Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Truth about Atlantis (2019)

talesoftimesforgotten.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 149 posts

Re: The Truth about Atlantis (2019)

#101

Post by tootie »

ericmcer wrote: post #75
sireat wrote: post #28

I highly recommend BBC's In our time Podcast on Plato's Atlantis: https://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.

We do seem to imbue the greek & roman writers with a more serious tone then they might have had. I was reading some of Ovid's Metamorphosis while waiting for someone else. I turned to a random page and it was an action packed description of Achilles riding his chariot while spears deflect off him and he effortlessly impales opponents. It almost resembled an anime style power fantasy or something. I wonder if Achilles…

I think it started when Schleimann discovered Troy based on Homer.

Re: The Truth about Atlantis (2019)

#102

Post by masswerk »

FloorEgg wrote: post #53
masswerk wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please, see "No – Atlantis Has Not Been Discovered in North Africa" by Steven Novella (2018): https://theness.com/neurologicablog/no-atlantis-has-not-been... BTW, there's still the problem of claiming that (a) Plato's account is a true and faithful transcript of an actual conversation, and that (b) all the various accounts reproduced in this rather complex game of telephone are faithful, as well. If, on the other han…

Hey there are lots of reasons to be skeptical of the theory, but I haven't yet seen a reason to claim the theory is false (or the specific theory of Atlantis relating to a civilization occupying the Richat structure as unfalsifiable). If we set aside "Atlantis" and Plato for a moment, and consider that 13,000 years ago the area around the Richat structure was lush with fauna and flora, and that there's geological evi…

While I do not doubt that Northern Africa has cradled human civilization for a long time, to me, connecting the Richat structure and Plato is stretching it quite a bit, though. Why not say Plato's Atlantis is actually Göbekli Tepe – it's in the wrong direction and also not an island, but there are concentric structures and is actual man made?

If we are to neglect that Plato clearly states that his rhetorical vehicle is situated outside of Africa, but the Richat structure is in the then known parts of Africa, why should direction matter? While we may discuss the Richat structure, we should do so separately. There's no need to connect these things and no indication of why we should do so.

Regarding features, given the total population of that time (at least, as far as our estimates go), controlling a circular structure of 25km diameter may have been a bit ambitious. (It may have been pretty disadvantageous in actuality, as you would have to control and defend rather extensive perimeters with what would only account to thousands (in the low single digits). And, if you failed to do so, the very same features would have hosted your enemies. — Compare this to what Plato thought to be a more realistic size for what must have been then a remarkably extensive population.)

Re: The Truth about Atlantis (2019)

#103

Post by tootie »

begueradj wrote: post #12

That does not make the existence of Atlantis a mere fiction. With the end of the Ice Age and its consequences, plenty of civilizations may have disappeared in deep waters. The Sumerians themselves claimed they received their knowledge from a man who visited them by the sea (fish-man like creature) on the aftermath of the great flood which may have buried plenty of Atlantis-like civilizations which could be the missin…

Except an exact location is given in the original text and there's definitely nothing there. Also the text says they ruled over lands that were known to the Greeks and they have no corroboration of an earlier dominant force or advanced society. Any civilization that failed to graduate past wood and earth construction could easily be washed away. Anyone that was capable of monumental construction or even pottery should leave a trace.

Re: The Truth about Atlantis (2019)

#104

Post by protocolture »

FloorEgg wrote: post #76
rfwhyte wrote: post #69

Damn some of the comments here are really depressing. I'd formerly thought HN was one of the last bastions of critical thought on internet, but I guess I was wrong judging by some of these comments. Way too much regurgitation of long-since debunked pseudo-scientific nonsense. Atlantis was never real and anyone who thinks it was is a moron. If there were truly some sort of globe-spanning advanced civilization existing…

"If there were truly some sort of globe-spanning advanced civilization existing ~11KYA we'd have found at least one single piece of their material culture by now, but we haven't." What about Gobekli Tepe? "Nor have we found any genetic evidence in people or crops that there was any kind of "Empire" connecting parts of Europe or Africa as we find time and time again with real empires that actually existed in prehistor…

>You seem to be really upset (and frankly insulting) at the prospect of people being curious about the idea that we don't know everything about our history yet.

Scientific Curiosity should never involve insisting something exists without evidence or any intention of looking for it.

This is where hancocks people always fall back to. Science just isnt "Imaginitive" enough to give enough time to their theories. Whereas you meet any scientist in the field and they will tell you how 3 broken pots and a pile of bones translates into an amazing civilisation. I dont think archeologists could survive being even 1 iota more imaginative.

>Skepticism is healthy, but why be dismissive of peoples' interest to consider or search for new evidence?

They should search for that evidence instead of writing 20 books, some of them DEEEPLY racist, demanding other people search for that evidence on their behalf.

>Isn't it more risky to stop developing the science and pursuing the truth?

There are tons of people in the field right now developing the science and pursuing the truth.

>do you have some reason to want there not to have been more developed civilizations pre-younger dryas than we previously thought existed? What's the harm to you in other people asking these questions and going out and trying to answer them?

The person trying to force a narrative on history is Hancock. The danger is that he doesn't hypothesize, he instructs his legion of morons that his word is the truth and they need to buy more of his books to discover said truth.

Re: The Truth about Atlantis (2019)

#105

Post by protocolture »

FloorEgg wrote: post #8

I 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…

> if it were to credibly refute the possibility that the capital of Atlantis was the richat structure

It has never been positively established why would it need refutation.

Re: The Truth about Atlantis (2019)

#106

Post by neaden »

cryptonector wrote: post #94
neaden wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People didn't use to think Troy was fictional, where did you get that idea? Edit: to be clear there is no evidence that the Trojan war happened as described, but that doesn't mean Troy is a fiction anymore then Sparta or Ithaca are.

I had to look it up. My memory of this is from my childhood, and I doubt I ever had sources. But yes, it seems that there were scholars who thought Troy to be fictional: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_the_Iliad?utm_s... | In the early modern era, attitudes towards the legends grew more skeptical. Blaise Pascal characterized the story as merely a "romance", commenting that "nobody supposes that Troy and…

I think you are conflating people calling the Trojan war fiction with thinking the city was. While there were a few people like Bryant who thought Troy was totally fictional it was always a very fringe position.

Re: The Truth about Atlantis (2019)

#107

Post by sandworm101 »

jcranmer wrote: post #97
milesrout wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

19th century archaeology and anthropology was thoroughly racist. It was a time where explorers could rediscover something like Great Zimbabwe and go "We found the Lost Tribe of Israel" because there's no way that the native inhabitants living among the site could possibly have built such an exquisite structure. It was a time where racism wasn't "dark-skinned people are bad" but rather "let me give you a lecture on ho…

But there are some progressions. For instance, Egyptian architecture is more "primative" than roman. Most everything in egypt is a gravity structure, big blocks piled atop each other. They didnt do connectors or mortar, let alone concrete. They did not progress along the tech tree the way that rome did. That doesnt mean that egyptian people are less smart, just that the ancient culture in egypt did not evolve new technology as quickly as others.

Re: The Truth about Atlantis (2019)

#108

Post by alibrarydweller »

sandworm101 wrote: post #107
jcranmer wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

19th century archaeology and anthropology was thoroughly racist. It was a time where explorers could rediscover something like Great Zimbabwe and go "We found the Lost Tribe of Israel" because there's no way that the native inhabitants living among the site could possibly have built such an exquisite structure. It was a time where racism wasn't "dark-skinned people are bad" but rather "let me give you a lecture on ho…

But there are some progressions. For instance, Egyptian architecture is more "primative" than roman. Most everything in egypt is a gravity structure, big blocks piled atop each other. They didnt do connectors or mortar, let alone concrete. They did not progress along the tech tree the way that rome did. That doesnt mean that egyptian people are less smart, just that the ancient culture in egypt did not evolve new tec…

It's worth noting that the pyramids were more ancient to Julius Caesar than Caesar is to us by a significant margin.

Re: The Truth about Atlantis (2019)

#109

Post by protocolture »

gigatree wrote: post #51
feoren wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What exactly is "missing" in understanding how the Egyptians built the pyramids? Why is it so hard to understand how a population of millions with a ton of unused labor during flood season built a bunch of scaffolding and moved a bunch of rocks around?

You must not be familiar with its architecture to be so dismissive. That’s the hn equivalent of calling Amazon “just a website”

I am quite familiar because I keep reading about it everytime someone insists its too hard, falling all over references demonstrating just how easy it was.

Heck I believe it was on this very website someone posted a study by a group of students who went to the actual quarry the stone was from, and actually carved out a stone using period techniques.

As far as I am concerned, pyramid denial is dead save a few absolute moronic hold outs who seem to believe copper tools cant cut stone.

Re: The Truth about Atlantis (2019)

#110

Post by poisonarena »

rfwhyte wrote: post #69

Damn some of the comments here are really depressing. I'd formerly thought HN was one of the last bastions of critical thought on internet, but I guess I was wrong judging by some of these comments. Way too much regurgitation of long-since debunked pseudo-scientific nonsense. Atlantis was never real and anyone who thinks it was is a moron. If there were truly some sort of globe-spanning advanced civilization existing…

waahhh no more critical thought on hacker news!!!!

then: "Atlantis was never real and anyone who thinks it was is a moron."

"f*ck"

go back to reddit

Post reply on HN