>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.” This seems like a misleading question. Based on what we…
The Truth about Atlantis (2019)
91–100 of 149 posts
Re: The Truth about Atlantis (2019)
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
"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…
> What about Gobekli Tepe? What about it? It's one of the oldest Neolithic settlements we've identified, but otherwise, it's not particularly unusual within our understanding of Neolithic Mesopotamia. When GP is talking about "material culture", they're (probably) referring to the archaeological definition of culture, which means you need to give an explanation as to what makes an artifact indicative of belonging to…
I wish I had time right now to thoughtfully ask a couple questions I have, but it will have to wait.
I am compelled to squeeze this in:
"As for the risk, a lot of these theories bear a deep legacy of overt racism just begin their skin; they've historically been used to devalue the abilities of the people who've made them (e.g., Great Zimbabwe). Nowadays, they've been modified to edit out the basic message of "white people taught everybody how to civilization," so it's no longer quite as overt as their late 19th century ancestors... but you can still see the lingering traces of it in "an ancient civilization taught everybody how to civilization.""
- Wow! Holy cow, I had no idea, and this hadn't remotely crossed my mind. If anything, I would have thought the opposite. (that evidence of incredible achievements by ancient civilizations would diminish [relatively] the achievements of modern ones).
Re: The Truth about Atlantis (2019)
#93Decades ago, I read a book (written, I think, around 1890) about Atlantis. 99% of the evidence it gave was, of course, bogus. But the one piece that seemed reasonable was an account of depth soundings by the SS Great Eastern when it laid the second cable across the Atlantic in 1866. I haven't seen a recent account of those soundings, but the chart in the book did show the Atlantic to be shallower in the middle--which…
Re: The Truth about Atlantis (2019)
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
People used to think Troy was fictional. People (myself included) think Atlantis is fictional. The difference is: Troy was much closer to us in time, and it was found.
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.
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 Agamemnon existed any more than the apples of the Hesperides. [Homer] had no intention to write history, but only to amuse us."[6] During the 19th century the stories of Troy were devalued as fables by George Grote.[7]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_Bryant?utm_source=chatgp...
| In his books on Troy, Bryant endeavoured to show that the existence of Troy and the Greek expedition were purely mythological, with no basis in real history. In 1791, Andrew Dalzel translated a work of Jean Baptiste LeChevalier as Description of the Plain of Troy.[8] It provoked Bryant's Observations upon a Treatise ... (on) the Plain of Troy (1795) and A Dissertation concerning the War of Troy (1796?). A fierce controversy resulted, with Bryant attacked by Thomas Falconer, John Morritt, William Vincent, and Gilbert Wakefield.[5]
Re: The Truth about Atlantis (2019)
#95Earlier 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.
I think there is consensus that Doggerland was wiped out by a massive tidal wave generated by the Storegga event. This feels like it deserves mention in any arrogant certaintist article like the one above. The article would be good if it asserted "we don't know".
But we do, Plato made them up.
Re: The Truth about Atlantis (2019)
#96I 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…
Not that that can't be correct sometimes. Would be interesting to see that quantified.
Re: The Truth about Atlantis (2019)
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
My daughter is an archeologist and this is one of her bugbears, the idea that the Egyptians couldn't possibly have built something so huge on their own. Even though we're pretty clear on it, the originally racist idea that they were too primitive has survived long enough to just become "common knowledge" with the explicit racism receding.
[flagged]
It's only in the latter half of the 20th century that the field stops presupposing that Europeans are better than everybody else and they start trying to more objectively and holistically evaluate life in other societies and compare them. There's still a large contingent of popular anthropology that hasn't caught up to that memo yet, and the general field of pseudoarchaeology absolutely thrives on it.
There's a reason that people treat the methods of construction of the Pyramids as some unsolved mystery but not, say, the Colosseum. And it's not because we don't have the evidence for the Pyramids--we have the written records that discuss pyramid construction, we have the letters from the Pharoah complaining about his workforce!
Re: The Truth about Atlantis (2019)
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don't know, but there is lots of geological evidence that 12-13,000 years ago there were several cataclysmic meteor strikes, and the earths temperature swung up and down wildly, eventually settling at a much higher temperature (ending the ice age). I am pretty sure this is accepted by the geological community. You're wrong about this. There's not a lot of evidence for the Younger Dryas Impact Hypothesis. In parti…
Thank you for taking the time to point this out respectfully. Looks like you're absolutely right about the current consensus, and my summary didn't fairly reflect all the evidence. Times like this I wish I could edit older comments. I would update it to incorporate what you are saying and diminish the confidence in the impact hypothesis.
And I'll try to return the favor. If they were airbursts, and so were providing heat but not stuff thrown up into the atmosphere, then I could maybe see meteors ending an ice age.
Re: The Truth about Atlantis (2019)
#99I 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 didn't enjoy much Ovid's books, but Homer was wonderful. The Illiad often surprised me. The human characters and their connections with gods are so intriguing. But it's mostly dark — a hero can seem nice then behead an unarmed prisoner. And I remember vividly when a river was so upset by all the atrocities of the furious Achilles that it flooded the battle ground to stop the massacre.
Re: The Truth about Atlantis (2019)
#100I 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.