Greek island hosts three-day conference on Atlantis myth

[Dover]

Greek island hosts three-day conference on Atlantis myth

An international congress devoted to the myth of the lost continent of Atlantis opened Monday on the Greek island of Milos, attended by seismologists, geologists, geographers, philosophers, historians and archaeologists from five existing continents. ..cont'd

http://www.physorg.com/news5068.html

[SteppingRazor]

1. What can I say, except

:banghead:


Seriously? A three-day meeting of seismologists, geologists, geographers, etc., and they do it so they can all discuss some ludicrous fiction?
Gawd. You'd think we'd bring these people together for some more-meaningful discourse.

[beam me up scottie]

2. Just say

WOO WOO ... WOOOOOOOOOOO WOOOOOOOOOOOO !!!

[Pepperbelly]

3. And you somehow know more than all of those combined people?

How can you so cavalierly dismiss this without so much as a speck of reasoning. Do you really believe that if those particular people believed as you believe they would have participated.

They should also include classical scholars. I'll take Homer's word for it in a heartbeat as compared to you or, as a matter of fact, about anyone living today.

They found Troy using Homer's descriptions which were absolutely dead on.

[Kraklen]

4. All of those combined people don't add up to much.

Perusing the submitted abstracts, it appears the conference is composed of actual archaeologists who've done work in Israel, Thera, Crete, Morocco, etc. and are suggesting that their place of work that Plato was describing. And a whole bunch of "independent researchers" (lol) and "former highschool teachers" who are likely presenting the crackpot stuff.

You'll take Homer's word in a heart beat? You know, Scylla is a real place too, but I'm pretty sure there aren't giant women with six wolves instead of legs gaurding the place.

[Pepperbelly]

5. At this point ...

we have Homer who has a very good track record as a historian. You can choose to retrieve your information astronomically if you wish but for my money, Homer knows far more about the classical world than you.

But hey ... believe what you want.

[Kraklen]

6. Homer was an epic poet.

Not a historian. And that's assuming he even existed, which is highly debatable. Homer wrote about cyclopses, enchantresses, gods, sea nymphs, literally invincible heroes, monster whirlpools, epic wars between frogs and mice, and harpies. He set it in real world places, like Greece and Troy. Kind of like how Frank L. Baum set "The Wizard of Oz" in Kansas. That doesn't mean there was actually a place called Oz and the wicked witch of the west.

I choose to retrieve my information via imperical evidence, not based on obvious works of fiction. Homer may have known more about the classical world than I do, assuming he existed, but it sure looks like I know more about Homer than you do.

[Pepperbelly]

7. hardly ...

he is sole source on much. And what is truly amusing is that each time he is completely accurate, it is dismissed. Skeptics believed that the Trojan War was mythical until Schliemann found Troy.

Of course, Homer is not alone in his discussion of Atlantis. Even Plato noted a war between Atlantis and Athens. Plutarch also described the location relative to the pillars of Hercules.

Snark all you want but your opinion does not counter the history from the time. Maybe they were tripping. Maybe not. All have proven accurate to some degree. Things at the end of the Greek dark ages (roughly 8 or 10 BCE) are a little dicey. Things were in flux. But to snidely dismiss the writings of contemporaneous writers does nothing to serve knowledge.

[Kraklen]

8. LOL. Homer never mentions Atlantis.

And what, besides the existence of Troy, was accurate about Homer? Like I said, it's calling "The Wizard of Oz" accurate because there's actually a place called Kansas.

[Pepperbelly]

9. in the Odyssey ...

at the far confines of "Oceana", beyond the Pillars of Hercules. He also wrote meaphorically about the Phaeacian "Sons of God". No, it is nothing like that at all.

What it is is second guessing from afar without even the courtesy of suggesting that perhaps time will pass and something will develp that might prove conclusively one way or the other.

[Kraklen]

10. LOL. Oceana... Plato's Atlantis... same thing. Meaphorically.

:eyes:

"What it is is second guessing from afar without even the courtesy of suggesting that perhaps time will pass and something will develop that might prove conclusively one way or the other."

Something will develop? You mean like sonar?



Oh, look at that! No lost continent. What a conclusion!

[Pepperbelly]

11. LOL

There are many, many possibilities of Atlantis on already-discovered archeological sites. Pick whichever one you want. Cases can be made for many of them.

Some that exactly fit Plato's description. No death rays or anything but the physicalness matches. Have fun with snark but ...

there are cases to be made and the last thing the topic deserves is contempt.

[muriel_volestrangler]

12. 'Exactly'? No, nowhere matches his description 'exactly'

Various places match bits of it. None of them match closely, because that would require a huge island (almost a continent) to disappear. That's the difference between Troy and Atlantis - one describes a city that would be physically possible, one is a fantasy.

[Maple]

14. But you folks all believe

your underarm deodorant spray puts holes in the ozone layer.

And that global warming is all caused by the few humans we have on this planet.

And that 'natural' cures like plants and herbs are better than anything that comes out of a lab.

Tsk tsk tsk...such open minds we have on here. NOT.

Guess you're all still ready to burn heretics at the stake hmmm?

[beam me up scottie]

15. Actually, you're

addressing an atheist, much worse than a heretic.

And using science to understand our world is hardly the same thing as "believing" in myths.

[Kraklen]

16. Well now to be fair...

It was scientists who realized it was CFCs that were causing the ozone hole.

It was scientists who first noticed and described global warming.

It's the scientific method that determines which plants will help you, and which plants will kill you faster than a sucking chest wound.

[Maple]

17. actually I was addressing ALL of you

especially those that confuse intellectual pretentiousness with actual 'science'

Scientists are supposed to have an open mind, and not just put their noses in the air and harumph at new possibilities.

No wonder they're so often wrong. Vested interests with closed minds.

SHALL WE JUST LOOK AT 'EXPERT' OPINION?

"The demonstration that no possible combination of known substances, known forms of machinery and known forms of force, can be united in a practical machine by which man shall fly long distances through the air, seems to the writer as complete as it is possible for the demonstration of any physical fact to be."

Simon Newcomb, a prestigious American astronomer, wrote several engaging popular books about science. One was "The Flying Machine."

"This 'telephone' has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a means of communication. The device is inherently of no value to us."
Western Union Internal Memo 1876

"the wireless music box has no imaginable commercial value. Who would pay for a message sent to nobody in particular?"
David Sarnoff rejecting pleas to invest in radio, 1920

"Who the hell wants to hear actor's talk?"
Harry M. Warner, Warner Bros, 1927

"Television will never be a serious competitor for radio because people must sit and keep their eyes glued on a screen; the average American family hasn't the time for it."
New York Time article, 1939

"I think there is a world market for maybe 5 computers."
Thomas Watson, chairman, IBM 1943

"There is no reason for any individuals to have a computer in the home"
Ken Olsen, chairman Digital Equipment Corp 1977

"The Internet will collapse in 1996"
Bob Metcalf Ethernet inventor, and 3Com founder 1995.

[Kraklen]

18. None of those are scientists.

With the exception of Newcomb, who appears to be taken out of context; and arguably Metcalf, who also appears to be taken out of context.

The rest are businessmen who have a responsibility to protect their investors.

[Maple]

19. Scientists have been just as wrong m'dear

I can do a post on them if you like...although you'll no doubt then nitpick as to who exactly is a 'scientist' according to your particular tunnel views.

Perhaps you could instead turn your attention to the fact that the PURSUIT of knowledge....not the canning and sealing and hiding of it...should be the hallmark of science.

EVERYTHING is open to investigation. Not just whatever is currently 'socially acceptable' in your culture.

So far Americans have turned away from evolution, stem cells and cloning...what's your next 'closed subject?'

[Kraklen]

20. They sure can be.

Which is why it's best to rely on the scientific method on not individual scientists. Even Newton wasted time on that alchemy nonsense, as shown in that other thread.

"Perhaps you could instead turn your attention to the fact that the PURSUIT of knowledge....not the canning and sealing and hiding of it...should be the hallmark of science."

Indeed. Which is why science revolves around new research, not senseless repetition of old experiments.

"EVERYTHING is open to investigation. Not just whatever is currently 'socially acceptable' in your culture."

Sure, assuming they haven't already been investigated and proven false.

"So far Americans have turned away from evolution, stem cells and cloning..."

Yeah, it's a damn shame there's so many pseudoscience nutjobs out there. People that think Evolution is "open to investigation," and "crop circles might be caused by UFOs too." Oh well. At least there are places where science is growing and not shrinking.

"what's your next 'closed subject?"

Pardon?

[Maple]

21. I don't recall anyone mentioning

'senseless repetition of old experiments'...although cold fusion has certainly benefitted by going over it once again hmmm?

You know...that 'already investigated and proven false' crap?

Pseudo science comes from pretentious intellectuals...those folks who insist they know best...and who close the doors on entire fields of study because they think it somehow 'beneath them'

Well guess what toots...it ain't.

Maybe that's why other countries are leaving the US in the dust.

Sheer senseless arrogance on your part.

[beam me up scottie]

23. So we're being left in the dust because we don't

study astrology at MIT or allow chiropractors to advertise that they cure diseases ?

[Maple]

24. No, because you have closed minds

and live in the Dark Ages scientifically and culturally.

And are arrogant about doing so, at that.

But then, you Murkins 'know best' I'm sure. Cough.

[beam me up scottie]

27. Really ?

So they give degrees in pseudo sciences where you're from ?
And how do you know our nationalities, Madam Fufu lend you her crystal ball today ?

[Maple]

29. I guess you get to determine this stuff

seeing as the rest of the world has been making scientific advances while you're still debating evolution in the US. Cough.

[beam me up scottie]

30. Say, that was a great impersonation

of a freeper talking to a Frenchman.
Been practicing up on your ignorance, haven't you ?
:applause:

[Maple]

31. Sorry sweetie

but anyone that disagrees with you isn't automatically a 'freeper' by definition.

See...there's that arrogance again. You really have to work on that.

[beam me up scottie]

34. You're a quick study, or are you ?

No, disagreement does not a freeper make, but these statements are very good imitations of their tactics:

" because you have closed minds
and live in the Dark Ages scientifically and culturally
And are arrogant about doing so, at that.
But then, you Murkins 'know best' I'm sure."

"as the rest of the world has been making scientific advances while you're still debating evolution"

Now, please show me the arrogant comments I have made about your citizens.

[Maple]

36. Well since I'm Canadian

something you could have easily discovered from my profile, I have zip interest in American rightwing Freepers or their supposed 'tactics'

I have even less interest in your leftwing political correctness...or country of origin.

You have made many arrogant statements about knowledge and science...I am arguing for open mindedness.

You might try it some time.

[beam me up scottie]

39. Open mindedness ?

You've done nothing but insult us since you posted on this thread.

And since you weren't content to insult and attack other members, you insulted American scientists and citizens as well.

Repeatedly.

I hope they don't delete your posts.

24. No, because you have closed minds
and live in the Dark Ages scientifically and culturally.
And are arrogant about doing so, at that.
But then, you Murkins 'know best' I'm sure. Cough.

29. I guess you get to determine this stuff
seeing as the rest of the world has been making scientific advances while you're still debating evolution in the US. Cough.

2. Civility: Treat other members with respect. Do not post personal attacks against other members of this discussion forum.
3. Content: Do not post messages that are inflammatory, extreme, divisive, incoherent, or otherwise inappropriate. Do not engage in anti-social, disruptive, or trolling behavior. Do not post broad-brush, bigoted statements.

[Maple]

43. I'm discussing closed minds

If you see yourself in that...it's hardly my problem.

And if you think waving a flag at me will solve scientific ignorance...it kinda shows you the basis of the snobbery doesn't it?

There are brilliant American scientists...as there are brilliant scientists in every country in the world.

Let's not forget that fact, and just dismiss other people's inquiries into a mystery, out of hand, because you think you know best...waving that flag and all.

[beam me up scottie]

44. How do you know I'm American ?

[Maple]

46. Your profile doesn't state it

and if I told you how...you'd only be miffed anyway. :D

[beam me up scottie]

48. Really ?

So you've seen my birth certificate and know which country I was born in ?
Madam Fufu is much more powerful than I thought.

[Maple]

50. Attitude my dear fellow, attitude

It always shows...just like breeding.

Whatever your birth certificate says.

But do say hello to Mdme Fufu for me would you?

There's a good chap.

[beam me up scottie]

54. I guess breeding matters if you're a poodle.

Not that a person of good breeding would insult the citizens of an entire country because they are in a snit because some don't believe in Atlantis.
Beliefs are such fragile things.

[Maple]

56. No, it matters less then

because all dogs growl and whine.

With humans I expect more civility, and less braggadocio

Give it a rest on the 'insult' line...articles on the decline of American science and knowledge are posted at this site on a regular basis.

Beliefs are indeed fragile things. Innate superiority is just such a belief.

Knowledge however is not.

Gain some.

[beam me up scottie]

59. I did.

Atlantis is a myth except in your fantasies.
Get over it and move on.
I have.


Now, if you'll excuse me, I have a thread that's actually about science to tend to.

:evilgrin:

[Maple]

60. We aren't discussing fantasies

Yours of superiority, or mine...of openmindedness on DU.

We were discussing a lack of subject knowledge. Yours.

Um...'beam me up Scottie' being that well-known scientific phrase from that well-known scientific show, right?

Cuz we sure wouldn't want to promote any fiction or fantasies on here now, would we.

[Emperor_Norton_II]

22. Meanwhile, back on the original topic....

Once again, nobody has actually found a city, or the wreckage thereof, that matches the description of Atlantis as given by Plato. The society Plato described seems similar to the Minoan civilization, which existed far enough back that it was bordering on legendary in Plato's time.

Googling up on the Cyprus claim, it's interesting on face value but I'd like to see some more detailed sonar scans of the seamount before I start saying it's Atlantis. Also, I'm wondering about the age of the find; the last time the Mediterranean basin was sealed off from the ocean predates *all* known civilization elsewhere in the region. So there are a lot of questions to be answered before we start waving the "ATLANTIS!" flag around.

Though I admit, if they end up finding something like this:



I could be happy. :)

[Maple]

25. Yes, lots of questions have to be asked

....not stifled.

[Emperor_Norton_II]

26. But if those questions come back with negative answers

Does that qualify as "stifling?" If peer reviews of the evidence in, say, the Cyprus find comes back and says that nope, it's not Atlantis, does that stifle debate?

[Maple]

28. Then you ask them again later

when we have more knowledge and better methods.

Same as we do with everything else.

All we are doing is eliminating possibilities here.

That doesn't mean something, once known as Atlantis, didn't exist.

It just means THIS isn't it.

Even Antarctica has been mentioned as a possibility ya know.

[Emperor_Norton_II]

32. Um

In the end, if you can't find the damn thing you have to start considering the possibility that it doesn't exist.

And Antarctica's been under the ice for 30 million years. I'm gonna go out on a limb here and suggest that a human city named Atlantis there is... highly unlikely.

Unless of course you think that the producers of Stargate got their history right, in which case... um, well... look over there! :yoiks:

[Maple]

33. And when we GET to the end

that's fine.

In the meantime, we keep searching.

I'm sure you're aware of the apocryphal stories about both the Roman bureaucrat, and later the American patent officer in the 1800s who insisted that everything that could be invented...had been invented.

There's a moral there ya know.

The story about Antarctica didn't come from Stargate.

Stargate did a story about the theory.

Perhaps you could remember that not everything comes from TV shows?

Bad place for science...or knowledge in general.

Does good 'missing blonde/shark stories'...that's about it

[Emperor_Norton_II]

37. Once again, um.

We really are pretty damn close to the end of the chain here. Until the Cyprus find, the consensus on Atlantis was that it was a fable based on the Minoan culture on Crete (one of the oldest civilizations in the Med) and stories of the eruption of Thera. That in and of itself is a pretty nice pedigree for the Atlantis story.

And again, Antarctica has been under the ice for millions of years. That's as in "predating humans as a species." So again, chances of there being a city there == highly unlikely.

[Maple]

40. We are nowhere close to the end

but YOU are coming perilously close to this attitude:

"Inventions have long since reached their limit, and I see no hope for further developments," Roman engineer Julius Sextus Frontinus, A.D. 10.

And,the director of the US patent Office: in 1899 he assured President McKinley that "everything that can be invented has already been invented." :D

Many a 'concensus' has already been thrown into the dumpster.

Especially lately, and especially in archaeology...currently a 'hot' science...and just when we thought everything was settled to everyone's satisfaction too hmmm?

So let's just hold off on the tut-tutting, shall we?

We are a long, loooooong way from being lords of the universe.

We haven't yet BEGUN to discover anything. Science is in it's infancy...matter of fact, it's still at the embryo stage.

A hodge podge of unconnected dots in fact...and we all know how unconnected dots can trip you up.

[Emperor_Norton_II]

47. Qe're not talking about science in general, or archaeology in general

We're talking about the Atlantis story. Let's stay focused, okay?

No evidence of Atlantis in the historical record appears before the Timeaus and Critas. If Atlantis was half as powerful as Plato described it, somebody would remember their empire. Even as a half-forgotten legend. So far, nada.

There are also no records in Egypt - you know, where the Atlantis story was supposed to have originated. Outside Plato, there is no evidence that the damn city ever existed.

People have claimed sites for the city in the past, but have never come up with any good evidence. When Schliemann claimed he found Troy, he dug and found artifacts. That's why we accept Schliemann's claim. So far, nobody's dug or dredged anything like ruins out of any of the suggested locations of Atlantis.

[Maple]

51. Key words here are:

'so far'

Patience grasshopper.

Surely you aren't that complete a product of the 30 second commercial are you?

[Emperor_Norton_II]

53. Let's not get snippy.

"So far" includes well more than a century of people looking for this thing.

"So far" includes no evidence whatsoever that the city of Atlantis ever existed.

You can chase up blind alleys for years, but in the end you're still just chasing up a blind alley. I mean, when you're casting as far from Greece as Antarctica to find this thing... maybe you've got to start entertaining the notion that it's not out there.

[Maple]

57. Golly, more than a century?

We spent more time than that inventing the printing press or paved roads.

Look, if you want to close doors, go right ahead.

Just don't expect everyone else to do the same.

Human history is full of examples of the masses calling one person 'crazy'...over every new discovery and invention.

Luckily, not everyone gave up the search for new knowledge, like you.

[Emperor_Norton_II]

61. Yes, more than a century

And people spent more time than that on pholgiston and the humors theory of medicine. And actually, once the press and paved roads were developed, they spread pretty quickly, if unevenly.

Yeah, they laughed at Galileo, and they laughed at Einstein, but they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.

I guess I don't get why you're so wound tightly about Atlantis of all things. If they find it, great. One more Greek city at the bottom of the ocean. If they don't, oh well. The evidence so far says that it ain't there, and nobody's come up with evidence to the contrary. So, what's with all the Moral Outrage and weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth about the Death of Science, huh?

[Maple]

62. Well actually the Romans had

paved roads about 2000 years before anyone else figured it out.

Even with examples right in front of them.

You think Bozo the Clown was a scientist?

Do you often have dizzy spells like this?

The scientific method is a search for knowledge...that means 'searching'....which means you won't always get the results you want. That doesn't end the search...it just eliminates another possibility.

I have very little interest in Atlantis...I was just amazed that people would nip on here right away to let us know that in THEIR opinion no such place ever existed.

Never mind that 99% of the planet is still a mystery to humankind...THEY just KNOW it didn't happen.

Drawing conclusions ahead of time isn't very scientific.

We don't know that it was Greek, or a city, or is on the bottom of the ocean...all we have is a few tantalizing lines, and a myth...which like most myths is symbolic not literal.

Not the comic book version at any rate.

Perhaps some openmindedness on your part is in order hmmm?

[Emperor_Norton_II]

63. "symbolic, not literal"

And more than a few tantalizing lines, btw. The entire record of Atlantis comes from Plato's dialogues Timeaus and Critas. We're not dealing with a half-dozen snippets of an ancient play, these are near-complete parts of some of the most famous philosophical documents in the classical world.

If Atlantis isn't a city on an island that is now submerged, then Plato's dialogues are completely worthless as a guide to finding whatever Atlantis "really" is. And since Plato is the primary source on Atlantis (Period. Full stop. End of discussion. All the details on Atlantis come from Plato, okay? This is undisputed by everybody involved in the debate.) if we can't trust his account then we can't find the city.

Homer described Troy as a walled city sitting on a hill before a broad plain on the coast with a river running between it and the sea. In the years since, the river's dried up and the sea's receded, but the ruins were still on a hill before a broad plain, just like as described in the poem. If I claimed to have found Troy on a mountain pass somewhere in the Turkish highlands, you'd start measuring me for a jacket that's all sleeves. And rightfully so.

Once we start throwing out the primay source in our quest, then the quest becomes meaningless. We might as well claim Atlantic City is the location of Atlantis, for all that matches with our source material.

[Maple]

64. No lawn ornaments or pyramids, no

And we have heard of Plato here in the hinterlands, thanx.

Plato's dialogues were not meant to be an atlas however, or some kind of handy dandy road map that would make it easy to find. Sit-com syndrome again.

Homer and Plato were two different people...that would be why locations are written differently. And no one believed Troy existed either until it was found.

And so far, Plato is one mention we've found...but then there are tons of Greek manuscripts that haven't been read yet...or found for that matter. Back rooms of museums are full of such stuff. He made references to other things we haven't found either.

Heck we don't even know everything there is to know about the pyramids, and we've studied them for a couple of centuries now.

Even dinosaurs...which are pretty big...are a recent discovery in history, and we're finding new types all the time.

There are even some new claims about Michaelangelo and the Sistine chapel...and people have been looking up at that for a long time. A little candle soot goes a long way apparently.

Maybe far-fetched, maybe reasonable...but dismissing it out of hand because it doesn't have a big red X marked on one page we've discovered in an ancient manuscript....well, just a leetle premature I'd say.

Stop slamming doors...you'll never learn anything that way.

[Emperor_Norton_II]

65. I am in awe

No, really. You just sort of randomly wave your hand and poof! Atlantis can be whatever we want it to be, primary sources be damned.

The dialogues - the primary source for all information about Atlantis - tell us that we're looking for a city on an island that sank. It was very accurately described; the three rings of the city seperated by canals, with the acropolis mount in the center featuring the royal palace and the temple to Poseidon.

This isn't about being an atlas, or a roadmap. This is a description of the thing everybody's looking for. If that description is untrustworthy, then Atlantis will never be found. Period. Full stop. End of story. The city could be on the coast, it could be on an island, hell it could be something that's already been catalogued and we'd never know it was Atlantis because it doesn't fit the description given by Plato.

I don't know if you're being deliberately obtuse here or not, I really don't.

[Maple]

66. Of course you are

You've apparently never learned to strike a balance.

Of course you don't have to believe every wild tabloid story that comes down the pike...but you don't have to dismiss items out of hand because they're not right in front of your nose and obvious to everyone, either.

It could have been artistic license on Plato's part. Completely fictional. Or it could have been a very old story even in his era...long since exaggerated and embroidered out of whack, so we are getting an 'ancient Greek supermarket tabloid' version of it.

Or it may have been from an even older civilization...already long gone, and nothing to do with Greece, thousands of miles away in fact...but updated and added to over millennia. There were, after all, many civilizations before Greece. Western history books tend to start in that country...but that's not remotely accurate.

The point is, we don't know. We may never know. But we should keep the main elements of the story in mind.

And not just scoff at something because it doesn't fit into our current worldview.

We've now found thousands of things we had scoffed at as rumors and fairytales...you'd think we'd know better by now.

[Emperor_Norton_II]

67. Strike a balance?

In this case, I'd say the balance is between keeping an open mind and gullibility.

If Atlantis looks nothing like the description handed down in Plato - and, I remind you for something like the fifth time, nowhere else in any other collection of myths from the region - then we'll never find it because we can't recognize it. If you go looking for a horse and find one cleverly disguised as a Cape buffalo...

As for older civilizations, we know that civilizations tend to spread. Especially imperial civilizations like Atlantis is purported to have been. We've found Neolithic villages and cities all around Eurasia, we've found Bronze Age villages and cities built near or on top of the Neolithic ones, Iron Age stuff from Rome - hell, Rome left shit all over the place - but nothing that could be marked as predating any of that. If Atlantis existed before that period, it tided up remarkably well for an early culture.

[Maple]

68. I believe I just said that

you know...it was the bit about the middle ground between supermarket tabloids, and 'there has to be a big red X on the ground at my feet or it doesn't exist.'

Atlantis may look very much as Plato said...however he also said the story came from Solon and Egypt. So we might be looking in the wrong area entirely.

It's a story he was passing on...parts of it may be true, parts of it may have been embroidered during the story's travels.

We've found many things predating the era you're discussing. As I've said earlier, archaeology is the hot science now.

Footprints found in Mexico, which throw the Bering strait theory into a cocked hat given their age, were in the news this week.

Satellite photos just revealed a whole series of identical henges in Germany...not visible from the ground, and previously unknown.

We've now found factories and production lines from thousands of years ago.

And you may remember that Atlantis was supposed to have gone kablooie in some major cataclysmic event...so you aren't going to find books lying around marked 'from the library in downtown Atlantis'.

Like I said...it may be complete fiction...or it may contain, as all myths do, some fragment of truth...but we'll never know if we just dismiss it because it's not easily found.

The tsunami at Xmas time revealed sculptures of a civilization off the coast of India, long rumored to be there, and now revealed.

Atlantis, or at least the basis of the story of Atlantis, could be revealed in much the same way some day...not in such a devastating way I hope...but since we have no idea what's on the ocean floor in most places, anything is possible.

We know very little about this planet...both today, and in history.

[Emperor_Norton_II]

69. Here's the thing

We don't have an Egyptian record. At all. No mentions of any great empire that ran riot over the known world that then vanished. And the Egyptians, having played with foreign invaders on a regular basis since day one, kept pretty good records of things like that.

This does not speak well of Atlantis' basis in truth.

It's late, and I'm tired, so I'm going to get blunt. Waving the "we don't know enough!" flag around like it settles the argument demonstrates a lack of knowledge on the subject and an assumption that nobody else has ever actually put more thought to this than you have. Especially when it comes to chasing myths like Atlantis.

You are also horribly incorrect when it comes to "factories and production lines" from thousands of years ago, unless you're equating cottage industry to a Ford plant. Which doesn't pass the laugh test.

Okay? End of discussion. You're so horribly open-minded that your brain is leaking out your ears, and I'm tired of trying to explain a century's worth of investigation to somebody who shake the magic doubt wand and make it all go away without having to think about contradictory evidence.

[Kraklen]

72. I for one...

would like to know more about these factories and assembly lines of the Ancients.

[beam me up scottie]

38. Ah, more insults.

Quite incapable of discussing anything without those, aren't you ?

And we're arrogant ?

[Maple]

41. Arguing for openmindedness

could only be seen as an insult, by a basically arrogant person.

Get over yourself.

[beam me up scottie]

42. No, your attacks

can be seen as an insult.
I've posted them above if you want to reread them and check DU rules.

[Maple]

45. Mmmm no they aren't

Disagreeing with someone is not attacking them. It's just disagreeing.

I'm frequently accused of being a Freeper, and I believe that's against the rules as well.

Never stops anyone though, when they don't like my disagreeing.

I just don't complain about it

I'm arguing for openmindedness regarding knowledge.

You're pretending to be insulted is just an effort to distract from the topic here...openmindedness on an ancient mystery people are interested in.

[muriel_volestrangler]

70. You're asking us to have an open mind

on how an island in the Atlantic "larger than Libya and Asia combined" (taking the definitions of those in Plato's day, that's still pretty damn large) could be swallowed up by the sea in one catastrophic event? And that we still haven't found where this huge Atlantic island was? I'd remind you that the post I replied to said 'exact' matches for Atlantis had been found. It's no use pretending that it was some claim that Plato was embrodering on a folk memory. I even said "various places match bits of it. None of them closely". But to you, that's a closed mind, is it?

I can't for the life of me understand why you're chuntering on about the ozone layer and natural 'cures'. I think it's very small minority who actually holds all 3 beliefs you gave. And yet you come up with "you folks all believe". Please define us folks. I'd like to know what stereotype I belong to, in your mind.

[Astarho]

13. Sounds cool

Atlantis, or myths like it (lost or destroyed cities/civilizations), seem to be universal. Many cultures have a similar legend, some likely based in fact.

[Maple]

35. It IS cool

Myths are often embroidered stories about real events.

We seem to take everything literally these days, when metaphor might be more useful.

Everyone is so keen to play skeptic on items they consider 'politically incorrect' that they forget time, and human memory, alter basic truths. Sometimes beyond recognition. That's why we have brains and technology.

You'd think we'd know better by now than to dismiss everything we don't like, as fable. Must be the sit-com syndrome again...everything solved in 30 minutes...or less with commercials.

[Desertrose]

71. and don't forget our human penchant for rewriting history

This is something that has been going on for ages...although I must say that the neocons have taken it to a fine art in recent years!

I often wonder what the "myths" will be like when referring to our current era.....

[Astarho]

73. exactly

I don't know where the literalism came from, but it seems to have combined with black/white thinking and the sitcom syndrome (I like that term).

It's something that must be sifted through (and that is the fun part, IMHO) and sort out what is fact from what is exaggeration (the story of Ubar is a good example)

It's like the people who insist Malory is the true and correct story of King Arthur and then ignore everything else from Lucius Artorius Castus to the Pa Gur. I've met people who (adamantly) tell me I'm wrong when I suggest Arthur could have been a Roman.

[beam me up scottie]

49. Why was this posted in the Science Forum ?

I thought there was a group for stories like this.

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[beam me up scottie]

55. Oh, here we go!

[Name removed]

58. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Dover]

74. Seafloor survey buoys Atlantis claim

Seafloor survey buoys Atlantis claim
Andreas von Bubnoff


Earthquake debris shores up evidence for lost city.
© Nature

"There occurred violent earthquakes and floods. And in a single day and night of misfortune... the island of Atlantis disappeared in the depths of the sea."

This account, written by Plato more than 2,300 years ago, set scientists on the trail of the lost city of Atlantis. Did it ever exist? And if so, where was it located, and when did it disappear?

In a recent paper in Geology, Marc-Andre Gutscher of the European Institute for Marine Studies in Plouzané gives details of one candidate for the lost city: the submerged island of Spartel, west of the Straits of Gibraltar.

The top of this isle lies some 60 metres beneath the surface in the Gulf of Cadiz, having plunged beneath the waves at the end of the most recent ice age as melting glaciers caused the sea level to rise.

Geological evidence has shown that a large earthquake and a tsunami hit this island some 12,000 years ago, at roughly the location and time indicated in Plato's writings..cont'd

http://www.nature.com/news/2005/050718/full/050718-13.html

[greyl]

75. "Not a Bronze Age culture as described by Plato"

http://www.nature.com/news/2005/050718/full/050718-13.html

"...researchers managed to agree on 24 criteria that a geographical area must satisfy in order to qualify as a site where Atlantis could have existed. The place must have accommodated such oddities as hot springs, northerly winds, elephants, enough people for an army of 10,000 chariots, and a ritual of bull sacrifice.

At present there are half a dozen candidates for Atlantis's location, each one with its own shortcomings. Some say that settling on a final answer may prove impossible.

"The geophysics is well done, the geology excellent," says geologist Floyd McCoy of the University of Hawaii, Kaneohe, of Gutscher's study. "But most of Plato's description of Atlantis is so ambiguous and open to interpretation. With the information we have from the ancient text, it may never be found, if indeed it ever existed."