Atlantis a Batholith

Ok I have two theories about Atlantis the first one is that North America was mistaken for Atlantis. That theory was posted on another thread. Ok well heres my other theory. There are these giant geological structures called batholiths. Its basically a large hollow dome thing made from molten lava. Anyhow what if somehow a batholith (a large one) was in the ocean and mistaken for an island. Now if the Atlantians build their civilization on a batholith it would be ripe for disaster. Examples of batholithes include Yellow Stone and crater lake. Ok correct me if im wrong on any of this but I forgot a lot of my geology from when i was in school. Now another thread suggested that Atlantis was sunk by a meteor well a meteor would shatter the thing practically. The other idea is since it takes volcanic activity to make a batholith volcanic activity could happen right there. Volcanic activity would cause it to collapse. Anyhow since its surronded by water theres your flood. Or the thing could have been flooded on the inside.
I'd like to hear some thoughts or ideas on my theory about it being a batholith.

That is a very interesting theory. Since I personally believe Atlantis is/was in N. Americia. Your theory also allows for the "flooding". Atlantis may have been lost and some technology left with peoples may have created the mayain and aztec civilization's. That would explain how they seemed to have high tech in somethings, far beyond what we think they should have had.

If there was a huge batholith there should be a huge rim where the edge of it was. I can show you a topographical map of the ocean floor which shows no batholith rim, but it does show an oceanic ridge that could have been exposed during the iceage.
Also, South America is supposed to fit Platos description, but to a factor of 2. This would make sense because in South America some cultures counted in base 20, which means they didn't carry a number until they got to 20, instead of 10. They'd write 10 when we would be writing 20, etc. So Atlantis according to some theories (which I do not entirely agree with) coudl be South America.

I am growing more and more attatched to the idea that Atlantis is an amalgam of stories. The description of South America incorporating aspects of the formerly exposed mid-atlantis ridge, with the civlization drawn from lost Greek city-state that was destroyed in the wars surrounding the time of Troy's fall.
The idea of Atlantis as an amalgam is furthered by the form of the reference to it from plato (it is described in Critias and appears to be an illustration preceeding some arguement regarding the gods, which is never presented because the work is incomplete.) Is it any stretch to imagine that a person making a hypothetical arguement might borrow aspects from several memorable tales or facts to create a more relevant example?

Suppose I wanted to show you the dangers of organized crime, political corruption, and over-urbanization: I could tell you about the city NewLosCago, located on the Potomac River and serving as the capital of the North American UN Protectorate. I'm mixing the names and details of New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Washington DC, and I'm forgetting about the past nation in which it happened- translating it into the new (imaginary future) country that occupies the same region.

Later, when part of my book is gone, people can read about the things that happened to Newloscago of the North American Protectorate in ancient history (before the protectorate even should have existed) and everyone will argue about the several possible sites- since Los Angeles, Chicago, New York, and DC all seem to fit the bill.

This reminds me: I actually do know how Chicago got started. A bunch of people from New York got together and said, "the over-crowding and crime is nice, but it isn't cold enough".

Well as for the rim its possible that either an ocean current was able to erode it so its near impossible to recogenize. That or if volcanic activity destroyed the batholith its possble it somehow destroyed the ring.

I wasn't specific enough, i appologize. Not ONLY the rim should remain. Crater lake was brought up, and is good example. There should be a very big identifiable basin right where atlantis was, with dimensions matching the description given by plato.
Besides, the greeks knew what a volcano was. Why didn't anyone write "A big dang volcano wasted Atlantis right after we went to all the trouble of beating them into submission. Georgius Dubyus says it must have been their WMD stockpiles accidently going off." Instead, a single philosopher wrote that Atlantis sankin the 2nd earthquake before Deucelion's flood.

About the Greeks knowing what a volcano is the Atlanteans might not have known. But even if they did know how many survivors were there who actually know why there island sank. Of course much of the ocean remains somewhat unexplored and after many years of erosion and possibly volcanic activity theres a strong chace that the basin became difficult to recognize. That and the mid-atlantic ridge could have run through Atlantis somehow and this would have covered up the remains of the basin. Now if we could just go into the chambers under the Sphinx then we would know for sure.

Perhaps if you reviewed what a batholith is, you might change your notion?

It's a large mass of intrusive rock:
www.webster-dictionary.org...

When it's solidified, you get granite and granite-like rocks. These are some of the hardest rocks on the face of the earth. They aren't circular. They are of various shapes. You couldn't sink it with an asteroid/meteor because it's harder than many of the asteroids/meteors.

Furthermore, there is no ancient evidence of any Atlantis in existance. And no, South America doesn't fit Plato's description in any way. It does, however, fit Plato and Socrates' idea of the ideal society:
classics.mit.edu...

I shouldn't have taken his word for it on the term batholith. I think he ment caldera, although there may be yet another word. Anyway, he means that Atlantis could have been build on a great big crater or boil full of lava that eventually exploded under them- sorta the same thing some people recently claimed might be brewing under yellowstone. I'm not behind the theory, but I understand what he means.

As for Atlantis: i saw hits and misses in the plato accounts if you measured it up to south america. (one significant miss is that I don't believe elephants have existed in South America as far as we are aware.) Anyway I plan to buy at atlas tomorrow, find out how many meters there are in a stadium (since plato measures in stadia- for those of you who don't know) and I will soon give you my independent conclusion as to rather or not even a madman (such as myself) could mistake South America for Plato's Atlantis.

Byrd, i respect you, but I have to question you on this until I've weighed it for myself, because I know that you don't believe in Atlantis and from time to time you lean on "facts" that I don't entirely trust (and in a few cases even on facts which actually may not BE trustworthy for that matter.) So at any rate, I'll be checking it out soon then getting back to you tomorrow unless I should be distracted by some shiney object and forget.

I'd have to say "ditto" on the huge caldera (yes, I know the phenomina he's talking about... a supervolcano similar to Yellowstone.

Okay, so why didn't THAT happen?

Welp, we know where the supervolcanos are, and they've got some fairly impressive lava flows. Lava can seal and cover evidence of things that existed directly on them (a city, for example) but it doesn't cover all the evidence that the city ever existed (roads into the place, mysterious trade goods in other areas (we can, in fact, track American Indian trade goods from thousands of years ago.))

A National Geographic Magazine insert of December 1997 (vol. 192, No. 6) stated this about the Meso-American culture around 1200 B. C. :

"About 1200 B. C., when the Trojan War was being fought half a world away, an agrarian people raising maize, beans, and squash began to build the first of many independant city-states in Meso-America. From this matrix of cultures came a calendar to measure time, glyphs to chronicle the movement of planets, and architecture to rival that of the Old World."

Its interesting to note that another portion within the insert says this:

"By 1500 B.C. AGRICULTURE
Until about 7000 B.C. the inhabitants of Mesoamerica subsisted by hunting animals- INCLUDING MAMMOTHS- and gathering wild plants for food. As the climate turned drier and large animals disappeared, people began domesticating plants."

This is maybe where the elephant element comes in. There have been many finds of mammoth tusks within North America, that were found along side indian arrow heads.

So possibly the Ancient American story was distorted and somehow was transmitted to travellers who embellished the tale.

I got my terms mixed up I guess. Sorry about that. I really need to retake a geology class.

Byrd, I took a very brief glance at my Atlas just for starters.
The Altiplano does fit the dimensions of the plane surrounding the city of Atlantis, and for the most part the geography looks right, but there are some things in Critias that I need to read closer.
(i had invisioned a site closer to the east coast of South America with a sea view to the south, from my understanding of Plato's description.)