Atlantis Explained!

[ShadowSot]

2 minutes ago, whitegandalf said:

Lack of evidence is not proof something did not exist. Thats not the same thing! Show me the proof!

You can't really prove something doesn't exist, anymore than you can prove there isn't an 11000 year old tea pot in my backyard. Especially if you want to start playing games with what I mean by "my" "backyard" and "tea pot." 

 What you can show is the lack of evidence for what there should be if it existed. 

 If Atlantis was a real place, why do we only have a single account for it? 

 No other reference exists aside from Plato, certainly not in Egypt where the story was supposed to have come from. 

 What about material culture? 

 For all that the Atlanteans were supposed to be an empire there's no evidence of a major civilization conquering and habiting the region 11000 years ago. 

 Let alone the proto Athenian who supposedly overthrew them.

 And no, claiming they're all under the sea doesn't get away from that. There's plenty of sites that were habitable then and plenty of ancient sites from that time period. 

 

[whitegandalf]

You are right, i cant prove 100% that atlantis or similar civ existed. But..
Show me the evidence atlantis or a similar civilisation did not exist!

Could we prove earth was going around the sun 1000 years ago? Could we prove tectonic plates existed 100 years ago? I can name thousands of examples.. Lack of evidence is not evidence something did not exist. We still havent looked at 99% of the possible places. 

Logic is evidence that civilisation started on islands and the sea,  for many reasons, as i mentioned. the largest by far, easy accessable, high quality storable food, which easy could support cities of 10.000 - 1.000.000 people , and trade with super highways.

Edited June 27, 2022 by whitegandalf

[cormac mac airt]

32 minutes ago, whitegandalf said:

cormac mac airt 

If you are 100% sure platons story was not real, or based on an ancient real lost seafearing civilisation. Then PROVE IT  to me! Show me the evidence!

If you are not 100% sure, and it could have existed, where did platon get his story from 8700 years earlier? And if you do not know, how can you be sure he got the perfect exact story alined with the real atlantis, if existed, if you dont even know how he got it..? 

Poseidon and his son atlas is relevant, and support platons story was real- even if it is a diffrent greek story.

What seafaring civilization? The earliest civilization in the Iberian Peninsula that is attested is Tartessos from the 9th CENTURY BC. That doesn't work in your favor. And the earliest evidence of a boat, NOT A TRIREME, is near La Marmotta in Italy dating to circa 6000 BC, 3600 years AFTER Plato's Atlantis. 

Plato likely got the inspiration for the name Atlantis from the mythical Atlas's and from Herodotus who placed similar sounding names (Atarantes and Atlantes) in northwest Africa and NOT in the Mediterranean or Atlantic. Neither Atarantes nor Atlantes predates Herodotus' mention of them. 

 cormac

[cormac mac airt]

6 minutes ago, whitegandalf said:

Show me the evidence atlantis or a similar civilisation did not exist!

Could we prove earth was going around the sun 1000 years ago? Could we prove tectonic plates existed 100 years ago? I can name thousands of examples.. Lack of evidence is not evidence something did not exist. We still havent looked at 99% of the possible places. 

Logic is evidence that civilisation started on islands and the sea,  for many reasons, as i mentioned. the largest by far, easy accessable, high quality storable food, which easy could support cities of 10.000 - 1.000.000 people , and trade with super highways.

Show me one that existed WHERE Plato wrote that Atlantis was. 

But it IS the only evidence we have. 

Civilization started in Sumer circa 3200 BC. 

cormac

[whitegandalf]

Again, you have no proof. Why are you 100% sure? Show me the evidence. Lack of evidense is not proof. 

There was no proof earth was round before someone proved it!

What if the civilisation existed on islands in the atlantic? Still unexplored because under the sea?

Edited June 27, 2022 by whitegandalf

[whitegandalf]

There are many old stories from all over the world. Greeks arent the only one.

[ShadowSot]

Just now, whitegandalf said:

Logic is evidence that civilisation started on islands and the sea,  for many reasons, as i mentioned. the largest by far, easy accessable, hight quality storable food, and trade with super highways

Well now you're falling into a problems the Greeks ran into a lot. Coming to what you state is a logical conclusion and not actually trying to disprove it. 

 So far you were dead wrong about flash frozen mammoths, the effective date range of c-14 dating, and arguing you know more than linguists. 

 I don't really buy that Islands are a logical place for civilizations to start. It's a very restricted existence, limited arieties of plants and animals and fresh water. The examples we have from history built their existence around providing material culture to other civilizations. Not being mighty by themselves. Would the minoans or the Chinca of middle America have been the powers they were without the contemporary powers they serviced? 

[whitegandalf]

2 canoes tied together with rope, and sail isnt rocket science. I think you underestimate humans 11.000 years ago

[cormac mac airt]

2 minutes ago, whitegandalf said:

Again, you have no proof. Why are you 100% sure? Show me the evidence. Lack of evidense is not proof. 

There was no proof earth was round before someone proved it!

What if the civilisation existed on islands in the atlantic? Still unexplored because under the sea?

Because we'd have evidence of some sort that supported Plato yet there is no evidence whatsoever. If Atlantis was a civilization it would have left extensive evidence of its existence considering how advanced Plato wrote it being. So why NOTHING?

There was proof earth was round before someone proved it, it just wasn't known by anyone before then. You have a non-argument. 

Then it's not Plato's Atlantis and therefore irrelevant to the discussion as Plato is the one and only source, period. 

cormac

[ShadowSot]

5 minutes ago, whitegandalf said:

Lack of evidense is not proof.

Really, it is. You're misunderstanding the principle. If you look for leprechauns and never find any its a good reason to believe they don't exist. 

 Civilizations don't exist in a vacuum. 

 Even ancient civilizations we don't have exact sites for, like Kush, are known from their interaction and material trade. 

[cormac mac airt]

2 minutes ago, whitegandalf said:

2 canoes tied together with rope, and sail isnt rocket science. I think you underestimate humans 11.000 years ago

And wholly unevidenced. You don't really have a point. 

cormac

[whitegandalf]

There are many powerfull and sucessfull seafearing civilisations in history. Britain ruled the world for 200 years from their island and sailing ships and trade. The vikings was also highly sucessfull with boats and trade from america to middle east, the minoans too, phoenics

Edited June 27, 2022 by whitegandalf

[cormac mac airt]

1 minute ago, whitegandalf said:

There are many powerfull and sucessfull seafearing civilisations in history. Britain ruled the world for 200 years from their island and sailing ships. The vikings was also highly sucessfull, the minoans too, crete, phoenics

ALL of which have left extensive evidence of their existence and where they were. Zero for Plato's Atlantis. 

cormac

[whitegandalf]

Again show me the evidence that a land based civilisation 12.000 years ago, that had a larger, easy acessable, high quality food source, than the seapeople at that time.  Or t make it easy, say 6000 years ago? 

And with faster and more easy way to transport trading goods

Edited June 27, 2022 by whitegandalf

[ShadowSot]

3 minutes ago, whitegandalf said:

There are many powerfull and sucessfull seafearing civilisations in history. Britain ruled the world for 200 years from their island and sailing ships and trade. The vikings was also highly sucessfull with boats and trade from america to middle east, the minoans too, phoenics

Yes but we have extensive material and written accounts about them.

 Both direct evidence  and indirect evidence of trade and material and genetics. 

 Meanwhile you're arguing for the lack of evidence. 

 None of them have only a single story that attests to their existence. 

[ShadowSot]

1 minute ago, whitegandalf said:

Again show me the evidence that a land based civilisation 12.000 years ago, that had a larger, easy acessable, high quality food source, than the seapeople at that time.  Or t make it easy, say 6000 years ago?

Show me evidence for a civilization at all 12000 years ago? 

 And why suddenly 12000, now

[whitegandalf]

Their cities would, if existed have lied at the coastline, now deep underwater. Only 0,1% of underwater sea bottom possible places has been archelogical extravated.

[cormac mac airt]

5 minutes ago, whitegandalf said:

Again show me the evidence that a land based civilisation 12.000 years ago, that had a larger, easy acessable, high quality food source, than the seapeople at that time.  Or t make it easy, say 6000 years ago? 

And with faster and more easy way to transport trading goods

There are not civilizations of either sort that are that old. 

cormac

[whitegandalf]

Because creating a large civilisation with 12 big cities and 12 kings, doesent come from a vacum. I estimate they must have existed 1-2 thousand years before the global catastrophe 11.200 years ago.

[ShadowSot]

It's worth noting again that all of your examples you listed relied heavily on trade with other contemporary powers who were on a similar level. Even while great Britain ruled the seas you had France and Germany and other powers at play. The Phoneans and minoans needed their contemoories to build up the power they gained. They did not exist in a vacuum. 

[cormac mac airt]

5 minutes ago, whitegandalf said:

Their cities would, if existed have lied at the coastline, now deep underwater. Only 0,1% of underwater sea bottom possible places has been archelogical extravated.

Their influence on trade partners wouldn't all be underwater. So where is any? 

cormac

Edited June 27, 2022 by cormac mac airt

[cormac mac airt]

1 minute ago, whitegandalf said:

Because creating a large civilisation with 12 big cities and 12 kings, doesent come from a vacum. I estimate they must have existed 1-2 thousand years before the global catastrophe 11.200 years ago.

And yet you have ZERO evidence to support that. 

cormac

[ShadowSot]

2 minutes ago, whitegandalf said:

Their cities would, if existed have lied at the coastline, now deep underwater. Only 0,1% of underwater sea bottom possible places has been archelogical extravated.

Except we have thousands of sites dating back that far and earlier. Including settlements and proto cities. 

 The many natufian settlements, places like Gobekli Tepe and Karahan Tepe, even sites in the America's and others. 

 Yet no where in those sites is the cultural debris from a contemporary major civilization. 

 Even civilizations that relied on sea trade weren't restricted to coastal dwelling only. 

 You're just trying to justify your idea. 

But I don't think you know much about the time periods involved. 

[whitegandalf]

Yes they would all be underwater, around 150m +- as they were a seafearing civilisation, trading between the 12 big cities along the coast on islands, easy to defend, is not a vacum. Again show me the evidence. Lack of evidence is not evidence they did not exist, not until we have looked at the possible places.

Edited June 27, 2022 by whitegandalf

[ShadowSot]

3 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

Their influence on trade partners wouldn't all be underwater. So where is any? 

cormac

Hell where's the genetics. If this was true archaeo geneticists would be puzzling over the spread of DNA