Gazrok v NinjaoftheNight : Atlantis is not a myth.

Two long standing and respected members.I expect this one to be close.A real bruising encounter and one that this tournament always hopes to turn up.

Each debator will have one opening statement each.This will be followed by 3 alternating replies each.There will be one closing statement each and no rebutal.
No post will be longer than 800 words and in the case of the closing statement no longer than 500 words.In the event of a debator posting more than the stated word limit then the excess words will be deleted by me from the bottom.Credits or references at the bottom count as part of the post.

Editing is Strictly forbidden.

Excluding both the opening and closing statements only 1 image or link may be included in any post.Opening and Closing statement must not carry either images or links.

The Debate topic is:That Atlantis is not a myth.Atlantis was a pre-eminent civilisation that was lost.

Gazrok will argue for this proposition and he will open the Debate.
NinjaoftheNight will respond and argue against this proposition.

As a guide responses should be made within 18 hours.However if the debate is moving forward then I have a relaxed attitude to this.

Defaulters will not be excepted in the next Tournament.The winner will receive 3000 ATS points the loser(on condition of completion)will receive 1500 ATS points.This on top of generous points allocation for Debate forum posts.

This Topic will be opened on Sunday Evening GMT and the debate may start.

I wish you both goodluck

The winner of the bout will face the winner of the Loki v FaithDefender contest.

Atlantis...fabled civilization of myth...or advanced civilization lost to time? My position is that it is indeed the latter. In order to illustrate this, it is important to clear up misconceptions about what Atlantis was, and how we define it as an "advanced" civilization. My goal is not to convince you that Atlantis was a city with flying cars, electricity, and death rays. Nay, I will illustrate the historic Atlantis...an advanced civilization akin to their later descendants, the Aztecs, Incas, etc.

For not only will I illustrate that Atlantis existed, but during the course of this debate, I will also illustrate where it is! After all, it is not my place to convince you of something's existence without showing you where indeed it does. Just as there are now confirmed archeological remnants of Troy (as written of by Greece's Homer), I will tell you of the remnants of Plato's Atlantis. We will not see remains of the aforementioned flying machines or death rays, for these are flights of fancy, taken by authors over the years. What we will see, is the tale of a civilization lost to the sands of time, but whose story was related to Plato, by the Egyptian Solon.

To establish the existence of Atlantis, it is important to examine the source of its account. The dialogue of Critias... (of which, I will provide a link later) Regardless of which viewpoint you hold on Atlantis...it is important to be aware of this text, as it is one of the few historical references to the ancient city. Keep in mind, though we consider the time of Plato to be "ancient", the account of Atlantis was considered "ancient" in his day! Therefore, it is not surprising that there aren't more accounts of this once great civilization.

The very origin of the name of the Atlantic Ocean, is given in the tale:

"And he named them all; the eldest, who was the first king, he named Atlas, and after him the whole island and the ocean were called Atlantic."

Furthermore, there are numerous details given, to describe the location:

"was an island greater in extent than Libya and Asia"
"outside the Pillars of Heracles"

These details, are the first which I will use to illustrate that the continent of Atlantis, is what we now refer to as South America. Instead, it is the city of Atlantis, not the continent that met its doom. The biggest point of confusion of the catastrophe lies in there being a difference between the island continent, and the island capital. Both were islands, and this is made clear in the text. Now, your first thought may be that South America is not an island. This is true...now. However, we are talking of the world 9000 years before Plato, so it may have truly been an island at the time, or it could have simply been perceived as an island by those of that time (being ignorant of the other continent to the north).

Another point of confusion in the text, is due to Critias describing a war between the Greeks of the time, and Atlantis. In doing so, he first describes each nation, as it existed at the time. In reading the text, he describes both Atlantis, and Greece. However, as he states, he describes the Greeks of the time first.

"I must describe first of all Athenians of that day, and their enemies who fought with them, and then the respective powers and governments of the two kingdoms. Let us give the precedence to Athens."

A common error of many Atlantean researchers is to ascribe these descriptions to Atlantis. This error is actually rather surprising...considering it seems rather clear who Critias is speaking of. Another point of confusion is the use of Greek names in the text, such as the continent being presided over by Poseidon. Again, Critias makes it very clear why he is using such names.

"Yet, before proceeding further in the narrative, I ought to warn you, that you must not be surprised if you should perhaps hear Hellenic names given to foreigners. I will tell you the reason of this: Solon, who was intending to use the tale for his poem, enquired into the meaning of the names, and found that the early
Egyptians in writing them down had translated them into their own language, and he recovered the meaning of the several names and when copying them out again translated them into our language."

Please forgive the time taken to clarify some misconceptions of the account of Atlantis. However, as we proceed with the debate, you will see how imperative it is to understand this account, as I present the evidence, not only of Atlantis' existence, but also of its location. Thank You.

No reply from Ninja.

Initially I was disheartened by this.

But if the first qualification round serves to show the ability of potential debators to write then this first round,which was not originally planned,shows the ability of potential debators to compete.

So it is with confidence in the integity of this tournament to find a worthy Challenger for our Champion that I pronounce Gazrok the winner of this contest.

Gazrok will go on to face Loki in the next round.

Ninja will not be elligable for the next debate tournament as despite my U2U's I have received no reply.

Congratulations Gazrok.The next debate topics will be posted on Sunday.

Do not worry about the manner of your victory.This process is about seperating the wheat from the chaff to find the best debator to challenge out Champion.

Not exactly the way I wanted to win...but any victory is a good one I guess.... Hope everything is ok Ninja...and I look forward to doing this again. The mods have graciously allowed me to post the follow-up arguements I had. After all, I'd hate to promise something (i.e. the location of Atlantis), and then fail to deliver... I'll post them tomorrow morning...

Thanks All!

Before going too much further, I'd like to provide a link to the efforts of another researcher, Jim Allen. Through this site, you will also find a link to the translated Critias text, so that you can see for yourself.

www.geocities.com...

Many often use the claim that Plato was trying to simply tell a moralistic story. However, there are at least three instances, in which he states it is a fact.

"Then listen, Socrates, to a tale which, though strange, is certainly true"
"And what is this ancient famous action of the Athenians, which Critias declared, on the authority of Solon, to be not a mere legend, but an actual fact?"
"And what other, Critias, can we find that will be better than this, which is natural and suitable to the festival of the goddess, and has the very great advantage of being a fact and not a fiction?" - all from the Dialogue of Critias.

Now that we have moved past some of the misunderstandings, and seen that indeed, Plato is writing of an actual event in ancient history, let us proceed with defining the location, and thus existence, of Atlantis itself. I have already started to explain some reasons and support for Atlantis (the continent) being South America. I will now further elaborate.

Though there are many translations of Plato's text, here are some to first establish that the continent of Atlantis, is indeed, in the Atlantic Ocean, as opposed to various other theories floating about.

1 For these histories tell of a mighty power which unprovoked made an expedition against the whole of Europe and Asia, This power came forth out of the Atlantic Ocean, Jowett

2 For it is related in our records how once upon a time your state stayed the course of a mighty host, which, starting from a distant point in the Atlantic ocean, Bury

3 Our records tell how your city checked a great power which arrogantly advanced from its base in the Atlantic ocean Lee

"Atlantis was located in the Atlantic Ocean. It is pointless to try and relocate Atlantis to within the Straits or move the Straits to inside the Mediterranean, because the text clearly says Atlantis was a continent in the Atlantic Ocean."
from: 50 point comparison of Critias text and the Altiplano, translations by Jowett, Bury (1929) and Lee (1971)

Next we will look closer at the descriptions of Atlantis. A quote from researcher Jim Allen, paraphrasing some of the passages in the Critias text.

"Plato�s description exactly fits South America because he describes a level rectangular-shaped plain which he said lay in the centre of the continent, next to the sea and midway along the longest side of the continent.. He also described the capital city of Atlantis which was built on a small volcanic island and also called Atlantis. The city lay on the level rectangular plain, five miles from the sea and according to Plato the whole region was high above the level of the Ocean sea, rising sheer out of the ocean sea to a great height on that side of the continent. Thus we have both a lost city of Atlantis as well as a lost continent of Atlantis."

This will become even more apparent during my next reply, upon seeing the picture showing the location of this plain. Another key point in all of this is the specific measurements that Plato gives for various features of the capital, as well as the plain it resided upon. These measurements correspond to matching features of the Altiplano of Bolivia.

There are still more details that also match the Critias text. For example:

"The stone which was used in
the work they quarried from underneath the centre island, and from underneath the zones, on the outer as well as the inner side. One kind was white, another black, and a third red, and as they quarried, they at the same time hollowed out double docks, having roofs formed out of the native rock."

Such remnants of these walls are found in the Altiplano region, as well as in neighboring ruins of structures. This white, red, and black brick combination can be seen in these wall remnants, and even in the structures used by neighboring villagers to this day! Another tell-tale sign lies in Plato's description of their use of orichalcum...a yellowish metal found mostly in the Andes.

Next, I will show you this region, and go into more detail of how it matches Plato's account.

Orichalcum is a metal often misnamed. However, in the Andes (and the plain that once held Atlantis), we can see this metal:

" Orichalcum is considered by Sir Desmond Lee to be a
"a completely unknown and imaginery metal" but such a natural alloy exists only in the Andes where it is called Tumbaga. It can be polished and the copper surface dissolved out to resemble pure gold"

This metal is found in the region (and only in the region), just as mentioned in the text.

As mentioned, the city of Atlantis, as described by Plato, is located in a plain, midway, along the continent's longest side. Here, we can see this plain:



As you can see, this fits the description to a tee. Not only that, but the measurements as given by Plato, also correspond correctly to the plain.

" canal of three hundred feet in width and one hundred feet in depth and fifty stadia in length, which they carried through to the outermost zone, making a passage from the sea up to this, which became a harbour" This canal exists in the area...though now it is dry.

" they divided at the bridges the zones of land which parted the zones of sea, leaving room for a single trireme to pass out of one zone into another.... Now the largest of the zones into which a passage was cut from the sea was three stadia in breadth, and the zone of land which came next of equal breadth; but the next two zones, the one of water, the other of land, were two stadia, and the one which surrounded the central island was a stadium only in width. The island in which the palace was situated had a diameter of five stadia. All this including the zones and the bridge, which was the sixth part of a stadium in width" Again, this all corresponds to the measurements in the area. Would a tale meant simply as a moral story, require such measurements? The answer of course, is no. Plato is recording history, not fable, as we have already discovered by the three references given before. These alternating bands will be seen in my next reply, and upon seeing this, there will be no doubt that indeed, this is Atlantis.