Atlantis has been discovered?!

Not directly related but here was another interesting find, this time one that can be mostly verified - the discovery of a carved monolith which may have once been used as some kind of lighthouse in the Sicilian Channel, of course there are many that believe that area too was once land, indeed it definitely was but how long ago?.
www.livescience.com...

At the very least it show's that someone in the region of Mediterranean as long ago as 9500 years or earlier was carving, transporting and placing very large monolithic stone's indeed - even long before the orthodox dating of such famous sites as Stonehenge.

Some of these ancient unknown cultures seemed to have achieved very high level's of sophistication, perhaps far higher than the traditional view of humanity in that period.

originally posted by: Guyfriday
a reply to: dragonridr

This isn't enterally true. The king of kings of Atlantis was Atlas, and Polyidus referred to Atlas as a king, not a demi-god, in his telling of Perseus' journey in the west.

That isn't entirely true.
Plato makes crystal clear who his King Atlas was - a demigod - the son of Poseidon.

What Polyidus wrote about the Titan (not demigod) Atlas occurred after Heracles released Atlas from his burden. Polyidus said that Atlas was actually a shepherd then.

Note that earlier versions of this story have Heracles tricking Atlas into taking the sky back, instead of erecting pillars and freeing Atlas from his doom.

Harte

a reply to: All Seeing Eye

The physical obliteration is the most astounding aspect, if this is indeed the location of Atlantis.

Your OP is very well presented and has great potential, however.

Say today, if a comet hit a large US city (a few come to mind), we would still find evidence that there was civilization there, somehow... perhaps a little metal car...

How can a place be wiped so clean of any evidence, or are scientists just not looking deep and hard enough?

a reply to: charlyv

Time, erosion and robbing out, remember this was probably by our standards a primitive culture more akin go the pre bronze age cultures of meso America on the level of technology they may have had and any more advanced technology would not have been like our own as there development would have been asymmetric to our own so almost certainly no cars, probably no air craft and maybe even only simply metal implement's made of copper or bronze while they may have favoured stone or animal horn and bone for many of there tool's, anything that glittered would have attracted the attention of the later people's of the region and so robbing out.

The area has been home to several far more recent west African empire's as well.

The people of the Atlas mountains though are highly unusual and among the Berber people's are Indigenous north African white people's with blonde hair, blue eye's and often RH negative blood lines.
anyaisachannel.blogspot.com...

a reply to: LABTECH767

It is true that complete entropy would result in everything created by mankind, eventually reduced to dust.
However, this is time on a grand scale. How old could that place be?

a reply to: Harte


Yes, this is correct, but what I'm suggesting is that Plato was saying demi-god because that's what makes sense to him. Let's say I went back in time and had a basic gun (I'm using this as an example, and not saying time travel had anything to do with this). I then used that gun to kill a member of the ruling class at a sizable distance. I could say that I'm a god since I took a life without ever touching the person nor laying a blade upon them. Even if someone was to think that maybe the gun was what did the deed, they would still say that it was a weapon of a god since they might not have known better. As the story gets passed down, I become a god, and the gun was nothing but a side note. Though I still wonder what they mean by "god"?

If we were to look at this from a logical standpoint and say that these stories are true, then let's also look at the possibility that the names and titles of people may have been muddled.
God = King of Kings (a territorial King that is in charge of multiple kingdoms and rulers. Zeus could easily fit this bill)
Demi-God = King of a single land or province (Atlas could fall into this title)
King = A land lord (the leader of a city-state. Theseus could fit this title)


In this light could the term "Titan" mean a ruler of a foreign land? If we started to look at this possibility then many of the stories start to make practical sense. Diving into the darkness of history that plagued an era when writing was new, society was trying to come back from a splinter effect of the Bronze Age Collapse, and tales of history are grandeurized into myths and fantasy is both a fun yet also frustrating endeavor.

Another big problem with decoding these myths and stories is that looking at them from a practical standing is made hard by the issue of dealing with a collapsed society. In the Trojan War, different groups used different styles of armor. Some of them wore Bronze Aged gear, some used Stone Aged gear, but even their death practices were out of alinement for this timeframe. People were making due with what they could muster. Agamemnon (I hope I spelt that correctly) shouldn't have had an issue coming up with a naval fleet large enough to fight the Trojans. Yet there he was having to enlist Achilles and troops from Myrmidon (again I hope I spelt that correctly). So these societies were coming back from a breaking point. We might be able to piece together a possible history of the times that Atlantis fell in, and that could be used to create a possible link to where it is, but until researchers start discussing these oddities as more well rounded possibilities we'll never get to the bottom of this.

a reply to: Guyfriday
That really is one of the premises in GH's "Magicians of the Gods".
The ability to be such a magician, that one could become a "God" by proxy.

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: SamIamSam

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: Wide-Eyes

I think it's clear as day that this site needs to be excavated. It's tragic that archeologists/historians dismiss the story of Atlantis as pure myth. The evidence weighs up.

"Evidence?'
There IS no evidence.

Besides that, you are woefully unfamiliar with archeologists, since there's a passel of them working on the idea of Atlantis (mostly in their spare time.)

Harte

Evidence, like Beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. If you have the eyes to see, there's plenty of evidence of ancient human activity at the Richat.

Actually, there's not.
Besides, you were talking about Atlantis. Not some goat herders.

Harte

So, these are all natural formation, then? Or was this the work of simple 'Goat Herders?' Only one way to find out - get out the shovels!

imgur.com...

originally posted by: charlyv
a reply to: All Seeing Eye


How can a place be wiped so clean of any evidence, or are scientists just not looking deep and hard enough?

Egypt's largest Pyramid no longer exists and it took decades to figure out that it was use to rebuild Cairo. So if a major kingdom was destroyed, people easily could have looted it for building supplies, wealth, even trinkets that they could sell as market items. The as LABTECH points out nature just takes over. Centralia, Pennsylvania fire has caused people to leave the area only a couple of decades ago, but if you look at picture of the place now you would be hard pressed to know that a large city was there.

a reply to: Guyfriday

Get that, but there just has to be some evidence, if even at the molecular level.
Looking forward to when real science is done there.

originally posted by: LABTECH767
a reply to: charlyv

Time, erosion and robbing out, remember this was probably by our standards a primitive culture more akin go the pre bronze age cultures of meso America on the level of technology they may have had and any more advanced technology would not have been like our own as there development would have been asymmetric to our own so almost certainly no cars, probably no air craft and maybe even only simply metal implement's made of copper or bronze while they may have favoured stone or animal horn and bone for many of there tool's, anything that glittered would have attracted the attention of the later people's of the region and so robbing out.

The area has been home to several far more recent west African empire's as well.

The people of the Atlas mountains though are highly unusual and among the Berber people's are Indigenous north African white people's with blonde hair, blue eye's and often RH negative blood lines.
anyaisachannel.blogspot.com...

You think it's a coincidence that there's an ancient town right by The Eye called 'Ouadane?' That's a distant memory of 'Wodan/Odin' - the ancient God of the Norse.

Ok, I know I'm being greedy. I want to see artifacts, photos of ruins, examples of culture etc...

a reply to: All Seeing Eye

originally posted by: charlyv
a reply to: All Seeing Eye

The physical obliteration is the most astounding aspect, if this is indeed the location of Atlantis.

Your OP is very well presented and has great potential, however.

Say today, if a comet hit a large US city (a few come to mind), we would still find evidence that there was civilization there, somehow... perhaps a little metal car...

How can a place be wiped so clean of any evidence, or are scientists just not looking deep and hard enough?

Yes, the however.

I have no real interest in going into the twilight zone in this thread. But your question is a good and righteous one, that deserves a answer.

If you go to the original op and look at the last part about the "Metropolis". I describe what the area looks like. A flat discolored area. Discolored from the surrounding area. It appears as though "something" scoured the surface with so much force, it scoured the top soil off. You can see the runoff going to the east. This wasn't a normal flood, this wasn't a tsunami, but it was water. The top of the Eye has the same color. All the topsoil from these areas and possibly others under the sand may also have suffered this same type of flooding. It is my feeling that all this material, in the form of mud ran to the ocean, filled up any lakes or bays on the way, making water transportation to the Eye impossible.

The remains of Atlantis, the City Island, the Gold Statues, elephants, large blocks, ships, etc, would have been carried away and most likely deposited, and mixed into that mud. And presently, that mud, is under the sand. Some, may have made it all the way to the sea and is just off coast buried in mud.



If this area is Truly "Atlantis", then that is where the hard evidence will be found.

A ground penetrating radar survey should be done in the area between the coast and the eye.

Don't think "Rain", or "Flood", think really large bucket. Can't go into it any deeper than that. That little car you speak of is only 5 or so years away

I see.
So Plato, a recognized genius, was ignorant of his own people's theogony, religion, and mythology.

Harte

originally posted by: SamIamSam
How did this formation come into existence?

i64.tinypic.com...

If you could give me the map coordinates I would be more than happy to look at it. Or a general location.

originally posted by: Harte
I see.
So Plato, a recognized genius, was ignorant of his own people's theogony, religion, and mythology.

Harte

If the story was told to him in a certain way, then it wouldn't have been his fault. Plato had only a limited description of places given to him by Solon, even his discourse on Attica wasn't all that complete and he lived there (Attica being the old name for the of the territory where Athens currently sits) Another point to add is that Solon had gotten the whole story from the Egyptians and then translated them into Greek. So the story about both Athens and Atlantis was recovered by the Egyptians. This may have contributed to a misunderstanding in words, or it could have been passed down with flourishes added. We don't know for certain, but I doubt Plato tried to mislead anyone with his discussion about this.

a reply to: All Seeing Eye
The dude makes a good case for that being Atlantis. Or at least as good as any I have heard people make, in fact better then some.

But then again, whos to say to say Solon or the ancient Egyptians were all that informed after all? And well even the difference in the gap of over 200 something years between when Solon was alive and Plato was alive, that the story can have changed in a thousand different ways.

Much less what the Egyptians told Solon in his day, which again was how many more hundreds of years removed before that story even took up in ancient Egypt? And if there was a big ol flood and catastrophe. Well chances are those who know anything of the matter were standing at ground zero and well were quite dead on the spot, ages before, and all anybody had to go by is word of mouth many many more years latter.

And whats in a name right. Atlantis is a Greek term after all, one brought out of there myths, which is basically a sort of a fancyfull historic rendition. Which is apposed to what we have to day, that is a historic restructuring.

Or not really, both are not all that different after all in either case.

a reply to: SamIamSam

Good point but look - and no offense to anyone - just because word's sound alike does not mean that they have the same origin, languages are one thing and if there syntax and word's are broadly common they can be shown to belong to a linguistic family such Indo European languages etc.
Sometimes word's travel with good's and commodity's and of course this can muddy the waters a little as languages then mix, enough mixing and this can complicate defining the linguistic family of a language such as for example Irish Gaelic which to this day some believe is Indo European while other's claim it is related to the Hebrew and Berber languages due to word's that are shared in common between them.

So while it is distantly possible the site was named after the Norse God I actually believe it is extremely unlikely that this is the case, the word may have a completely different origin the languages of the people that have lived there, the many recent African empires that have stretched there hand over the region, the ancient Carthaginian and other Phoenician influences and of course there is the feint possibility of European influence which went both way's.

For me there is a strong likelihood that many of the Blonde north African's are indeed descendants of SLAVES, people taken in raid's not only by the recent Islamic period during which MILLION's of European's were enslaved, often worked to death in condition's almost identical to those the African slaves suffered in the America's and that indeed not only are there likely some blond north African's as a result of this as well as a lasting impact of the genetic influence of so very many people having been forcibly taken during the Islamic period - and earlier (there was an infamous raid on Iceland that come's to mind).

But the idea of Vandal's and Nordic conqueror's such as Viking's having not only settled far from a river - that was flowing in there period (the Viking's as you know liked to use rivers and when the river was too shallow they would even carry there boats or drag them if the land was good - so why would they ever settle in a desert?) - is too much for me to accept unless a direct and provable genetic link could be shown which it can not.

Also remember when European's found the Canary islands there were already people living there, described as blond, tall and with blue eye's these natives were almost wiped out - there are pyramid's on the canary's by the way which Viking's did not build and no sign of Nordic culture there so they were also not Viking's.
www.familytreedna.com...

And of course there are claim's of blond people including native blond south American's - that's right native white, blond south American's - perhaps descended from ancient Phoenician's but who knows, ever hear of the cloud people.

In North America the Viking idea is actually very probable though as there were also tales of white Indian's there and we know that the Viking's had indeed settled newfoundland - perhaps later abandoning the colony they had established but I doubt that though it was definitely cut off by the little ice age which wiped out the Greenland Viking colony and so lost contact with Europe entirely perhaps going native, the Viking writers of the time referred to the natives of Vine land as foreigners or Skraeling.

You see there is this misguided belief that every one that is blond has the Viking's to thank for it, in fact the Nordic peoples were perhaps the smallest blond race for a very long time, everywhere else it has been bred out as dark hair is a stronger recessive gene.

Also you know most of the Celt's were blond, tall and NOT Viking, the Roman's even had law's - eventually abolished - that specified Prostitutes had to be blond while the native roman woman were dark haired so in that city it was actually seen as a lower cast - non patrician - trait more suitable to the common rabble - though they did like there female house slaves to be attractive and the more exotic the more they probably fetched at the block - remember Rome at it's height was probably four to one slave's to citizen's.

There has also been strong claim's that the ancient Philistine's whom were probably a Phoenician race were blond and there legacy can still be seen in the Kurdish people's today whom are often blonde, blue or green eyed.

The Ancient Greek God's in spite of the fact that southern Greek's were almost certainly dark skinned as evidenced from art depictions on ancient Greek and Mycenaean pottery and art and unlike the Macedonian's were also described as blond or GOLDEN haired.

The Spaniards used blond blue eye's members of there expedition to there advantage in the conquest of south America as many of there god's were also described in similar term's.

So I would argue against the idea that because the name sound's similar that it is actually a homage to a non African deity from pre Christian Northern Europe - why not a Celtic/Gaelic god by that argument they too had ship's and sailed, the Greek's, Carthaginian's and Roman's traded with them and they also traded with the Greek's - perhaps even the Egyptian's and African's, the Carthaginian's and the Roman's and remember how tin from Cornwall was used in most of the ancient classical world's bronze.

And correct me if I am wrong, RH negative is common among the native blonde berber but the blonde Scandinavian's are RH positive and usually type O like myself are they not.

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: Wolfenz

ANCIENT EGYPT IN AMERICA

BY MRS. SCHUYLER VAN RENSSELAER

an Rensselaer, Mrs. Schuyler. "Ancient Egypt in America." The North American Review 218, July 1923.
xroads.virginia.edu...

Perhaps you should read your references before posting them. That article isn't about what you think.

Harte

just keep on assuming,,,

I know what they are talking about ..

Raiders hired bye the Rich Elite so called collectors too get the Egyptian treasures aka goods in the 19th century and were brought in the Americas North n South .. by the hundreds..


so those artifacts that may be Egyptian or Are Egyptian just could of just came from those Elite American Collectors from the early too late 19th century ,,

like the so called Sumerian Bowl that was found Bolivia could been a ancient art collector ..

but could Egyptians or Sumerians coming too the Americas ??

I say they could of , all they need too do is Island Hop ...

if you say they cant .. then explain why there is a 50,000 to 67,000 year old body remains found in the Philippians in 2018 a Early Human as they call it .. how did it get there .. ?? we know of the Aboriginals Australians got too Australia close too 40,000 years ago.. and let alone New Guinea Indonesia .. just maybe the Routes existed 5 thousand years ago or more ...


but as I had a Debate with you before about the origins of Puma Punku ..

which still is hard too Explain WHO where or WHY those Structures Puma Punku Ruins came into existence ...

Not your Average X-BC to 9th century Indigenous Native Peruvian could make such a Structure Especially when you look at the complexity H Blocks ,, yet some of the stones have a similarity of Egyptian Sumerian Assyrian Ethiopian INDIA Cambodian Chinese & Indonesian Stone Work .. the H blocks the most complex piece of the Ruin site is a whole different ball game ..

what i see is Foreigners aka Contractors... LOL .. had came too the land and built some very complex structures & buildings and then took their tools when they had left. Tiwanaco site is what the natives had participated in making not puma punku ,, and perhaps the Foreigners had taught the natives some Basic Stone work Skills ..

a reply to: Wolfenz

It's an old argument Diffusionism vs Isolationism, the founder of the Smithsonian was a stern believer in Isolationism and pushed it, perhaps forever tainting that institution's stance (and of course there are umpteen claims of artefacts and evidence inconvenient to the Smithsonian and the established view they push disappearing also the abuse of NATIVE American ancestral claim's all too convenient to hide evidence of other ethnic group's in the America's than the mongoloid north American's whose ancestors probably crossed the baring strait land bridge, such as skulls with Caucasoid trait's handed over to the native Americans to be buried - I do not blame the native American's for this and agree those remains' should be respected AND that they are indeed probably there ancestors as well as the baring strait's ancestors but it hides some inconvenient fact's, very conveniently for those that do not want to address them, similar in other parts of the world probably for similar reason's, maori rites and sites that may push back human occupation millennia before there time for example down in NZ - in the case of the Maori though land right's are probably the driving point and for the English descended government probably loose end tying as the suggestion some Maori may have more right than other Maori due to being really more indigenous than the later maori also comes into the equation ***).

I myself believe both are true, some cultures do arise independently and they do have thing's in common but not to the degree of similar architecture etc and that is why I also believe in diffusionism - as the far more valid idea in fact.

Not only do I believe the Carthaginian's reached the America's but perhaps also the Roman's having learned from them (they stole the idea of how to build there own ship's from the Carthaginian's after all) may also have reached them, there is the fact the Brazilian navy dumped sediment over a roman ship wreck in Rio harbour and the coc aine and tobacco in the Egyptian mummy's which predate even the Carthaginian period to indicate trade did indeed occur.

As well as the artefact's you mention, there were even claim's of Chinese sea anchor's possibly from the Grand fleet that may have visited the western sea board of the America's nearly a hundred years before Columbus - whom may also have been working from a chart or portolan made by earlier travellers and though I have never seen any images there was a claim of an ancient Buddhist site in the Andes that may have predated the European conquest as well.


***
There is a story from New Zealand, during the early 20th century while building a road an ancient cave tomb was discovered when dynamiting some stone out of the way, in niches the very tall red and blond haired mummy's of ancient people were found and so they asked the Maori what they wanted done with them to which the Maori said do what you want with them they are not our ancestor's - the mummy's apparently thousands of them were ground up and used as fertilizer.