Forums

 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages 
Atlantis Thread
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fortean Times Message Board Forum Index -> Earth Mysteries - the land
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
PinkElephantsOffline
Grey
Joined: 02 Oct 2003
Total posts: 15
PostPosted: 15-08-2005 20:20    Post subject: Reply with quote

Not sure if this is the right thread, but my brains been fried just trying to log on!

Tsunami clue to 'Atlantis' found
A submerged island that could be the source of the Atlantis myth was hit by a large earthquake and tsunami 12,000 years ago, a geologist has discovered.
Spartel Island now lies 60m under the sea in the Straits of Gibraltar, but some think it once lay above water.

The finding adds weight to a hypothesis that the island could have inspired the legend recounted by the philosopher Plato more than 2,000 years ago.

Evidence comes from a seafloor survey published in the journal Geology.

Marc-André Gutscher of the University of Western Brittany in Plouzané, France, found a coarse-grained sedimentary deposit that is 50-120cm thick and could have been left behind after a tsunami.

Shaken sediments

Dr Gutscher said that the destruction described by Plato is consistent with a great earthquake and tsunami similar to the one that devastated the city of Lisbon in Portugal in 1755, generating waves with heights of up to 10m.


The thick "turbidite" deposit results from sediments that have been shaken up by underwater geological upheavals.
It was found to date to around 12,000 years ago - roughly the age indicated by Plato for the destruction of Atlantis, Dr Gutscher reports in Geology.

Spartel Island, in the Gulf of Cadiz, was proposed as a candidate for the origin of the Atlantis legend in 2001 by French geologist Jacques Collina-Girard.

It is "in front of the Pillars of Hercules", or the Straits of Gibraltar, as Plato described. The philosopher said the fabled island civilisation had been destroyed in a single day and night, disappearing below the sea.

Sedimentary records reveal that events like the 1755 Lisbon earthquake occur every 1,500 to 2,000 years in the Gulf of Cadiz.

But the mapping of the island carried out by Dr Gutscher failed to turn up any manmade structures and also showed that the island was much smaller than previously believed.

This could make it less likely that the island was inhabited by a civilisation.






Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/sci/tech/4153008.stm

Published: 2005/08/15 13:47:56 GMT

Sourcehttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4153008.stm
Back to top
View user's profile 
PeripartOffline
is still wondering
Joined: 01 Aug 2005
Total posts: 2910
Age: 46
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 09-10-2005 14:14    Post subject: Reply with quote

I just read "Atlantis" by David Gibbins. Yes, it's a work of fiction, and makes no claims otherwise, but makes some interesting speculations as to what/where Atlantis may have been, and why there aren't more stories about it. The author is an archaeologist and so presumably knows his stuff. In a way, I'd rather read a fairly entertaining thriller with a plausible semi-scientific basis than read another supposedly factual piece of claptrap writtan by someone who claims to have found incontrovertible proof that the Ark of the Covenant has been found up a tree in Wales guarded by the direct descendants of Noah, who have used the Freemasons to hide the whereabouts of etc etc.

Anyhow : "Atlantis", by David Gibbins, in all good bookshops now.
Back to top
View user's profile 
Heckler20Offline
The Sockpuppet of
Joined: 16 Jul 2004
Total posts: 4001
Location: In the Nostril of The Crawling Chaos
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 11-10-2005 16:25    Post subject: Reply with quote

Peripart wrote:
than read another supposedly factual piece of claptrap writtan by someone who claims to have found incontrovertible proof that the Ark of the Covenant has been found up a tree in Wales guarded by the direct descendants of Noah, who have used the Freemasons to hide the whereabouts of etc etc..


*Heckler glances nervously at synopsis of proposed new book and curses beneath his breath*

How did you know?
Back to top
View user's profile 
tattootedOffline
Jersey Devil
Joined: 10 Aug 2002
Total posts: 167
Location: Doo, doo, doo, lookin' out my back door
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 12-11-2005 21:47    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I don't see what the fuss about Atlantis is at all: it's clearly an allegory, of the sort Plato uses all the time...So it seems a bit pointless to go on about.


Atlantis may well be an allegory, or a metaphor, but the meaning has changed since Platio's time. For those of us who don't have the financial wherewithal to organize a physical search, the quest to locate Atlantis is more about the investigation of "lost" cultures/places. Every distinct population group in the world has a at least one myth telling their specific version of this loss.

When you compare these myths, there are a lot of similar details, which leads the fortean in anyone to ask, could there have been a real-world event that these stories refer to? And if even one of these myths could be proven to refer to a specific real-world event (say Dogger Bank for example), then isn't it entirely possible that other lost cultures/places myths were based on real-life events/places as well?

Throw in the enticing idea that some of these lost cultures might have achieved a level of technology that wasn't supposed to have been possible at the time of their existence, then add the even more remote possiblity that some of these lost cultures/places existed at a time when no organized cultures were thought to exist. Who could resist the fortean allure?

In defense of the reality of Atlantis, I seem to remember reading that when describing its physical location and details, Plato was only quoting from another book, a travel guide maybe?, written by an Egyptian before Plato's lifetime.

My absolute favorite Atlantis theory is the one posited in the book When the Sky Fell: In Search of Atlantis. amazon link
The book links the disappearance of the fabled Atlantis with the theory of earth's crust displacement, and uses the latter, plus ancient sea maps, to show how Antartica is really lost Atlantis.

My mind boggled for days.


Last edited by tattooted on 15-11-2005 15:22; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile 
OldTimeRadioOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Total posts: 5532
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio USA
Age: 73
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 15-11-2005 07:56    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote] there is not one shred of evidence that atlantis ever existed - as some posters have said above [/quote]

If you mean that there was no one discrete island or "continent" which has come down to us under the name "Atlantis" you are almost without doubt absolutely correct.

But since the year 2000 evidence has been accumlulating on an almost monthly basis that there may very well have been a sort of "Atlanean Age" (for want of a better word), "kingdoms between the ice ages," of which we moderns have lost almost all record, and which went under the sea at the end of the most recent ice age.

Now I am certainly NOT talking about some Flash Gordon-style civilization with glassite towers and space ships. What we are talking about, rather, seems to have been what we might very well call a sort of "hyper-neolithic" world perhaps comparable to the early (pre-Dynastic) Egyptians or even the very early Greeks.

Not yet proved, of course - but both the evidence and the investigation is getting more and more intereewting.
Back to top
View user's profile 
WondrWmnOffline
Grey
Joined: 29 Aug 2005
Total posts: 21
Gender: Female
PostPosted: 18-11-2005 15:44    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello Everyone,

My take on Atlantis is that it's somewhere in the Atlantic.
But not to swtich topics...I think that Stonehenge is a representation of Atlantis and the reason I say this is because their are underwater ruins in Japan resembling the concentric outline of Stonehenge, which is also the supposed architecture of atlantis.

Take a look:

http://www.grahamhancock.com/images/gallery/japan-other/1-1.jpg

So, I feel that the theme of these concentric massive stones is based on perhaps an ancient design and that those who erected the stones are saying, "This is in memory of our ancestral home..." etc. But perhaps it was not called Atlantis at all.
But there are a lot of sunken islands. Check out the story of the island off the coast of India. It was massive. All that is left of it is SRI LANKA. I beleive it was called Kumari Kandam.

I am just saying there has got to be something to the Atlantis myth because it has survived for so long and there are more questions than answers.

WW
Back to top
View user's profile 
many_angled_oneOffline
Haunter of the Dark
Joined: 18 Jan 2002
Total posts: 429
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 22-11-2005 15:12    Post subject: Reply with quote

I do think there probably was an "Atlantian" age where relatively advanced kingdoms and communities were starting to form due to agriculture, herding etc before the rising seas and floods sweapt it all away forcing them to rebuild elsewhere and abandon their civilizations. Numerous abandoned structures underwater could be testament to this fact.

Unless Atlantis was a floating Island I dont think there is no way it could be in the middle of the Atlantic, there is simply no way that I know of that an island could have formed there. The continental structure just dosnt support it. All there is is the mid atlantic ridge, a chain of underwater volano's but that would not have been able to support a stable island structure that would have supported life.

Still "beyond the pillars of hercules" does not mean that it was straight out into the Atlantic. Maybe they were talking about that direction as in the route to it by sea on a ship. Maybe it was something like you sail out past Gibralter on a boat and then turn north or south, where Atlantis was really located. That would still be "beyond the pillars of hercules" and a much more likely location than the mid-atlantic.
In Wales/England there was the legend of Lyonesse, another kingdom which succumed to the sea and sank beneath the waves. For all we know these legends may have had the same basic source. Perhaps "Atlantis" was located somewhere nearer to Ireland or the UK, which would make more sense from a continental landmass view.
What do people think of that idea?
Back to top
View user's profile 
OldTimeRadioOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Total posts: 5532
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio USA
Age: 73
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 22-11-2005 22:31    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="many_angled_one"] "I do think there probably was an "Atlantian" age where relatively advanced kingdoms and communities were starting to form due to agriculture, herding etc before the rising seas and floods sweapt it all away forcing them to rebuild elsewhere and abandon their civilizations. Numerous abandoned structures underwater could be testament to this fact."

Exactly. But may I point out that there is no really good reason to automatically assume that civilizations were merely "starting to form" at this point?

In fact, why do we assume that the Cro-Magnon cavern artists of 35,000 years ago were truly the high point of civilization at that period? Isn't it possible that the Cro-Magnons were simply a bunch of disgrunted "hippies" or communalists hiding out in caves because they rejected the values of the majority civilization?

I make the above statement with tongue firmly in cheek, but it's a point at least worth discussing.
Back to top
View user's profile 
many_angled_oneOffline
Haunter of the Dark
Joined: 18 Jan 2002
Total posts: 429
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 23-11-2005 12:11    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, the archaeological evidence simply does not support the existance of any sort of widespread relatively advanced civilization 35,000 years ago. Some sort of evidence would have survived. No pottery, religeous idols, wheels, ornate metal weapons, well made stone architetcure and roads etc have come to light.

Of course thats if it was widespread, it if it was isolated in a very few places or something it could have easily slipped detected thus far, after so long there might not be any signs it was once there unless you dig deep.

I found this on a US university website about the last Ice age:
"Studying sea level changes in corals and organic materials from Vietnam and Barbados, scientists concluded that an influx of freshwater from the Antarctic 14,000 years ago increased sea levels by an average of 66 feet (20 meters) over 200 years"
Basically they think a huge ice sheet collapsed and meleted causing the currents to shift globally and temperatures to rise and the ice age to end about 10,000 years ago.

As far as I know Sumeria is the oldest properly advanced civilization from about 3100BC. Surely if the ice age ending and the huge flooding happened thousands of years before that there would have been some evidence of something before Sumeria if there had been civilizations destroyed by the flooding?

Still, there may be all that evidence and we just havent discovered it yet.
Back to top
View user's profile 
OldTimeRadioOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Total posts: 5532
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio USA
Age: 73
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 24-11-2005 04:41    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="many_angled_one"] "Well, the archaeological evidence simply does not support the existance of any sort of widespread relatively advanced civilization 35,000 years ago. Some sort of evidence would have survived."

WOULD IT? One of the longest-lasting artifacts of our own civilization is supposed to be the GLASS Coca-Cola bottle, which is estimated to have a life expectency (under optimum conditions) of about 8,000 years. But that's less than ONE-QUARTER of our 35,000 year period!

On the other hand, museum basements and private collections are full of "out of place artifacts" which seem to be both ancient and of unknown antiquity. Shouldn't they all be carefully re-examined now that we have reason to believe that there was at least SOME some sort of civiliization prior to 10,000 BC?

And:

"As far as I know Sumeria is the oldest properly advanced civilization from about 3100BC. Surely if the ice age ending and the huge flooding happened thousands of years before that there would have been some evidence of something before Sumeria if there had been civilizations destroyed by the flooding?"

It's really interesting that you use the example of Sumeria. The ancient Sumerian king-lists give a history dating back WELL beyond 35,000 years! Archaeologists and linguists specializing in the Mesopotamian-area have spent generations passing 'em around for laughs. So maybe it's time to actually STUDY the written evidence the Sumerians passed down to us....WITHOUT the smirks?
Back to top
View user's profile 
many_angled_oneOffline
Haunter of the Dark
Joined: 18 Jan 2002
Total posts: 429
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 24-11-2005 10:36    Post subject: Reply with quote

There are always artifacts that would easily survive 35,000 years in recognisable shape. Stonework, metalwork, pottery, cut gemstones etc. They could at least have found evidence of writing, mathematics etc on stonework, in cave paintings etc. But there is none of that antiquity. At least, that have been discovered as yet. Which of course does not rule out the *possibility* as lack of evidence for something does not necessarily rule out its existance. The mere fact that there are legends of a great flood all over the world lend credence to the fact there was probably some sort of civilizations then, and the stories of that time were passed down through the years.

Thats the thing, there ARE artifacts that come to light in odd places where there shouldnt be any, in rock/earth strata too old etc. This "Forbidden Archaeology" is fascinating. In general they just get laughed off or pigeonholed as anomalies and nothing else. They should be examined more thorougly and some kind of register kept of them so that we coudl see if there are any kidn fo trends or correlations. As it is they seem to be swept under the rug and fogotten.

As for the Sumerian King list it does tend itself towards being classified as a mix of some historical with some fantasy/mythology with kings reigning for sometimes thousands of years at a time. Of course that could just be exageration of previous kings turend into mythology, including some that claim to be before the flood. Which could have been exagerated from some kind of pre-flood oral history, we just dont know. The later list of kings gives a more "natural" length of their rule rather than hundreds or thousands of years.

see: http://www.jameswbell.com/a002kinglist.html
and: http://www.csun.edu/~hcfll004/sumking.html
Back to top
View user's profile 
OldTimeRadioOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Total posts: 5532
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio USA
Age: 73
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 25-11-2005 02:02    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="many_angled_one"] "There are always artifacts that would easily survive 35,000 years in recognisable shape."

You seem so absolutely certain of this. There are early mediaeval European inscriptions which are already difficult to read, not alone because of weathering, but also from the natural flow-rate of the stone; that is, the inscribed letters are closing of their own accord. How much do you think will be left to read in 35,000 years?

Some of the greatest cities of, say, 2000 BC are nothing more than featureless mud-flats today (and indeed for many centuries past) to other than the most trained, expert eyes. But how much could even those experts detect after a period eight and one half times that long?

No Coca-Cola bottles, that's for certain, and nothing else of that ilk.
Back to top
View user's profile 
many_angled_oneOffline
Haunter of the Dark
Joined: 18 Jan 2002
Total posts: 429
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 25-11-2005 11:11    Post subject: Reply with quote

mmm most of this is off topic but anyways...
I think its certainly possible there were pre-flood civilisations like Atlantis in existance - some things to think about:

I am sure that something of such a civilization would survive, because there are already artifacts of this kind of age in existance. Of course what shape they are in after so long would depend on location, climate, soil they are buried in etc. And as you point out, unless you happend to stumble across the site, during building works or something it would be unlikely you would recognise it as the site of an ancient city.

*goes net scavaging*

"Starting about 40,000 years ago with Homo sapiens sapiens, the archeological record evidences what can be termed a semiotic 'explosion,' a proliferation in human sign-making activities" (Givens 1978:161).
" . . . realistically carved animal and human forms appear in Germany's Vogelherd Cave (dating to 30,000 B.P.); as does the French figurine, the Venus of Laussel (dated to 22,000 B.P.). Such signs convey not only 'made by man' and 'man was here,' but rather more complicated messages: 'horse,' 'lion,' 'leopard,' 'bear,' 'bison,' 'mammoth,' 'human adult female,' and perhaps even such qualities as 'standing,' 'awake,' 'bowed head,' 'stretched neck,' and so on" (Givens 1982:161-62).

And I noticed this:
http://www.archaeologyonline.net/artifacts/gulf-of-cambay.html
Indian neolithic settlements that have been dated from about 7,500BC.
-So history is gradually winding back towards Atlantis-era civilizations and increasing the apparent odds of it. It is certainly possible no doubt about it though humans were still relatively low in numbers to form a largish proper civilization/city I think.

Since Homo Sapiens is supposidly in existance from 300,000BC or so, and the primary migration to Eurasia of modern Homo Sapiens Sapiens then took place about 30,000BC (of course Neandertals were there long before) then if there was a civilization from 35,000 it would have been in Africa (assuming it was a homo sapiens sapiens and not a different now extinct/absorbed offshoot).

also:
Hibbeln (1998) pointed out that Palaeolithic nutrition was probably low in saturated fats and high in polyunsaturated fats (the reverse is true today). Therefore, our ancestors consumed more omega-3 fatty acids (arachidonic acid, docosahexaenoic acid) and these are the major determinants of synaptic membrane fluidity. Hibbeln proposed that the move from being vegetarian and scavenging for meat to eating fish (rich in these fatty acids) promoted the sudden burst in intellectual/technological/cultural achievement about 45,000-35,000 years ago. Prior to that our ancestors (who had larger brains) had achieved relatively little.

They speculate that humans achieved advanced intelligence about 45k-35k years ago due to either activing a critical mass of population causing competition and innovation, change in diet, or a gene becoming present for the first time in the human brain 35,000 years ago/brain structure change. All theory why of course.
Back to top
View user's profile 
Quake42Offline
Warrior Princess
Joined: 25 Feb 2004
Total posts: 5607
Location: Over Silbury Hill, through the Solar field
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 25-11-2005 11:27    Post subject: Reply with quote

I read a good book a few years ago called Lost Civilisations of the Stone Age by Richard Rudgely. The arguments were not strictly conventional but were not Graham Hancockesque either!

Rudgely's argument was not that there was a lost "golden age" as such but rather that history and prehistory is not linear and that not all "civilisation" originated in the Near East. He showed evidence that relatively advanced civilisations existed 1000s of years ago in places like Japan, the Americas and Northen and Eastern Europe, but that they had decayed over time due to wars, natural disasters, climate change etc. I found it all pretty convincing and much easier to swallow than the Atlantean vision.
Back to top
View user's profile 
_TMS_Offline
profane, harsh, unharmonious
Joined: 23 Jul 2003
Total posts: 606
Location: Kusinagara
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 25-11-2005 14:00    Post subject: Reply with quote

From my understanding, migration out of the African continent began sometime as far back as 100,000BC.

Between 60-40,000BC, and in very broad terms, one group of peoples headed North into the Arabian peninsula, the other followed the Indian coastline as far as China, Japan and Australia.

The genetic evidence of this has been verified by the Hyderabad Centre for Cellular & Molecular Biology, who tested samples taken from the Andaman tribes, and discovered that their genetic make-up separated from the Indo-European geneline sometime between 100-50,000BC.

Studies of a cave system in peninsula India, specifically the Kurnool system, carbon dates awls, barbed arrowheads, spears and scrapers to the Late Pleistocene (about 50,000BC). This certainly demonstrates culture, if not high technology.

I think the "out of Africa" hypothesis still fits all of the evidence as and when it arrives. Also I like Geopaleontologistic terms such as "between 80 and 40,000 years ago". Like people sat around eating shellfish for 40,000 years. Wonderfully vague, and obviously possible to have quite a reasonable, solid cultural edifice within that sort of timeframe that is now utterly obliterated.

The Late Glacial Maxima (LGM) perios was marked by such severe alterations to the surface of the Earth (sea levels etc), that barring a miraculous "Rosetta stone" type civilisation emerging all we're really doing is making informed guesses.
Back to top
View user's profile 
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fortean Times Message Board Forum Index -> Earth Mysteries - the land All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Page 4 of 10

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group