Tsunami clue to 'Atlantis' found

Originally posted by Byrd

Originally posted by Nygdan

Originally posted by Byrd
Unlike Troy, unlike some of the lost Biblical cities, there's only a single story of Atlantis -- Plato's.

I would note that there is another greek author, previous to plato, who wrote something, only a tiny portion of which is preserved if anything, and the title was "Atlantis". Not much to go on there tho.

References? This hasn't come up before in Atlantis discussions.

I've heard of this before, but always just assumed it was a rumour.
It has been posted on a lot of other forums, I no longer bother to visit/ no longer want me there. :|

Originally posted by nikelbee

1. Aztec were known to be 'borrowers' of other cultures including the Maya and the Toltec.

References please. In the meantime, here’s a link to a mesoamerican timeline so you can see the impossibility of any connection between the South American inhabitants and even your version of Atlantis. www.timelines.info...

Originally posted by nikelbee
2. They were also infamous for rediscovering writing that had been used 1000 years in Central America before they ever came along - if they rediscovered writing 1000 years later, it would prove that they took the passing down of such things pretty seriously. My way of saying that 1000 years of well preserved legends and teachings means they didn't necessarily have to live in Plato's lifetime.

Assuming the Aztec knew of the Toltec or Olmec mythology means either the Aztecs had the same language as these earlier tribes, that they could translate what ancient writings they might have found, or that there was some long-standing oral tradition that was somehow passed down from earlier tribes to the more recent Aztecs. There exists no evidence for the second possibility, and the first and third are demonstrably not true, the region of the Aztec’s origins being fairly well established to be in the American southwest, this based on linguistics.

Originally posted by nikelbee
3. They had Solar AND lunar calendars - based again on Mayan calendars and very accurate according to most sources. Even better than our own Julian calendar as it took into consideration the calculation of the leap year.

If you are saying here that the various Egyptian calendars were based on those of the Mayans, you really need to go to the timeline I linked to. The end of the Egyptian civilization predated the Mayan’s beginnings by thousands of years. The origination of the Egyptian calendars predates any New World civilization by thousands of years.
As far as Egyptian calendars, I provide three sites here for you to peruse: www.polysyllabic.com... www.touregypt.net... www.tyndale.cam.ac.uk...
If you go to these sites, you’ll see that what I’ve said here concerning the Egyptian Lunar calendar is only the truth. The Egyptians never counted lunar months as years, there could have been no such mistake made by Solon. Solon could have made some other kind of mistake, but it could not have involved mistaking months for years.
Also, at these sites I’ve provided you’ll see that the Egyptian calendars were not “more accurate that our own” and that the concept of a “leap year,” while first brought up at an earlier date, was not incorporated into the Egyptian calendar until 25 or 30 BC. Both the first suggestion of a leap year and the implementation of the concept into the calendar occurred during the Ptolemaic era of Egypt, long after the pharaohs were gone.

Originally posted by nikelbee
3. Never underestimate oral history. The fact that they came along 1000 years after the legend of Atlantis is irrelevant. It has been proven that oral history is invaluable - if they had heard the legend they would have passed it down - albeit in their own tongue, with their own names and in their own legends.

Again, whose oral history are you talking about here, and exactly what does that history say about Atlantis?

What about the people that were alive and living in the Mediterranean area at the time? Why is it they have no “oral history” of such a thing, even though it must have occurred right on their doorstep?

Plus, I’ve got to point out another problem I have with your date of Atlantis’ destruction.
If you go to the Egyptian calendar websites I linked, you’ll see that the Egyptians accepted 12 lunar cycles per year (although they knew that number wasn’t exactly correct, and they corrected their calendar every year accordingly.) The likeliest period for Solon’s visit to Egypt is around 560 BC. Given twelve “lunar years” per actual year, that places the destruction of Atlantis (as you calculate it) sometime around 1310 BC. Your calculation error? Almost 46%!

Additionally, plenty of writings from various civilizations have survived from that period and before. Most of these have been translated. Why is there no mention of anything resembling Atlantis?

Originally posted by nikelbee
4. A lot of Mexican and Central American glyphs and codexes have not yet been fully translated. Who knows what they may have in store.

Apparently, you are basing your theory on facts that remain undiscovered. You could be right, but what kind of theory is based on undiscovered facts?

Atlantis never, ever existed. Until they built it in the Bahamas.

Harte

Check out this post from Mr. Doug Weller in alt.history.ancient-worlds

Castleden follows this with a very detailed discussion of the archaeology
and geography of Minoan Crete and Thera and how that compares with
Plato's tale. He goes into detail about how the story might have been
transmitted to Plato and Plato's possible motives in writing the two
essays. (He also mentions that there was a century older text by
Hellanicus, of which only a small fragment survives, called 'Atlantis'!).

The book he is talking about is Rodney Castleden's Atlantis Destroyed, Routledge. 1999

Apparently he also wrote also wrote:
The Making of Stonehenge, The Knossos Labyrinth, The Stonehenge People, Neolithic Britain, and Minoans: Life in Bronze Age Crete and "Classic Landforms of the Sussex Coast for the Geographical Association", maybe you might recognize some of them (i don't)


It looks like the info about Hellanicus has received little attention, I've mostly seen Weller mention it in fact. Here is a newsgroups search on it that might provide more information.

Here is another discussion on atlantis where its mentioedn that Hellanicus is cited in "T Ganz, Early Greek Myths, 1992".

Here's another source from that list
ccat.sas.upenn.edu...

Hellanicus of Lesbos, another author of major significance, continued the tradition of Ionian mythography begun by Hecataeus, and influenced both Herodotus and Thucydides (though the latter apparently didn't think much of him). Two hundred fragments of his writings survive, including portions of his Deucalionea, **Atlantis**, and Troica as well as parts of his ethnographic works on mythological tribes which are therefore included here".

Somewhat intersting ina weird way that one work is titled after the surivor of the greek flood myth.

This page mentions Plato and Hellanicus and interstingly and amusingly notes that Plato's linegeage claims descendancy from Poseidon, with Okeanos as one of the other ancestors too. What might be relevant is that Plato claims descendancy from Kodros, (according to that page), one of the big three tribe founders apparently. Hellanicus wrote a history that contained information about Kodros. So perhaps Plato would be familiar with Hellanicus's writtings simply by researching his own familiy history.

A section of the fragment

What still exists includes the line 'Poseidon mated with Celaeno, and their son Lycus was settled by his father in the Isles of the Blest and made immortal.' Plato says Poseidon mated with Cleito and had a son Atlas who became ruler of that marvelous island Atlantis!

Diodorus, btw, calls the Aegean islands the Isles of the Blest.

Here is an interesting article I just found while trying to get the text of the whole fragment again
Was Hellanikos the First Chronicler of Athens?


I acutally found an older post of mine with the citation from Princeton
HELLANICUS. Atlantis I
AM 4096; P.Oxy. VIII 1084: Frame 8
Published: Grenfell and Hunt, The Oxyrhynchus Papyri VIII (1911)
Oxyrhynchus, II A.D.
Upper margin 1.0 cm.
Papyrus
Greek
11.5 x 7.9 cm.
17 lines


I can't quite find what those 17 lines are tho

Here's some more information that I've been able to get:

Atlantis Rising Forum Thread

This work survives only in fragments and primarily describes Atlas and his daughters (the reference comes from the Andrew Collins book "Gateway to Atlantis.")

And (also from an older post here of mine) a translation is in

Robert L. Fowler, Early Greek Mythography Volume 1: Text and
Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. Pp. xlviii,
459. ISBN 0-19-814740-6.

But, again, the lines don't talk about an island, city, etc. Its possible that its just a text about the lineage of Atlas, or somesuch. But apparently plato wasn't the first to use the word Atlantis amoung the greeks.

(muttermuttermutter...why don't they let us do an 'applaud' button when a moderator puts up a really great post? ... mutter mutter mutter....)

Interesting stuff, Nygdan! So we know the name was there, at least (and I always thought the Minoan connection made sense... not that it was a true Atlantis but rather that Plato took a parable from a real event.)

Its funny to think that if this text had survived we'd never had Huxely book on Atlantis, or Blatvasky's crazy ramblings, and Cayce'd be outta work. et cetc

Atlantis actually means "Global"
It's named after Atlas, the guy with the Globe on his shoulders
Which is why Plato called it Atlantis in the first place, to give the impression that it was a huge world wide maritime empire.


It may have been a Greek Island... and It may have been In the Area that is now know as Azores Islands.

The Egyptian Aalu "Isle of Flame" matches Plato's description of Atlantis almost exactly and is also mentioned by the Apache Indians.
Abnakis--Algonquian tradition from N. America derived their tribal name from the founding father who "came from the rising sun," after being forewarned of a flood sent to destroy it.
Ad- palatial island capital punished for its wickedness by a terrible flood. Preserved in the Koran.
Adad-Atlantean concept of Atlas imported to Sumer after 3000 BC. Sumerian flood version described as "came suddenly with a loud noise and darkening sky and a raging wind from Adad.
Adima- Indian myth, Adima is the first man to arrive in the subcontinent with his wife Heva, from and island overwhelmed by natural catastrophe.
Ah-Auab- Literally "white man" or "foreigners to the land" a term by which the Mayans of the Lowland Yucatan distinguished themselves from native inhabitants because they claimed descent from 'fair skinned survivors of the Great Flood."
An- In Sumerian tradition (3500 to 2500 BC), a capital city on the island of Atu, which was overwhelmed by a cataclysmic deluge.
Anubis- Prayed to as "The Westerner" and was said to have 'written annals before the flood' which destroyed his homeland in the Distant West, ie. Atlantic Ocean.
At-ach-u-chu-- Premiere founding father of the Andean civilization. A Viracocha or "white man of Sea Foam"
Atala--"White Island" mentioned in Mahabharata described as the mountainous homeland of a powerful and highly civilized race located in "The Western Sea" on the other side of the world from Indian. Atala is located on "the seventh zone" on heat, which corresponds to 24-28 degrees latitide.
Atcha- Ancient Egyptian, a distant, splendid, vanished city, suggestive of Atlantis.

Gosh, I could go all day, but I think you get the picture. And Harte, refute it all you want, your opinion doesn't carry much weight with me.

Almost every single culture refers to a 'Sunken Homeland" of their ancestors. If you add all these together with Plato you can see the truth of Plato's words as based in some sort of logical fact. EVERY BIT OF HISTORY IS ROOTED IN FACT!! Plain and simple. Yet, the skeptics here seem to dismiss them as falicay. Scientists refute them, which if you ask me makes them lack scientific intelligence. You've got to be an ignorant, naive person to think we are the only persons who could have been 'high advanced', because those two words can mean just about anything when you're looking from the perspective of an ancient man.

Very interesting read...Atlantis is fascinating,ever since the old TV show the "Man from Atlantis".. I have had an interest...

Originally posted by cleasterwood
The Egyptian Aalu "Isle of Flame" matches Plato's description of Atlantis almost exactly and is also mentioned by the Apache Indians.

Cleasterwood,
What you say about Aalu is simply not true. I provided you with links to verify this, did I not?

You continue to make claims about the Apache's without backing them up with any references. I gave you at least one link to a site on Apache mythology. Have you found anything there or elsewhere that would support this claim you continue to make?

Originally posted by cleasterwoodAdad-Atlantean concept of Atlas imported to Sumer after 3000 BC. Sumerian flood version described as "came suddenly with a loud noise and darkening sky and a raging wind from Adad.

What does this do to your theory of Atlantis vis a vis the Sea Peoples, Ramses, the Egyptian "Lunar calendar" etc.?

Originally posted by cleasterwoodGosh, I could go all day, but I think you get the picture. And Harte, refute it all you want, your opinion doesn't carry much weight with me.

The weight of my opinion is beside the point. Anyone can get on a message board and make these kinds of claims. I have asked you multiple times in the past to provide some references. All you can come up with is some book you read by one of the pseudoscientists making money hand over fist these days by mischaracterizing evidence, ignoring facts and commiting downright fraud. I have given you several links that back up what I have said regarding Atlantis. Your lack of supporting evidence is refutation enough for me.

Originally posted by cleasterwoodAlmost every single culture refers to a 'Sunken Homeland" of their ancestors. If you add all these together with Plato you can see the truth of Plato's words as based in some sort of logical fact. EVERY BIT OF HISTORY IS ROOTED IN FACT!! Plain and simple. Yet, the skeptics here seem to dismiss them as falicay.

Every bit of history is rooted in fact. How pithy. Also, every bit of math is rooted in numbers. Every living tree is rooted in the ground.

Every bit of mythology is not rooted in fact.

Originally posted by cleasterwoodScientists refute them, which if you ask me makes them lack scientific intelligence. You've got to be an ignorant, naive person to think we are the only persons who could have been 'high advanced', because those two words can mean just about anything when you're looking from the perspective of an ancient man.

You construct a straw man when you make the statement that "You've got to be an ignorant, naive person to think we are the only persons who could have been 'high advanced." No respectable scientist could possibly make that claim. It's just that there is absolutely no evidence anywhere that earlier 'highly advanced' civilizations ever existed. Besides, why on Earth would you even think that, if Atlantis existed, then it's inhabitants must have been "highly advanced?" The origin of this claim lies with debunked and admitted psychic frauds of the late 19th - early 20th century.

Additionally, you've got to be either completely naive or completely egotistical to routinely disregard the result of centuries of investigations by antiquarians and archaeologists, all the while characterizing them as "lack(ing) scientific intelligence" while simultaneously taking at face value the ridiculous innuendo and outright fraudulent statements made by pseudohistorians who often lack even a basic grounding in science.

As for the rest of the claims in your post, I suppose I am free to just dismiss them with a wave of my hand, since that is apparently the method you used to arrive at them. That is, unless you decide to provide some kind of substantiation for them. I would be interested in what you had to say if you could only do so.

Harte

Every bit of mythology is not rooted in fact.

Huh.. interesting. Guess The City of Troy wasn't really discovered after all. It was just a myth wasn't it? Must've been one of those psuedoscientist's that "discovered" it.

Originally posted by Produkt

Every bit of mythology is not rooted in fact.

Huh.. interesting. Guess The City of Troy wasn't really discovered after all. It was just a myth wasn't it? Must've been one of those psuedoscientist's that "discovered" it.

What would you say about, hmmm, let's see, uh, centaurs, harpies, mermaids, Gaia, Odin, werewolves, golems, talking fish, the turtle that holds up the universe?

Remember what I said (after all, you quoted it) - Every bit of mythology is not rooted in fact. You point out one single thing that was once declared a myth, and this is supposed to mean what, that all mythology must be real? And even if it did mean that, point to me the mythology that concerns Atlantis. You cannot, because there is none.

Harte

Seems too be so many theorys next one's gonna be somthing crazy like

Atlantis was in the Bermuda Triangle area but it was blasted sky high by radiation high ray beams flattened the island too no traces then it got washed under the see,and the radation of the beams cause what the Bermuda Triangle area does today somthing like that LOL

Originally posted by Galiega
Seems too be so many theorys next one's gonna be somthing crazy like

Atlantis was in the Bermuda Triangle area but it was blasted sky high by radiation high ray beams flattened the island too no traces then it got washed under the see,and the radation of the beams cause what the Bermuda Triangle area does today

somthing like that LOL

Sorry, Galiega, you'll have to be more original. That particular theory is old news.

Harte

It's common knowledge to earth scientists (and many of us) that the geology of the planet is extremely dynamic and ever changing. Geologists know that much of the land surface that we know of today was once under water and that the floor of the oceans were once dry land. It's all basically a cycle caused by the chain of tectonic plates that make up the earth's crust (helped along with other natural forces such as polar shifts, volcanoes OR manmade causes.

Given that 70% of the earth's surface is currently covered by water it's not difficult to believe that lands/continents existed where water exists today, and that these lands supported civilizations. These civilizations were wiped out, both slowly and suddenly, by a range of catastrophies. Given the power of earth forces, it doesn't take much to destroy a civilization. For example, look at the discovery of the frozen baby wooly mammoth found in Siberia with a stomach full of undigested buttercups - that thing was flash frozen - temperate climate changed to arctic climate in the wink of an eye (possibly caused by a polar shift). I don't remember where I read about it but a group of scientists strongly believe that some time ago (and it was something along the lines of tens of thousands, not hundreds of thousands or millions of years ago) MUCH of what we call the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans were once dry land. In the early 20th century, when one of the telephone companies was laying cables in the Atlantic, they discovered that undersea regions had risen and sunk up to a mile at a time over the course of a couple of decades AND that they had drudged up plant matter and rocks from the floor of the Atlantic that were found to have once been exposed to the atmosphere.

Even if Atlantis existed as a land mass in much of what is now the Atlantic ocean, it would be extremely difficult to find preserved artifacts from it after so long due to erosion, violent destruction, buried under 100's or 1000's of feet of volcanic debris/silt/etc. BUT, it would be incredibly awesome to learn all about an advanced civilization that did exist tens or hundreds of thousands of years ago (and scary as hell to know that our civilization could be destroyed just as quickly at anytime as well!).

Originally posted by Harte

Originally posted by Galiega
Seems too be so many theorys next one's gonna be somthing crazy like

Atlantis was in the Bermuda Triangle area but it was blasted sky high by radiation high ray beams flattened the island too no traces then it got washed under the see,and the radation of the beams cause what the Bermuda Triangle area does today

somthing like that LOL

Sorry, Galiega, you'll have to be more original. That particular theory is old news.

Harte

Lol i love Sarcasm,hmm is it really hmm funny i didn't know just made it up on spot