on Greek history (as much as the Robin Hood legend is based on English history), but it is likely that they were transformed by time out of all recognition.

 

[RoofGardener]

4 hours ago, Pettytalk said:

Look to the future, young man...to Plato's future you must go, if you want hard core evidence, geologically speaking. But not only geological proof, as historical proof will be found as well, to corroborate the geography as described. And Atlantis' main opponent is not the military of the prehistoric ancient Athens, but Socrates' ideal city-state warriors, The Golden and Silver State Warriors of Socrates' Republic; the philosophers/warriors. Atlantis "will be" defeated, if it needs to come to pass, by the City governed by the Philosopher King. Look, He comes with clouds.....or comically put, Aristophanes' Clouds.

It's rather logical why there is no evidence of any kind to be found in our past for Atlantis. And you need not keep repeating the same old allegory nonsense, as superficially it's what all normal minded and intelligent people will make of it. It's the deeper meaning and intent that eludes these, because one must be divinely inspired, insanely divine, to get to the profundity of the story.

Utter gibberish. 

[Piney]

4 hours ago, Alchopwn said:

I am less convinced that there is no kernel of truth to the story.  Perhaps that is fanciful, but people said Schlieman was fanciful, but he still found Troy where the texts said it would be.

It's characters are not in any other legends and Plato pretty much said he made it up. The characters who participated in the Trojan War can be found in other legends though. 

[Saru]

Thread closed for moderator review.