"If you are like most Americans, chances are, you probably believe that Atlantis or another civilization like it once existed. A survey conducted by Chapman University in October 2014 found that, at that time, roughly 63% of people in the United States agreed or strongly agreed with the statement “ancient, advanced civilizations, such as Atlantis, once existed.” I am pretty sure that Atlantis existed in one way or an…
> We found that the the Great Flood in the book of Genesis existed Floods are certainly a thing that happens in nature - especially to the flood plains that surrounded large rivers like the Euphrates before dams were a thing. Are you referring to a specific event? Or just floods in general?
The Truth about Atlantis (2019)
21–30 of 149 posts
Re: The Truth about Atlantis (2019)
#22"If you are like most Americans, chances are, you probably believe that Atlantis or another civilization like it once existed. A survey conducted by Chapman University in October 2014 found that, at that time, roughly 63% of people in the United States agreed or strongly agreed with the statement “ancient, advanced civilizations, such as Atlantis, once existed.” I am pretty sure that Atlantis existed in one way or an…
Can you elaborate what you mean by the "Great Flood"? There's certainly evidence for regional megafloods, but I'm not aware of any professional geologic body that recognizes what most people mean when they say "Great Flood", i.e. a single planet-wide flood around that time period.
Re: The Truth about Atlantis (2019)
#23I thought everyone knew that Atlantis is just another name for the Richat Structure.
It's not just another name for that, though. That's in a very, very wrong location to be the source of Atlantis myths. If Atlantis had a real basis, which it doesn't, it would probably be the pre-glacial-retreat land off the coast of England like Doggerland or off the west coast of Ireland.
The theory comes with several hypotheses which have not been validated or invalidated yet. to invalidate the theory would require significant (strategically chosen) archaeological surveys of the Sahara and the richat structure. The theory is falsifiable, and has not been falsified yet. That doesn't make the theory of Atlantis true, it just makes it undetermined.
Re: The Truth about Atlantis (2019)
#24I could take this article more seriously if it were to credibly refute the possibility that the capital of Atlantis was the richat structure, and that the empire of Atlantis covered the saharah, with a port of entry just outside the straight of Gibraltar. I think its accepted that ~13,000 years ago the Sahara was lush forests and grasslands, and around that time there was a significant meteor strike (or several) that…
Is it Atlantis? Maybe not, but there a number of stiking coincidences.
Re: The Truth about Atlantis (2019)
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
Achilles was bathed by his mom in the river Styx, not in the blood of a dragon. I still don't follow your point though.
[flagged]
Re: The Truth about Atlantis (2019)
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not just another name for that, though. That's in a very, very wrong location to be the source of Atlantis myths. If Atlantis had a real basis, which it doesn't, it would probably be the pre-glacial-retreat land off the coast of England like Doggerland or off the west coast of Ireland.
The relevant (unvalidated) theory is that Atlantis was an empire that covered north western Africa (Morocco, sharah, etc) - at least, and which had a port city around where Tangier is today, and a capital city at the richat structure (pre-younger dryas). The theory comes with several hypotheses which have not been validated or invalidated yet. to invalidate the theory would require significant (strategically chosen)…
Re: The Truth about Atlantis (2019)
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Richat Structure is the result of natural geological processes. Other than having concentric circles, it doesn't match Plato's description of Atlantis, and there is no evidence that any large city was ever there.
"The Richat Structure is the result of natural geological processes." - this is irrelevant "Other than having concentric circles, it doesn't match Plato's description of Atlantis" - in what way? Be specific. "and there is no evidence that any large city was ever there." - lol, there has never been a thorough archeological survey, and the surveys that have been done have turned up evidence that points to noteworthy hu…
I think OP mentions this due to your mention of meteor impacts
> What about the tens of thousands of axe heads found all concentrated in one spot?
According to Wikipedia, Stone Age axes. It seems reasonable to believe that the site provided easy access for material
Re: The Truth about Atlantis (2019)
#28https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m001c6t3
The conclusion is similar to OP: Plato had way too much fun making up the story.
Originally it was meant to be a critique of democracy as practiced by the seafaring populace of Athens.
There is also nice reading list provided there.
Re: The Truth about Atlantis (2019)
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
The relevant (unvalidated) theory is that Atlantis was an empire that covered north western Africa (Morocco, sharah, etc) - at least, and which had a port city around where Tangier is today, and a capital city at the richat structure (pre-younger dryas). The theory comes with several hypotheses which have not been validated or invalidated yet. to invalidate the theory would require significant (strategically chosen)…
I would say Atlantis is like a slightly more falsifiable and slightly more plaudible version of Russell's Teapot. We have zero reason to think Atlantis existed and zero indications of it. Is it possible that there was an advanced civilization that somehow left virtually zero evidence? Yes, but why? There are plenty of much less advanced civilizations which left plenty of trace and while we cannot know exactly how man…
Falsifying a vague hand-wavy theory of Atlantis, I agree with you. But the specific theory that Richat structure was the home of a large city 13,000 years ago that was destroyed in a flood? I wholeheartedly disagree. It's falsifiable and probably could be done with less than 1/100th the archeological investment that's been made into Egypt.
"Is it possible that there was an advanced civilization that somehow left virtually zero evidence? Yes, but why?"
Several cataclysmic meteorite strikes that ended the ice age, triggered younger dryas, caused biblical flooding, rapid environmental change, etc.
I don't think the geological evidence of this is being refuted, just the consequences of it on our understanding of human civilizational history.
Re: The Truth about Atlantis (2019)
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We found that the the Great Flood in the book of Genesis existed Floods are certainly a thing that happens in nature - especially to the flood plains that surrounded large rivers like the Euphrates before dams were a thing. Are you referring to a specific event? Or just floods in general?
The Black Sea Deluge Hypothesis posits that around 7,500 years ago, the Mediterranean Sea breached the Bosporus Strait, causing a massive influx of water into the Black Sea. This event transformed the Black Sea from a freshwater lake into a saltwater sea, resulting in a dramatic rise in water levels. This rapid flooding would have submerged large areas of land, displacing human settlements along the coastline. The ca…
You're just pointing at a flood and saying it must be the origin of a story of a flood, but there's no basis for it.