3 of 4
3
FINALLY! ATLANTIS FOUND!!!
Posted: 25 April 2011 12:45 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 31 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  191
Joined  2010-10-09

I LOVE the Atlantis legend. It has just enough ambiguity and mystery to it that one can hang just about any conceivable, or even inconceivable mythology onto it, making it a great theme for fantasy novelists. So we have Atlantis with dinosaurs, flying saucers, power crystals, magick, ancient astronauts…....

I’ve always felt, though, that the most popular “explanation” in academic circles, the Galanopolous and Bacon (1969) version (see http://www.decadevolcano.net/santorini/atlantis.htm ) is perhaps the least credible. Yes, they say, Atlantis actually existed, but Plato got the name wrong, it wasn’t where he said it was, it was a lot smaller than Plato described it, it was a mountain not a plain, Plato’s circular canals didn’t exist, it was destroyed by an eruption and not by sinking, and it all happened 900 years before Plato wrote, not 9000. Plato, in fact, managed to get every single detail wrong, but one; it was round (ish).

So how, may I ask, is this any different from saying it never existed at all?

Theflyingsorcerer

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 April 2011 09:07 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 32 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1283
Joined  2011-03-12

I LOVE the Atlantis legend.

Which one? If you mean the allagorical device which Plato used, there’s actually very little to it. See http://www.skepdic.com/atlantis.html for a discussion.

 Signature 

Question authority and think for yourself. Big Brother does not know best and never has.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 April 2011 04:21 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 33 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  191
Joined  2010-10-09
Equal Opportunity Curmudgeon - 25 April 2011 09:07 AM

Which one? If you mean the allagorical device which Plato used, there’s actually very little to it.

Actually Plato gives a fairly full description of Atlantis in the “Timaeus”; see http://ascendingpassage.com/plato-atlantis-timaeus.htm ; Poseidon’s citadel surrounded by a gold enclosure, walls coated with brass, tin and orichalcum, canals 300ft wide and 100ft deep - that sort of thing. No dinosaurs or flying saucers, though…...

Theflyingsorcerer.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 April 2011 11:50 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 34 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1283
Joined  2011-03-12

No dinosaurs or flying saucers, though…...

I wouldn’t expect it either. The thing is, the real Atlantis legend comes only from Plato and appears nowhere else in any ancient myths of legends. Much of what you run into these days are modern contrivances.

 Signature 

Question authority and think for yourself. Big Brother does not know best and never has.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 April 2011 01:11 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 35 ]
Jr. Member
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  23
Joined  2011-04-27
Dead Monky - 10 April 2011 06:04 AM
Equal Opportunity Curmudgeon - 10 April 2011 12:06 AM

I gave up listening to these jokers years ago. Some insanity is just not worth the trouble.

But it’s so funny.

Not very hard to imagine some or all of our world’s countries sinking/flooding. In a few generations it would seem as they were great powerful societies from the past.  Now add 1000’s of years to that and we would probably be right where we are today AGAIN.  I wouldn’t put $ on it being as advanced as people claim but who knows?  Man is older than we are told.  With the little bit of land we have left on Earth, is it that big of deal that you would dismiss it 100%?  They are finding ruins miles down in the oceans.  “If” they knew the stars better than we do know today then why question if it is true?  I think people don’t like the Fact that early man could have been smarter than us. We are not as great as we think.  Man now is weak and on it’s last limb.  Cut the power everywhere and see millions of people just die or cower in a corner.  It takes one idiot to create or release something and we have to start over.  Silly to think it’s real(Atlantis) and even more to say it is not possible.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 April 2011 01:28 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 36 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  9301
Joined  2006-08-29
OGMONKEY - 29 April 2011 01:11 PM

I think people don’t like the Fact that early man could have been smarter than us.

Sure, why not. I bet you that Aristotle was smarter than all of us here combined on this forum. But our accomplishments are predominantly a result of many people living and working together. The human population had been too small until recent times to have achieved anything even close to what we have today.

[ Edited: 29 April 2011 01:30 PM by George ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 April 2011 02:04 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 37 ]
Jr. Member
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  23
Joined  2011-04-27
George - 29 April 2011 01:28 PM
OGMONKEY - 29 April 2011 01:11 PM

I think people don’t like the Fact that early man could have been smarter than us.

Sure, why not. I bet you that Aristotle was smarter than all of us here combined on this forum. But our accomplishments are predominantly a result of many people living and working together. The human population had been too small until recent times to have achieved anything even close to what we have today.

What’s wrong?  You don’t sound OK keep it together.  shock 

Ohhhh is that it?  Since there “were” less people it is impossible to achieve what we can today?  Maybe in those times there weren’t so many false positives going around and they could think.  You should agree!!  I am getting the book you said i should look at also(think it was you).  I believe in evolution 100%.  I have seen it happening all around me my 29 years.  Now could our evolution have been tampered with somehow?  We had some kind of push.  Maybe bombardment of rays(sun?) causing mutations. Or a suppressed gene from way back?  And i get what you are trying to make me realize about the mind.

SO could a reptile/other animal have evolved to walk up right and think like we do?  You know since they were and have been here WAY longer than us?  If you think that we just evolved with no help in any way they I wonder what evolved millions of years ago?  UNLESS man is older than we are told.

Ease up a little.  You made me laugh…  blank stare

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 April 2011 03:53 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 38 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1283
Joined  2011-03-12

Silly to think it’s real(Atlantis) and even more to say it is not possible.

Yes it is silly. Especially when one studies the ground well enough to realize that the story was a metephorical device used by Plato. Quite the common practice in the ancient schools of philosophy and a perfectly valid one at that.

Everything which has come after those two dialogues comes from successive generations reading waaaaaayyyyyyy to much into the myth. A myth which appears nowhere in any other ancient mythology.

My dismissing it does NOT come from underestimating the ancients or what they were able to accomplish.

My dismissing it comes from what WE in the present day do in reading things into it that even Plato never said.

 Signature 

Question authority and think for yourself. Big Brother does not know best and never has.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 April 2011 12:23 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 39 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  191
Joined  2010-10-09
George - 29 April 2011 01:28 PM

Sure, why not. I bet you that Aristotle was smarter than all of us here combined on this forum.

Aristotle smart? ARISTOTLE?? Have you actually READ any of his stuff, or even tried to? Tedious in the extreme, and very, very full of his own cleverness, but SMART?? Give me Plato or Plotinus any time.

Actually there are mysterious references to an ancestral place called Aztlan in South American legends, and “Atlan” in the Freislanders’ strange “Oera Linda Book”.......... Yes, I know the Oera Linda Book has been called a forgery, but still…..

Theflyingsorcerer.

[ Edited: 30 April 2011 12:28 AM by Theflyingsorcerer ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 April 2011 01:48 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 40 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1283
Joined  2011-03-12

Actually there are mysterious references to an ancestral place called Aztlan in South American legends,

Which bear no relationship to Plato’s metephorical device.

and “Atlan” in the Freislanders’ strange “Oera Linda Book”.......... Yes, I know the Oera Linda Book has been called a forgery, but still…..

Well now, since it IS a forgery, why would it surprise you that it would be called that? hmmm

 Signature 

Question authority and think for yourself. Big Brother does not know best and never has.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 April 2011 03:01 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 41 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  191
Joined  2010-10-09
Equal Opportunity Curmudgeon - 30 April 2011 01:48 AM

Actually there are mysterious references to an ancestral place called Aztlan in South American legends,

Which bear no relationship to Plato’s metephorical device.

and “Atlan” in the Freislanders’ strange “Oera Linda Book”.......... Yes, I know the Oera Linda Book has been called a forgery, but still…..

Well now, since it IS a forgery, why would it surprise you that it would be called that? hmmm

“Aztlan” was supposedly out in the Atlantic somewhere, and it sank. Just like Atlantis.

And the Oera Linda Book. Doesn’t surprise me in the least that it has been called a forgery. But apparently you know FOR AN ABSOLUTE, CAST IRON CERTAINTY that it IS a forgery? H’mmm….

I prefer to think that, yes, the Oera Linda Book that first came to the world’s attention in the 1860’s was a “forgery”, if by “forgery” you mean that it was presented as something other than what it was (after all, it was written on 19th century paper, supposedly), but there are odd bits of folklore and archaeological hints that it MIGHT have been referring to something real. There’s plenty of evidence that parts of the North Sea were dry land in the past, but were flooded about 10,000 years ago (!!) - and this is where the Oera Linda people were supposed to have come from. (And this has also been proposed as a site for “Atlantis” too - but that’s a whole other story).

Theflyingsorcerer.

[ Edited: 30 April 2011 03:03 PM by Theflyingsorcerer ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 April 2011 06:45 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 42 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1283
Joined  2011-03-12

“Aztlan” was supposedly out in the Atlantic somewhere, and it sank. Just like Atlantis.

So what? That doesn’t mean that it was intended to have any bearing on what Plato was trying to say or that the people who came up with this were even aware of it.

And the Oera Linda Book. Doesn’t surprise me in the least that it has been called a forgery. But apparently you know FOR AN ABSOLUTE, CAST IRON CERTAINTY that it IS a forgery? H’mmm….

Yes. This is known. It’s a forgery. Faking “ancient” documents, maps and even antiquities/artifacts is one of the world’s oldest cottage industries. It was thriving thousands of years ago and still goes on today.

Frankly, you’ve offered nothing in the way of any credible evidence to give me any reason to believe otherwise.

 Signature 

Question authority and think for yourself. Big Brother does not know best and never has.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 May 2011 12:42 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 43 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  191
Joined  2010-10-09
Equal Opportunity Curmudgeon - 30 April 2011 06:45 PM

“Aztlan” was supposedly out in the Atlantic somewhere, and it sank. Just like Atlantis.

So what? That doesn’t mean that it was intended to have any bearing on what Plato was trying to say or that the people who came up with this were even aware of it.

Frankly, you’ve offered nothing in the way of any credible evidence to give me any reason to believe otherwise.

Of course “Aztlan” wasn’t “intended” to have any bearing on Plato’s Atlantis, and of course the people who came up with it weren’t even aware of Plato’s book. That, my dear Equal Opportunity Curmudgeon, is the WHOLE POINT. These are TWO COMPLETELY INDEPENDENT TRADITIONS, using suspiciously similar sounding names and both pointing to the same place.

And it was never my intention to offer “evidence”; just intriguing hints and possibilities.

As I said in my previous post (I wish I didn’t have to repeat myself quite so often), I accept the Oera Linda Book of the 1860’s as a 19th century work purporting to be much older, and thus in common parlance a “forgery”, but one that offers intriguing hints of something beyond itself. It is known, for example, that there existed a mysterious and little-known people known as the Stedingers, who seeminglly appeared out of nowhere in the Freisland area in the early 1100’s, and who were both political and religious heretics whose social order was similar in many ways to that which the Oera Linda Book describes. It is suggested that their beliefs and social structure may have been similar in many ways to those of the Cathars of Southern France. Their fate was the same; Pope Gregory IX, at the instigation of the Archbishop of Bremen, ordered a crusade against the Stedingers in 1233-1234, which turned out to be a genocide. European history has relegated these unfortunate people to a footnote - indeed, most standard histories don’t mention them at all - but MAYBE, just MAYBE, there might be a link forward with the 19th century “forgery”, and a link backward to the flooding of “Doggerland” - called “Atland” in the OLB - at ABOUT THE SAME TIME as Plato claims Atlantis was destroyed….....

Again, nothing that could be called “evidence”; mere hints and conjectures. Accept them for what they are, or dismiss them. It doesn’t much matter; the planet continues to revolve, ponderously…....

Theflyingsorcerer.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 May 2011 08:30 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 44 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1283
Joined  2011-03-12

Of course “Aztlan” wasn’t “intended” to have any bearing on Plato’s Atlantis, and of course the people who came up with it weren’t even aware of Plato’s book. That, my dear Equal Opportunity Curmudgeon, is the WHOLE POINT. These are TWO COMPLETELY INDEPENDENT TRADITIONS, using suspiciously similar sounding names and both pointing to the same place.

No they’re not. Compare the Skeptic’s Dictionary exposition at http://www.skepdic.com/atlantis.html with the Aztlan article on Wikipedia at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aztlán All you’re doing now is confusing a word play for a similarity.

And it was never my intention to offer “evidence”; just intriguing hints and possibilities.

We’ve heard it before. You’ve offered nothing new.

As I said in my previous post (I wish I didn’t have to repeat myself quite
so often), I accept the Oera Linda Book of the 1860’s as a 19th century
work purporting to be much older, and thus in common parlance a “forgery”,
but one that offers intriguing hints of something beyond itself.

Sorry, but no. A forgery is by definition a work that is faked!As evidence of anything other then fakery and fraud, it’s worthless.

 Signature 

Question authority and think for yourself. Big Brother does not know best and never has.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 May 2011 04:48 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 45 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  191
Joined  2010-10-09
Equal Opportunity Curmudgeon - 01 May 2011 08:30 AM

Of course “Aztlan” wasn’t “intended” to have any bearing on Plato’s Atlantis, and of course the people who came up with it weren’t even aware of Plato’s book. That, my dear Equal Opportunity Curmudgeon, is the WHOLE POINT. These are TWO COMPLETELY INDEPENDENT TRADITIONS, using suspiciously similar sounding names and both pointing to the same place.

No they’re not. Compare the Skeptic’s Dictionary exposition at http://www.skepdic.com/atlantis.html with the Aztlan article on Wikipedia at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aztlán All you’re doing now is confusing a word play for a similarity.

And it was never my intention to offer “evidence”; just intriguing hints and possibilities.

We’ve heard it before. You’ve offered nothing new.

As I said in my previous post (I wish I didn’t have to repeat myself quite
so often), I accept the Oera Linda Book of the 1860’s as a 19th century
work purporting to be much older, and thus in common parlance a “forgery”,
but one that offers intriguing hints of something beyond itself.

Sorry, but no. A forgery is by definition a work that is faked!As evidence of anything other then fakery and fraud, it’s worthless.

So are you saying, in your first quote there, that Aztlan and Atlantis are NOT completely independent traditions? In a previous post you said that they have nothing to do with each other. You can’t have it both ways, sorry.

The gist of the Aztlan article is that no-one really has a clue where Aztlan was; which means that Donnelly’s suggestion was as plausible as anyone else’s. (Note, please, that I an NOT, repeat NOT, suggesting that Atlantis a.k.a. Aztlan was a big island continent in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean; only that it might refer to something a bit more “real” than a mere literary device. All right, all right, I KNOW you’re not going to agree so you don’t need to say so.)

And the definitions of “forgery” and “fake” are, to say the least, fuzzy around the edges. Was Han van Meegeren a “forger” when he painted pictures “in the style of” Vermeer? He passed them off as Vermeers, true, but none of them were actual copies of Vermeer paintings. One of his aims was to make the art critics of his time look like idiots, and in that endeavour he was entirely successful - although art “experts” nowadays, now that they know the truth, claim not to have been fooled for a minute. Right, sure. This is a fairly mild example; there are others that are much more controversial.

Back on topic. You say the “Oera Linda Book” is “worthless as evidence”. I never said it was evidence. I merely said it was intriguing, which, to me, it is. If it isn’t to you, then so be it. We are obviously of different temperaments, you and I. You feel that the Universe has been adequately explained under the scientific-materialist paradigm. Me, - I just wonder a bit, sometimes. That’s all.

Theflyingsorcerer

Profile
 
 
   
3 of 4
3