Ancient Global Civilization

originally posted by: bluesfreak
Firstly , Plato NEVER says ‘continent’ he says ‘island’, bit of a difference.

He said: Let me begin by observing first of all, that nine thousand was the
sum of years which had elapsed since the war which was said to have
taken place between those who dwelt outside the Pillars of Heracles
and all who dwelt within them; this war I am going to describe. Of the
combatants on the one side, the city of Athens was reported to have
been the leader and to have fought out the war; the combatants on
the other side were commanded by the kings of Atlantis, which, as
was saying, was an island greater in extent than Libya and Asia, and
when afterwards sunk by an earthquake, became an impassable barrier of
mud to voyagers sailing from hence to any part of the ocean.

Libya was the old name for Africa so the Island of Atlantis was greater than that continent and Asia......

Secondly, you continue to do a great job of making yourself look an arse on here, by trying to ape Harte’s under-friendly manner, you don’t quite cut it though , just sound arrogant.

You mean I'm showing you up? Yep but then you just keep giving me straight lines....

[Quote]How typical of you to delete a load of my post that you don’t want to talk about, your Skepsis infection has really taken hold, hasn’t it?

No it was just you giving your opinion and rather boring. Stuff Plato wrote isn't facts....just encase that hasn't become clear to you. Pretending they are won't help you either.

sure you delete most of what I wrote again

I will thanks for the reminder.

Oh, and make sure you don’t comment on the isostacy related evidence of shore lines and shallow water fossils on the submerged Azores plataeu.

---which is not of a greater extent that Libya and Asia is it? That's the problem you are trying to cherry pick bits and piece of C & T but you have to take the story as a whole and as a whole it doesn't make any sense.

You explain that to me then I'll take a look at your link.

Except as a story.

originally posted by: Blue Shift
As I've said elsewhere, I think that the idea of a small civilization existing on the Azores Plateau which was lost due to some fairly rapid catastrophe -- a meteor impact -- is at very least plausible and certainly worthy of conjecture. Whether Plato created the story himself out of whole cloth or was told the story by an anonymous source only indicates to me that if he was just guessing or philosophizing, he did a hell of a job getting as much potentially right as he did.

Of course finding some kind of proof would be nice, but we're talking about a small group of people who used to be in a place that is now and has supposedly under quite a bit of water for over 10,000 years. We have a hard time finding stuff that old on land that has always been high and dry. Even if there wasn't a huge catastrophe, the chances of finding hard evidence of such a civilization would be very slim and we might not even recognize the tiny fragments of it if we found it.

I prefer to stay open to the idea. Not that it means anything to us here in the present. Any knowledge such people might have acquired would be of no use to us now. Any gods they worshiped are all long dead in temples buried under hundreds of feet of silt. Still, it would be nice all around to think that at least some of the tales we've been handed down over the centuries were based on real things, and it makes modern humanity's past just a little less murky during a time when there was so much climatic upheaval.

But, hey. We still have those odd folks who build Gobekli Tepe to figure out. What got a bunch of hunter gatherers organized enough to build some temples with such impressive stone work. Gotta wonder what their deal was.

While it is certainly possible there was a small culture in or around the Azores that they weren't the 'Atlantis' that Plato imagined.

I would say that GT is a 100 times more interesting that the legends about Atlantis - at GT we have real evidence and the opportunity to find more in the future.

originally posted by: Blue Shift

originally posted by: Harte
No other Athenian ever made that claim prior to Plato. You'd think it would be a big part of their culture, you know, like the Trojan War was.

Well, the text has the senior Egyptian priest explaining that, "From a small remnant of their seed you and all your citizens are derived; but you know nothing of it because the survivors for many generations died leaving no word in writing.”

However...

We have thousands of years of Egyptian writing. They didn't write books (or even document) other cultures or care about the histories of other places beyond "we went here and got these resources". So the idea that there's Egyptian writing about Atlantis is clearly false.

Which among the other things the priest supposedly said -- including the stuff about periodic floods and meteor bombardments -- is pretty accurate.

Plato (who originated this) never said that. He said that where Atlantis stood is now mud flats that you can't pass through. Not "sunk under the ocean" not periodic floods, not meteors.

Thousands of years. A thousand years ago everybody on the continent where I'm living was still Neolithic. Who knows what glorious battles they fought?

The archaeologists do. Ask them.

Maybe even against some stray Atlanteans who managed to survive the crustal plate drop.

Crustal plates will subsume but they don't drop.

Please don’t pretend that your ‘opinion’ carries any more weight than anyone else’s. It doesn’t , and being rude doesn’t give you an air of authority either.

It’s stated in T&C that this island ‘Power’ was an ‘empire’ , therefore ‘greater in extent’ can be taken as the reach of an empire, not necessarily the size of the ACTUAL capital of said empire.
I suspect a sea faring race based on a land mass in the Atlantic had quite a vast reach. We don’t REALLY know what that meant, by ‘greater in extent’ so your assumption of size is just that-assumption to fit your own argument, seeing as you can read it whichever way you like.
You berate me over ‘continent/island’ and then quote T+C back at me with the word ISLAND in plain view! Priceless again .
Is it even accepted that the ancient Greeks knew of the Americas? Here it is in T&C.
On the one hand, you are dismissing me for taking Plato’s words literally, then on the other, YOU cherry pick a piece to ‘prove’ to me I’m wrong!! Priceless!!

So, “stuff Plato wrote isn’t facts” , well, funny how the event he describes and at the precise time he describes it, matches a known climate spasm in the Younger Dryas event, along with meltwater pulses at the same era, how he talks of earthquakes and great floods at the 11,500 mark BP when we now know that there were these events. Funny how he talks of an Atlantic landmass that sunk , corresponding with the shore line/shallow water crustacean evidence that exists on the Azores plateau that you don’t want to address.
Tell you what, Plato was some guesser.
So, no, you’re not showing me up, just yourself, and if you want to look at the link I sent from NASA, that’s up to you , I don’t bargain with deliberately offensive people .
reply to: Hanslune

While it is certainly possible there was a small culture in or around the Azores that they weren't the 'Atlantis' that Plato imagined.

You really do have to stop stating your opinion as ‘fact’, you have no authority to proclaim this in the way you do, all the while berating others if they do the same.
Some breathtaking assumptions proclaimed as fact by the Skepsis sufferers today...

a reply to: Hanslune

originally posted by: bluesfreak
I’ve read Plato, don’t get hot under the collar with Harte and Hanslune , they can’t actually engage with other humans very well, it’s their Skeptical outlook, you know, the outlook that allows them to proclaim from above things like this from Hanslune -” Plato was telling a fictional story not history “ now, that’s just HIS opinion, not fact .
Firstly , In Timaeus, it is stated that the story is ‘true’ that it is ‘old world ‘ (possibly referring to the end of the Pleistocene melt events?) and regardless of Harte’s statement that there is no evidence for Atlantis in Plato’s timeframe , Harte’s statement is a great sleight of hand- Plato never stated it WAS during his time frame ; It is stated that the Egyptian priest states that their civilisation started 8000 yrs before Solon, and that the Greek ancestor race were 1000 yrs older than them- the proto-Greeks/Athenians repelled an attack from a ‘power’ based in an island in the Atlantic , and AFTER THAT, the cataclysmic event occurs, earthquakes , sea level rise etc: in Timaeus it states...

As touching your citizens of nine thousand years ago, I will briefly inform you of their laws and of their most famous action; ...... Many great and wonderful deeds are recorded of your state in our histories. But one of them exceeds all the rest in greatness and valour. For these histories tell of a mighty power which unprovoked made an expedition against the whole of Europe and Asia, and to which your city put an end. This power came forth out of the Atlantic Ocean, for in those days the Atlantic was navigable; and there was an island situated in front of the straits which are by you called the Pillars of Heracles; the island was larger than Libya and Asia put together, and was the way to other islands, and from these you might pass to the whole of the opposite continent which surrounded the true ocean; for this sea which is within the Straits of Heracles is only a harbour, having a narrow entrance, but that other is a real sea, and the surrounding land may be most truly called a boundless continent. Now in this island of Atlantis there was a great and wonderful empire which had rule over the whole island and several others, and over parts of the continent, and, furthermore, the men of Atlantis had subjected the parts of Libya within the columns of Heracles as far as Egypt, and of Europe as far as Tyrrhenia. This vast power, gathered into one, endeavoured to subdue at a blow our country and yours and the whole of the region within the straits; and then, Solon, your country shone forth, in the excellence of her virtue and strength, among all mankind. She was pre-eminent in courage and military skill, and was the leader of the Hellenes. And when the rest fell off from her, being compelled to stand alone, after having undergone the very extremity of danger, she defeated and triumphed over the invaders, and preserved from slavery those who were not yet subjugated, and generously liberated all the rest of us who dwell within the pillars. But afterwards there occurred violent earthquakes and floods; and in a single day and night of misfortune all your warlike men in a body sank into the earth, and the island of Atlantis in like manner disappeared in the depths of the sea. For which reason the sea in those parts is impassable and impenetrable, because there is a shoal of mud in the way; and this was caused by the subsidence of the island.

So don’t be put off by the skeptics- skepticism is a form of ‘research disability ‘ an inability to keep an open mind to all possibilities , and an ability to keep a closed , threatened mind .
Just so you know, there have been REAL scientific papers done (benade etc) regarding the Azores plateau and surrounding submerged seamounts showing multiple HUGE landslides
( check out the seamount names , WHY would they be named as they are?) , core samples done , revealing SHORE-LINE SAND and shallow water crustacean and fauna remains, and conclusions drawn that the ENTIRE plateau had somehow isostatically submerged, risen , submerged again .
Timaeus conveys the information that the Atlantic was ‘ far more navigable then’ (old world, more water locked up in Pleistocene ice caps? ,lower sea level?) and that Atlantis was part of islands that led to more islands and then ‘the other continent’ . So the Greeks knew of the Americas?
Perhaps we should give our ancestors , and the story learners/repeaters, more credit than blandly compartmentalising the detailed and well-learned information they kept as mere allegory .
Kind of makes a mockery of Harte and his sycophantic mates’ assured assertions , doesn’t it?

Deny ignorance indeed...

You should read Plato again.

Crit. Friend Hermocrates, you, who are stationed last and have another in front of you, have not lost heart as yet; the gravity of the situation will soon be revealed to you; meanwhile I accept your exhortations and encouragements. But besides the gods and goddesses whom you have mentioned, I would specially invoke Mnemosyne; for all the important part of my discourse is dependent on her favour, and if I can recollect and recite enough of what was said by the priests and brought hither by Solon, I doubt not that I shall satisfy the requirements of this theatre. And now, making no more excuses, I will proceed.

Let me begin by observing first of all, that nine thousand was the sum of years which had elapsed since the war which was said to have taken place between those who dwelt outside the Pillars of Heracles and all who dwelt within them; this war I am going to describe.

Critias
My emphasis.

Really. It's necessary to have actually read Plato if you're going to discuss what he wrote. You see, you come off like a fool. Are you trying to do that? Or, did you even notice?

If you can't even understand what was written, then I would pity you. But I suspect you haven't even tried, so I don't. I don't blame your lack on "research disability" either, though it's clear that Plato does precisely date the Atlantean demise - in Critias, exactly as I stated, (you DID know that the main story is related in Critias, right?) - and you didn't even know that fact (which can be found on any of the thousands of fringe websites you've no doubt poured over.) No, I blame your self-imposed ignorance on your unfounded hubris, as I already explained. You want to live in a world where you're part of a small cadre that's "in on" some big secret that nobody else is aware of. To me this reflects a serious personality disorder on your part - pretending you know things that you don't know, then huffing them out in some ignorance-filled rant aimed at your betters that DO know what you claim to know, is a sign of a mental disorder.


Harte

I'm reading.

Being a dick doesn’t make one right.
It just means you’re a dick

Really. It's necessary to have actually read Plato if you're going to discuss what he wrote. You see, you come off like a fool. Are you trying to do that? Or, did you even notice? If you can't even understand what was written, then I would pity you. But I suspect you haven't even tried, so I don't. I don't blame your lack on "research disability" either, though it's clear that Plato does precisely date the Atlantean demise - in Critias, exactly as I stated, (you DID know that the main story is related in Critias, right?) - and you didn't even know that fact (which can be found on any of the thousands of fringe websites you've no doubt poured over.) No, I blame your self-imposed ignorance on your unfounded hubris, as I already explained. You want to live in a world where you're part of a small cadre that's "in on" some big secret that nobody else is aware of. To me this reflects a serious personality disorder on your part - pretending you know things that you don't know, then huffing them out in some ignorance-filled rant aimed at your betters that DO know what you claim to know, is a sign of a mental disorder. Harte

Ah, so your omnipotence stretches to knowing whether I’ve read a book or not, now, does it?! Hilarious. It’s on my bookshelf right here!!!
PLEASE SHOW WHERE I DISAGREE WITH THE DATINGS IN THE DIALOGUES; as I haven’t .
Actually , they state that the War was 9,000 years before Solon, and that ‘after’ this war, the cataclysm begins. So where’s the PRECISE dating in the dialogues that you mention ?
Not really sure what you’re arguing with me about as I’ve NEVER disputed what’s written in the Dialogues dating-wise —-AH WAIT, silly me,it’s just your usual M.O again, rudeness, an attack that causes a different response than the salient points in a previous post that need addressing - it’s utterly boring , but a great exercise in bluster .
What DOES need to be addressed is Plato’s incredible
‘ luck’ with dating events that now tie in to research about the Younger Dryas climate spasm , how his dating corresponds to it, sea level rise, isostasy in the Atlantic sea floor , the SHALLOW WATER fauna and crustacean remains found deep on the Azores plateau, the flood, earthquake reports in the Dialogues all match with a verifiable climate spasm now known to have taken place .
Perhaps that’s what you should talk about? rather than trying to ‘remote view ‘ what’s on my bookshelves with such false authority.
... and “betters..” is that what you are to me? Don’t make me laugh; just more proof of your incredible ego, I’m afraid .
Once more I must state, you are not an authority on ‘Atlantis’ and all the factors related. You are just an amateur researcher , like many in here, (and most you criticise) and your words carry no more weight than anyone here - it’s just that you are far ruder than most , which you believe gives you an air of dismissive authority . Which it doesn’t . You just look like a pr*ck.



a reply to: Harte

I don't know why some refer to YouTube posts on here in a derogatory manner.

Even in corporate and r&d environments they have multimedia presentations (usually PowerPoint.)

It gets your point across easily.

It actually takes skill and knowledge to make a good YouTube video.

That said, here's a simple and short YouTube of a puzzling representation of a 65 million year old stegosaurus on an allegedly 800 year old temple.

Even MORE evidence just published in ‘Nature‘ regarding the Younger Dryas event and the absolute devastation it caused in two hemispheres . Comet fragment air bursts ( like Tunguska) are most likely it is believed .
It MAY just start to dawn on the Skeptics that this event most likely annihilated all in its path: temperatures in this linked paper would melt a car within minutes it has been stated .
The pieces of global evidence for a cataclysm are continuing apace.

This is the level to read at if you are interested in this stuff, not just the YouTube vids by guys like ‘Jimmy’ from ‘bright insight’ , as insightful to some as his videos are , he piggybacks , and regurgitates the work and research of THESE guys;
Have a read and enjoy ..
Nature paper on Syrian samples of impact proxies from Younger Dryas

originally posted by: bluesfreak
Even MORE evidence just published in ‘Nature‘ regarding the Younger Dryas event and the absolute devastation it caused in two hemispheres . Comet fragment air bursts ( like Tunguska) are most likely it is believed .

It's still debateable.

It MAY just start to dawn on the Skeptics that this event most likely annihilated all in its path: temperatures in this linked paper would melt a car within minutes it has been stated .

Yes, but no. That's the temperature that the micro-particles reached as they entered the atmosphere (remember, things coming in from space burn from friction. They might hit the ground at that temperature but we're talking about tiny things (or things that burned up) and that cooled down within a short time (hours at most.)

One of the big arguments against this kind of action is the fact that there's no consistent die-off. In other words, the American cheetah died off but the puma (about the same size and shape) lived. The short-faced bear died but the grizzly (similar habitat, shape, size) lived. In a "rain of disaster" everything in the area would die. It's not a cosmic ICBM that only kills the marsupial lions in Australia while leaving other carnivores the same size alive.

It's still debateable

Yes, Byrd, but increasingly less so: today Super Skeptic Michael Shirmer sent a tweet to Graham Hancock saying he was moving his position on the YDIH, (can hear Harte retching) in light of this new evidence.
Obviously there is still debate, but these are the type of proxies that sealed the debate on the Yucatan impact in the 80’s : a dateable layer containing the same proxies worldwide.
They are not necessarily fragments formed atmospherically, the proposition is that several or more comet fragments exploded a la Tunguska, Airbursts , (kind of like Hiroshima really, but with the resulting climate impact , those air bursts were WAY bigger than Hiroshima-) with devastating effect, proponents consider impacts into the northern ice sheets also. Many of these ‘micro-spherules ‘ are also fused elements of the locality, like fused quartz, I believe .
The Younger Dryas boundary layer known as the ‘black mat’ is basically black because it contains ,either or both , carbonised fauna and carbonised everything or/combined with slurry mud in places from unparalleled flooding events related to the supposed ice sheet impacts.
As for the Megafauna, much is still debatable yet the mastodons sloths etc found in the North American Yd layer were incased in a pyroclastic type mud event, combined with superheated burning of the earth also. Also I would imagine in nature there is a great deal of ‘luck’ involved in species survival- smaller versions you mention of bears, lions etc may have survived through a combination of enough breeding pairs and the fact that they need less food .
What’s for certain is that this event was certainly a ‘catastrophe’ of epic proportions, came in two waves, (the 2nd wave could have done for species on the edge, ) and that our ancestors lived through it, and that it could well be we as a species only survived the YD events by the skin of our teeth. a reply to: Byrd

To pretend that Plato invented Atlantis also means that Plato invented the end of the Ice Age, the Sargasso Sea, the American Continents and the Coconut. Because Plato describes all of those too. None of which were supposed to be known about at the time.

When it was said Atlantis was “larger than Libya and Asia”, that was not the same Africa and Asia we know of today.
They were talking about the Africa and Asia of their time, the known extents of which were much smaller.
This can easily be seen on ancient maps, like these 5 examples:

The Herodotus map of the world:
www.google.com... 7j0i8i30.167903.171612..175775...0.0..3.92.1881.27......0....1..gws-wiz-img.....0.P19JIMHmjg4&ei=EF5qXoqCHcay0PEP6MiduAQ&rlz=1C1GCEU_enUS848US848

And the Hecataeus of Miletus' world map:
www.google.com... 54KHTXYBqwQ_AUoAXoECBcQAw

And the Posidonius' world map:
www.google.com... .12..0i30.8021.24101..26081...10.0..3.75.1668.24......0....1..gws-wiz-img.....0..0j0i67.mYvXOVUOcSQ&ei=BV1qXuKFE8aI-gTe6b3wBA&rlz=1C1GCEU_enUS848US848

The Pomponius' world map.
www.google.com...:1584043023530&source=lnms&tbm =isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjxxOeN3JXoAhUrHDQIHWxkD8kQ_AUoAXoECA0QAw

The Marinus of Tyre’s world map:
www.google.com... =img.12...68270.71406..73136...1.0..2.109.1548.18j2......0....1..gws-wiz-img.....10..35i39j35i362i39.AKVv2yO1H10&ei=mpNqXueGCKTC9APX4qXwCw&rlz=1C1GCEU _enUS848US848

Compared to the map the Romans said they saw on the temple walls around 30 BC ~ the same one Solon would have seen ~ Atlantis compares well with Libya and Asia in size.

upload.wikimedia.org...

Remember, the Romans, Egyptians and Greeks were not as familiar with the look of the Earth from above as we are today. We take it for granted what it looks like, while they had never seen it.

So if the size reference of Atlantis comes from the map on the temple wall, then it would not be a stretch for Solon to say that the Island of Atlantis was larger than the then known land masses of Libya and Asia.

Athanasius Kircher claimed he redrew his map from a copy that the Romans had brought back from Egypt around 30 BC. This map now, as then, most likely resides in the hidden depths of the Vatican.

If the Athanasius Kircher map is of the Great Meteor Seamount then it clearly uses locators on the side. Because the Island itself is in scale with the two smaller islands next to it. Since the islands outskirts are open ocean, the only way to locate it is to add locators next to it. The locators are not to scale, as that would make the map humongous and the subject of the map too small. So the locators – Spain and America – are shown at much smaller scale and for location purposes only.

www.youtube.com...

Of course the Great Meteor Seamount has never been above water in recent historical times, so how could the Egyptians have a map of it?

memeworld.funnyjunk.com...

memeworld.funnyjunk.com...

memeworld.funnyjunk.com...

While the Great Meteor Seamount is at its highest only 490 feet underwater, the top of the Irving Seamount is only 220 feet underwater. And just north of Sao Miguel Island is the roughly 222 foot high Azores Pyramid, the top of which is only 135 feet underwater.

Well if the complete Azores Island/Seamount chain was above water in ancient times then it would stretch from the Closs Bank Seamount in the south, past Plato’s Seamount in the middle of the chain and all the way to the Corvo volcano at the northern end of the Azores. This is a longer stretch of islands than the West coast of Spain and Portugal.

pbs.twimg.com...

As for size, just think Rome. Was Rome built on 7 hills? Or did Rome stretch from Britain to Egypt?

That may be the answer. Atlantis was an Empire, large than Libya and Asia combined.

originally posted by: spiritualarchitect
To pretend that Plato invented Atlantis also means that Plato invented the end of the Ice Age, the Sargasso Sea, the American Continents

Plato never described any of these.

originally posted by: spiritualarchitect
and the Coconut. Because Plato describes all of those too. None of which were supposed to be known about at the time.

The Greeks knew of coconuts since just after 500 BC, over a century before Plato's birth, if not earlier.

So, who's "pretending" here?

Harte

Don’t bother with Harte’s reply, he’s just trying to get a rise out if you, notice he didn’t address any of your points about the maps, the real premise of your postings, no comment from him on that, as per usual.
No comment from him about the implications of sophisticated trading and knowledge of the existence of the americas .
On other forums Harte would be considered a quasi-troll the way he talks to people.
You make an interesting point with the maps.
One thing is not truly known- just HOW MUCH water was locked up in the Pleistocene ice caps , therefore what was the true sea level at this point- the 400ft lower estimate is just that, an estimate , and is always a conservative one in science,it could well have been 1000ft lower, we’re just not sure. If it was up to 1000 ft lower, that changes everything even further - implying more marine archaeology that would reveal coastal settlements worldwide being completely decimated , leaving literally the mountain dwellers as the main survivors - “ and the meek shall inherit the earth” as has been said, (I’m not religious!) .
Unless Harte has anything to say relating to the major points you discussed, don’t bother following his new provocative narrative , it just serves to annoy and actually stifle the debate. Kind of bored of his M.O and behaviour to others now, don’t know about you ..
a reply to: spiritualarchitect

a reply to: spiritualarchitect

By "Asia," he probably meant "Asia minor" aka Anatolia/turkey.

That ydih event may have introduced even more new water.

Comets/asteroids delivered water to earth. That's incontrovertible. It may have happened again.

There would've been water vapor enveloping earth for over a millenium blocking out the sun alongside the particles from the impact bringing on the younger dryas.


Then as the dust settles along with the water vapor clouds, the other shoe dropped.

Sunlight warms the earth again in an accelerated manner, resulting in the catastrophic melting of younger dryas ice deposis; a double whammy.

The thing with space debris is it most probably hit our planetary neighbors also.

Maybe they were even hit worse and first; then that chaos may have taken it's sweet time going to earth.

Plus, if it was really bad it may also have stimulated the sun to throw some coronal mass ejections.

Oooh look another YouTube

Funny picture on that YT vid! Harte will never take Hancock off of his dartboard though .. !a reply to: reject