Atlantis Explained!

[Abramelin]

47 minutes ago, Rojack said:

How would you start the discussion and keep it going?

It's easy to start a discussion.

But how to keep a discussion going, while ignoring anything thrown at you, and religiously repeating what you read in some book?

That is nòt how *I* keep a discussion going.

At some point I'll accept that I was wrong, but I am not too shy to post other alternative facts or possibilities.

You keep a discussion going by actually discuss what's been posted by others or by yourself.

Accept, publicly, you were wrong a couple of times. You cannot be right all of the time, right? No one is.

 

 

[+Noteverythingisaconspiracy]

1 hour ago, Abramelin said:

Then fkg DISCUSS !!

You do not discuss, you just keep repeating nonsense you read in a book written by an idiot.

It is quite possible that he is the author of said book.

1 hour ago, Rojack said:

How would you start the discussion and keep it going?

You have shown repeatedly that you aren't really interested in anyone elses opinion. You are just here to push the same old story. 

Looks like Atlantis is like a religion to some people. 

[Antigonos]

2 hours ago, Rojack said:

How would you start the discussion and keep it going?

1. First, you have to actually want to be part of a discussion, not merely reside inside an echo chamber.

2. You can’t ignore what your fellow posters write when they respond to you.

3. Be humble and realize there are others out in the world who are more knowledgeable about certain subjects than you are (in this case, ancient history and geology) who can provide you with a solid foundation to start constructing  your knowledge base, one built on reliable sources.

4. You can’t be rigid in your thinking. You have to be willing to revise your opinions when facts you did not previously have and better/more accurate information comes your way. A wise person I know has said more than once that he welcomes arguments against his ideas because he uses them as a way to test his theories in order to see whether or not they are well constructed.

5. Your only concern should be the facts. Once you have a good grasp of them, then see where they take you. Don’t start from a predetermined conclusion and then twist evidence in an attempt to make them fit together. 

6. As long as you are intellectually honest, I don’t think keeping a discussion going here will be a problem.

Edited June 25 by Antigonos

[TrumanB]

Such a long topic about something that almost certainly never existed. I'm wondering why, what are people writing about. Have no intention to waste my time by reading it.

[Trelane]

58 minutes ago, TrumanB said:

Such a long topic about something that almost certainly never existed. I'm wondering why, what are people writing about. Have no intention to waste my time by reading it.

In regard to this thread, here's the story. The OP proposes that Atlantis is in Tampa FL and has ignored all other posters' responses for 146 pages.

[jmccr8]

8 hours ago, Abramelin said:

ccept, publicly, you were wrong a couple of times. You cannot be right all of the time, right? No one is.

 

Hi Rob

True that but being single I found that I am not wrong most of the time and just sometimes.

 

[Rojack]

20 hours ago, Trelane said:

....and still, No.

What does it take to bring you around to yes?

[Trelane]

3 minutes ago, Rojack said:

What does it take to bring you around to yes?

Nothing. Atlantis as described by Plato never existed. Certainly not where you have been proposing.

[Rojack]

18 hours ago, Antigonos said:

1. First, you have to actually want to be part of a discussion, not merely reside inside an echo chamber.

2. You can’t ignore what your fellow posters write when they respond to you.

3. Be humble and realize there are others out in the world who are more knowledgeable about certain subjects than you are (in this case, ancient history and geology) who can provide you with a solid foundation to start constructing  your knowledge base, one built on reliable sources.

4. You can’t be rigid in your thinking. You have to be willing to revise your opinions when facts you did not previously have and better/more accurate information comes your way. A wise person I know has said more than once that he welcomes arguments against his ideas because he uses them as a way to test his theories in order to see whether or not they are well constructed.

5. Your only concern should be the facts. Once you have a good grasp of them, then see where they take you. Don’t start from a predetermined conclusion and then twist evidence in an attempt to make them fit together. 

6. As long as you are intellectually honest, I don’t think keeping a discussion going here will be a problem.

Thanks for the advice.

[Peter Cox]

13 hours ago, Rojack said:

What does it take to bring you around to yes?

Evidence, not a made up story or what you believe, real factual evidence. 

[Abramelin]

On 6/25/2023 at 11:31 PM, Noteverythingisaconspiracy said:

It is quite possible that he is the author of said book.

I think I was one of those suggesting that somewhere in the beginning of this thread.

But Brooks based his book on a book written by freemason, William something.

 

[+Noteverythingisaconspiracy]

40 minutes ago, Abramelin said:

I think I was one of those suggesting that somewhere in the beginning of this thread.

But Brooks based his book on a book written by freemason, William something.

 

So it's not even his own idea. 

I haven't read his book and I don't plan on doing so.

[Abramelin]

7 minutes ago, Noteverythingisaconspiracy said:

So it's not even his own idea. 

I haven't read his book and I don't plan on doing so.

[Rojack]

On 6/27/2023 at 10:19 AM, Abramelin said:

Yes, The book  is difficult to read and hard to follow.

[Piney]

On 6/27/2023 at 4:19 PM, Abramelin said:

The Golden Dawn. They were Theosophists. Not Masons. 

That's why it's written in a "word salad" format.

Idiots....the whole bloody lot....

[Abramelin]

7 minutes ago, Piney said:

The Golden Dawn. They were Theosophists. Not Masons. 

That's why it's written in a "word salad" format.

Idiots....the whole bloody lot....

https://sf-encyclopedia.com/entry/phelon_w_p

[Rojack]

2 hours ago, Abramelin said:

https://sf-encyclopedia.com/entry/phelon_w_p

This is where Bimini Road comes into play? It is a real manmade road that suppose to take us to Atlantis. It takes us to Florida. The road is now under water.

[Antigonos]

16 minutes ago, Rojack said:

This is where Bimini Road comes into play? It is a real manmade road that suppose to take us to Atlantis. It takes us to Florida. The road is now under water.

No, it’s not supposed to “take us to Atlantis”.
The only reason the Bimini Road is associated with the subject of Atlantis at all  is because Edgar Cayce “predicted” that Atlantis would start to rise again in 1968.

It was during that year that the Bimini “Road” was first noticed, so Cayce believers started proclaiming it was part of Atlantis and this MUST be what Cayce was talking about. The fact that it’s on the opposite side of the ocean from where Plato said Atlantis was didn’t send up any red flags for them apparently. 

It’s also been proven to be a natural geological feature made up of beach rock, not manmade.

Edited June 29 by Antigonos

[ShadowSot]

5 minutes ago, Antigonos said:

No, it’s not supposed to “take us to Atlantis”.
The only reason the Bimini Road is associated with the subject of Atlantis at all  is because Edgar Cayce “predicted” that Atlantis would start to rise again in 1968.

It was during that year that the Bimini “Road” was first noticed, so Cayce believers started proclaiming it was part of Atlantis and this MUST be what Cayce was talking about. Complete crap. 

Funnily enough carbon dating on the Bimini road puts the concretions  at around 3000 years old. Much too young for any Atlantis story. 

[cormac mac airt]

23 minutes ago, Rojack said:

This is where Bimini Road comes into play? It is a real manmade road that suppose to take us to Atlantis. It takes us to Florida. The road is now under water.

No, it’s really not. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bimini_Road

cormac

[Peter Cox]

7 hours ago, Rojack said:

This is where Bimini Road comes into play? It is a real manmade road that suppose to take us to Atlantis. It takes us to Florida. The road is now under water.

How is a natural forming thing that is (according to carbon dating) much younger than Atlantis supposed to lead there?

The yellow brick road also leads to the emerald city, should we be debating this too?

[+Noteverythingisaconspiracy]

10 hours ago, Rojack said:

This is where Bimini Road comes into play? It is a real manmade road that suppose to take us to Atlantis. It takes us to Florida. The road is now under water.

Supposed by who ?

[Essan]

On 6/26/2023 at 6:10 PM, Rojack said:

What does it take to bring you around to yes?

Sound archeological evidence that a bronze age civilisation existed in Florida thousands of years before the bronze age.  That it invaded the Mediterranean (how and why?) and subjugated the countries therein, including Egypt, thousands of years before any such countries - including Egypt - existed.  And then fought a war against a bronze age Athens, thousands of years before Athens, bronze age or otherwise, ever existed.   And that Florida then sank beneath the waves never to be seen again, leaving just muddy shoals that inhibited sea travel beyond the gates of Gibraltar up to the time of Plato.

While your at it, you could also prove that Minis Tirith is really New York city.   It might be easier .....

Oh, and by the way, the Bimini "Road" is more likely the yellow brick road in the land of Oz. 

(edit: I hadn't seen Peter's comment when I mentioned the yellow brick road - obviously not just great minds that think alike )

Edited June 29 by Essan

[Piney]

1 hour ago, Noteverythingisaconspiracy said:

Supposed by who ?

Edgar Cayce's ARE or David Imhotep. Take your pick of hucksters.

[Abramelin]

15 hours ago, Rojack said:

This is where Bimini Road comes into play? It is a real manmade road that suppose to take us to Atlantis. It takes us to Florida. The road is now under water.

Well, I assume you read all the answers to the question you asked ME.

The Bimini Road is now under water, indeed.

But your Atlantis ISN'T, and it SHOULD.

 

Your main problem is, that you try to convince us that Plato was wrong.

But Plato <drum roll> IS OUR ONLY SOURCE!!

Everything you posted up to now to prove your theory has been proven wrong so many times, that I think it's an "Unexplained Mystery" that you're still holding on to it.

At some point you'll have to accept...that you were wrong.