[LH Pathe]

can't believe what my bleary eyes are reading, wading through tis thread. like patrick duffy when the credits roll

[opinion guy]

Originally Posted by LH Pathe

can't believe what my bleary eyes are reading, wading through tis thread. like patrick duffy when the credits roll

Holy crap!! finally you said something I understand!!!! Apart from the patirck duffy bit

[LH Pathe]

Yeah, well that's just like, your lack of intuition, man

[Biggins]

Originally Posted by Mr. Incognito

I read that link.

What a lot of tripe.

"what if, what if"

Sounds like some over active boyscouts at a campfire.

Bull****

Which link in particular?

I gave some quick links that touched upon some real known facts.
Some of the links THEN above also added other stuff that is indeed out there with the faeries to say the least - however the underlying known stuff is real - and again - is only a precursor to how any of the website writers THEN takes some recognised well known data and spins it further to their various means.

* Look up the scientific data on the underlying soils and ultra clean, sub-soil fresh water found recently by the Russians alone in the last two months that has been widely reported in the worlds press.
* Look up matters related to the Antarctic and the Piri Reis' map.
* Study the actual real facts based on the genuine timeline of Thira - modern-day Santorin - that inspired the ancient Greek philosopher Plato to pen the original story of Atlantis nine hundred years later- ...keeping in mind that Platos in his writing (fourth century B.C). account claimed that Atlantis sunk nine thousand years earlier - way before Thira exploded.
Again, taken literally with the world acknowledged timeline of real events as they happened - and combined with recent events by research station in the south pole, ancient clues suggest that Antarctica may, in fact, prove to be the site of the legendary Atlantis.

Recognise though that the name "Atlantis" was a name that came about by Plato as he came up with his story of a land that supposedly vanished beneath water. Using the then later Thira as a guiding indication of how such things might occur, he used the said later events as a foundation guideline for a supposed previous land which pre-existed, might have then sunk for his later story.

...And by coincidence, a previous land did exist at one stage beneath what we know now as the South Pole. These underlying facts are not in depute by serious academics the world over.

I would also suggest that you look up the National Geographic Magazine of October 1947 (a copy of which I have) which describes from page 429 to 522, goes into GREAT detail (including many photos) of the 4,000 troops used in operation "Highjump", decided in tandem with additional British troops whom set out with 13 warships alone along with additional tools and planes, to geographically map what they had discovered. The entire mission led by Rear Admiral Richard E Byrd USN. It was the fifth survey team led by the man to this very location and ordered from the highest levels of USA government at the time - and ALL this is on record.

If your going to call all the above tripe too - at least back your reason up with evidence for you to be able to do so and not just come across as some one who has not studied this very topic for decades - as I have.

-------------------

There is a lot of wacko stuff being spun about this fabled "Atlantis" - when in fact if anyone REALLY bothers to check, "Atlantis" as such NEVER existed.
It was a story made up by Plato. It was a story he drew up based about a supposed land that had previously sunk.
The wacko stuff out there now beyond serious academic circles is generally rubbish and indeed should be laughed at.

Now taking into account that a large piece of fertile land might have existed prior to sinking and crust displacement, it's assumed again by serious people that such a people on those lands might have decided to leave from a place they eventually saw as in trouble.
If they did leave (by boats its assessed) they would to further increase they chances of survival as a race, education and social practise, hedge their bets and go in a number of directions rather than one.
This might later explain why certain SEPARATE world cultures share strange common language base words, precise same knowledge of the stars, similar gods, matching exact methods of precise construction, same shaped carved idols, same fundamental language vascular bases offshooted later and twisted later by ancestral interpretation, and much, much more - from places as far reaching from Easter Island, across to central America, down to South America, up into Europe, over to a number of African cultures including Egypt and beyond into Asia.

[ManFromAtlantis]

no its not. And I'd know

[DEFTLEFTHAND]

Originally Posted by ManFromAtlantis

no its not. And I'd know

Keep searching man from Atlantis you'll eventually get home, have you checked off the coast of Crete?

[tallaghtmick]

Originally Posted by CJC999

We should change the name of the country to Atlants immediately and have a fish as our national emblem and change the national flag colours to green white and goldfish.

I wonder where they buried the stargate???

Dont you mean geata na reailt?

[Show Time]

Atlantis position was just off the coast of Cork. When the great island sunk to the bottom of the ocean the survivors made their way to Cork which lead to the birth of the chosen people of Ireland.

[holystungun9]

Geologists have rocks in their head.

[Doc Ruby]

Originally Posted by Biggins

* The discovery of a mysterious "anomaly" in Antarctica.

Now that was an entertaining read! There is some funky stuff going on down at the South Pole alright, and has been for a while, but I doubt it has anything to do with Atlantis. Antarctica has been icebound for millions of years.

Originally Posted by Biggins

* The VERY ancient Piri Reis' map - which shows an ancient land at the south pole which until recently we (in modern times) couldn't prove was there.

The Piri Reis map has been traced as the coast of South America, which would have been accessable to explorers of the time.

The truth is probably more interesting than the fiction I guess, when you look back over history, every great era has seen a rise in complex and sophisticated societies and their subsequent collapse. Towards the end of the stone age and bronze age, there was the emergence of powerful civilisations with beautiful artwork, which newer "barbarian" cultures destroyed with new technology.

Combine this with the coastal shrinkage brought on by the ice sheets melting, and you reach the conclusion that Plato was probably combining a lot of folk tales and turning them into an allegory. On the plus side I wager there are some pretty astonishing ruins buried under the silt off our coastline and many others, which would explain the prevalence of a glorious past/flood myths throughout all cultures - sea level rises were global.

[Biggins]

Originally Posted by Doc Ruby

There is some funky stuff going on down at the South Pole alright, and has been for a while, but I doubt it has anything to do with Atlantis. Antarctica has been icebound for millions of years.

As I said, "Atlantis" as such did not exist. It was a tale created by Plato that came about many suspect due to something he knew or heard about himself from ancient stories.
He created thus a tale of "Atlantis" in his own writings and used Thira - modern-day Santorin - as a basis method of how such a place might have sunk.

There is no doubt that there was a civilisation that existed on Santorin at one stage - its accepted though by many qualified heads though that the timing of that civilisation existence is too late to qualify as the land that Plato might have in fact been basing his own THEN heard ancient tale - and thus respun and re-worded later yarn, upon.

Originally Posted by Doc Ruby

The Piri Reis map has been traced as the coast of South America, which would have been accessable to explorers of the time.

NOT JUST of South america.

The Piri Reis map shows the western coast of Africa, the eastern coast of South America, and the northern coast of Antarctica. The northern coastline of Antarctica is perfectly detailed. The most puzzling however is not so much how Piri Reis managed to draw such an accurate map of the Antarctic region 300 years before it was discovered, but that the map shows the coastline under the ice. Geological evidence confirms that the latest date Queen Maud Land could have been charted in an ice-free state is 4000 BC.

Source: http://www.world-mysteries.com/sar_1.htm

The above is only one example source, of which there is many saying the same thing, in teaching, in net location, in research papers and in many books (some of which I possess from studying this subject for decades).

The official science has been saying all along that the ice-cap which covers the Antarctic is million years old.
The Piri Reis map shows that the northern part of that continent has been mapped before the ice did cover it. That should make think it has been mapped million years ago, but that's impossible since mankind did not exist at that time.

Further and more accurate studies have proven that the last period of ice-free condition in the Antarctic ended about 6000 years ago. There are still doubts about the beginning of this ice-free period, which has been put by different researchers everything between year 13000 and 9000 BC.
The question is: Who mapped the Queen Maud Land of Antarctic 6000 years ago? Which unknown civilization had the technology or the need to do that?

It is well-known that the first civilization, according to the traditional history, developed in the mid-east around year 3000 BC, soon to be followed within a millennium by the Indus valley and the Chinese ones. So, accordingly, none of the known civilizations could have done such a job. Who was here 4000 years BC, being able to do things that NOW are possible with the modern technologies?

---------------------

This is worth a further read - keeping in mind that "Atlantis" as such did NOT exist in very name: http://www.s8int.com/water10.html
NOTE: for some there seems to be a problem with the above link - so here is the text upon its page.

After WW II, scientists started to pay close attention to the issue of a supposedly once-existing civilization in Antarctica. The hypothesis is confirmed by some medieval maps and research of paleogeologists and glaciologists.

In January of 1820, a Lieutenant of Russian Empire Fleet, Mikhail Lazarev discovered a new continent. In the beginning of 20th century, a Russian encyclopedia, while adducing the approximate square milage of the south pole continent, reported that it was insufficiently explored and there was no flora and fauna. The author of the article also mentioned the richness of the algae and sea life.

Twenty years later, the director of the Istanbul National Museum, Khalil Edkhem, was sorting out a library of the Byzantine emperors in an old palace. He found an ancient map made on gazelle skin. On the map, there were the shores of western and southern Africa, as well as the northern shores of Antarctica.

Khalil could not believe his eyes: the shores of the Queen Mod Land, to the south of the 70th parallel, was free of ice. An ancient cartographer marked a mountain chain there. The name of the cartographer was known: an admiral of the Ottoman Empire fleet, Piri Reis, who lived in the first half of 16th century.

The map's authenticity was without doubt. Graphology examinations of the notes on the margin confirmed that they belonged to the admiral.

In 1949, a combined British and Swedish expedition conducted intensive seismic measurements of the South Pole through the ice cap. According to the commander of 8th Technical Investigation Squadron of the US Armed Force Strategic Command, Colonel Harold Olmayer, the geographical details of the bottom part of the map (the shore of Antarctica) correspond with the results of the seismic measurements. We cannot correlate these data with the supposed level of geography in 1513.

In his notes on the map's margin, made in the early 16th century, Piri Reis explained that he was not responsible for the cartography and that the map was based on earlier sources. Some of these earlier sources, belong to his contemporaries (for example, to Christopher Columbus), while others could be dated to the 4th century B. C. if not later, because one of these sources belonged to Alexander the Great.

Of course, professional historians who specialize in ancient history could say the following: This is only one more hypothesis. What about documentation and, what would be even more desirable, trust-worthy sources? The opinion of the Turkish admiral and notes on a margin, is too open to controversy.

Therefore, I would like to present the position of the late historian and professor of Keene College in New Hampshire, USA, Charles H. Hapgood. In the late 1959, he found in the Washington Congressional Library a map created by Orontheus Phynius in 1531.

Orontheus Phynius depicted Antarctica with mountains and rivers, without glaciers. The relief of the continent-s center was not marked, which, according to Hapgood, could mean that there had been an ice cap in that area.

In the early 1960s, Phynius' map was studied by Doctor Richard Stratchen of the Massachusetts Technology Institute together with Hapgood. Both scientists concluded that Phynius map had indeed depicted Antarctica free of ice. The characteristics depicted were very close to the information that was obtained in 1958 by specialists from different countries.

Gerard Cremer, known in to the world as Mercator, also trusted Orontheus' evidence. He included the Phynius map into his atlas, in which several maps of Antarctica by Mercator himself were also included.

There is one other interesting feature: on Mercator's map of 1569, the west shore of South America is pictured less accurately than on the earlier map of Mercator from 1538.

The reasons for this contradiction are the following: while working at the earlier map, the cartographer of 16th century proceeded from ancient sources, which were not kept for our time, and while working on the later map, he proceeded from observations of the first Spanish explorers to South America. Gerard Mercato's mistake can be excused.

In the 16th century, there were no precise methods to measure longitude: as a rule, an error could have been hundreds of kilometers!

Photo: Ikonos satellite photo of glacier in Antarctica. Click and drag photo to resize. Finally, we come to Philippe Boiche, a full member of the French Academy of Science. In 1737, he published his map of Antarctica. Boiche presented a precise picture of Antarctica of the time when the continent was free of ice.

On his map, the under-ice topography of the continent is presented, about which our civilization had no clear idea until 1958.

Moreover, based on now-lost sources, the French academician depicted in the middle of the South Pole a body of water dividing it into two sub-continents, which were situated to the west and to the east from the line, where the Trans-Antarctic Mountains are now marked.

According to the investigation in the framework of International Geophysical Year (1958), Antarctic is in fact an archipelago of large islands covered with 1.5-kilometers of ice.

Medieval maps show Antarctica without an ice cap or only partially covered with ice. The precision of the 16th century cartographers was very high and even surprising. Their data surpassed the technical possibilities even of the late Middle Ages (for example, the determination of the longitude of a relief within one minute). This level was reached by mankind only just in the late 18th century, and in some cases, the 20th.

Scientists cannot comment on the high scientific level of medieval cartography. Information from almost 2000-year-old primary sources is supposed to be not well-founded.

Orthodox geology claimed that the age of the Antarctica ice cap was at least 25 million years; however, recently, it has been reduced to six million years. Therefore, we should notice the following feature of the Reis map: the shore of the continent was free of ice. On the Phynius map, made 18 years after the Reis map, there is an ice cap around the South Pole within the limits of 80th and the 75th parallels. Two hundred years later, academician Boiche depicted Antarctica with glaciers.

The conclusion is obvious: we can see the process of the spreading of glaciers on the southern continent.

In 1949, Admiral Baird's expedition bore holes into the Ross Sea in three spots, where Orontheus Phynius marked river-beds. In the cuts, fine-grained layers were found, obviously brought to the sea from rivers, whose sources were situated in temperate latitudes (i.e. free of glaciers).

While using the nuclear dating method of doctor U. Oury from the Karnegy Institute in Washington, scientists discovered that Antarctica's rivers, which were sources of fine-dyspersated deposits, were flowing as depicted on the Phynius map, about 6,000 years ago.

About 4000 years B. C., glacial sediments started to accumulate on the bottom of Ross Sea. Kernels show that before this, there was a long warm period.

Therefore, the maps of Reis, Phynius, and Mercator present Antarctica when the ancient Egyptian and Shumer civilizations were newborn. This point of view is excluded by almost all professional historians and could be regarded as an operating hypothesis that cannot be verified.

Any historian would say that there were no civilization of the kind in the late 5th millenium B. C. According to Doctor Jacob Hock from Illinois University, the deposits in-question could be 6 to 12 thousand years old.

In September 1991, US and Egyptian archaeologists discovered at a distance of 13 km from Nile River, in Abidos, 12 large boats that belonged to Pharaohs of First Dynasty. The age of the boats is about 5,000 years. They are believed to be the most ancient vessels in the world, the leader of the expedition, D. O-Connor far, the find is estimated to be aimed for religious rites.

According to Herodotus, ancient Egyptians tracked stars more than 10,000 years ago. This statement of the "father of history" is supposed to be esoteric and, therefore, not true. However, land nations seldom produced astronomers. The fact that ancient Egyptians were interested in astronomy may indicate that they inherited some knowledge from an unknown civilization of navigators.

Workers of US technical intelligence determined the projection center of the Piri Reis map, whose data belongs to 4000 year B. C. The projection center was supposedly situated near today's Cairo. At that time, according to most historians, all then-existing nations were at a very low level of development.

Between the 5th and 10th milleniums B. C., there was a civilization on Earth that possessed great knowledge in the field of navigation, cartography, and astronomy, which was no less advanced than that that of the 18th century.

This civilization preceded our civilization, and it was not an extraterrestrial one. Its age could be several thousands years, while its location was probably on the northern shore of the most southern continent, or archipelago: Antarctica. Later, this civilization may have resettled to the north-east of Africa.

The reason for the death of the civilization was the covering of Antarctica with glaciers. This process started no earlier than in the 10th millenium B. C. It cannot be excluded that there were also large-scale floods, which were regular and cause long-term local deluges (this is confirmed by archaeologists).

These disasters could have destroyed most of the civilization's cultural objects. However, some fragments might be found in the future under the thickness of ice. It can also be assumed that the survivors of Antarctica kept and handed down knowledge to the ancient Egyptians.

Therefore, if there will ever be an extensive exploration of Antarctica, mankind will most likely be surprised with the results.

[Doc Ruby]

Originally Posted by Biggins

As I said, "Atlantis" as such did not exist. It was a tale created by Plato that came about many suspect due to something he knew or heard about himself from ancient stories.
He created thus a tale of "Atlantis" in his own writings and used Thira - modern-day Santorin - as a basis method of how such a place might have sunk.

There is no doubt that there was a civilisation that existed on Santorin at one stage - its accepted though by many qualified heads though that the timing of that civilisation existence is too late to qualify as the land that Plato might have in fact been basing his own THEN heard ancient tale - and thus respun and re-worded later yarn, upon.

Okay well to save any talking at cross purposes here, are you saying that you believe there was an Atlantean-type civilisation in Antarctica (which has been covered in ice for 34 million years), and if so what is your impression of what it might have been?

Originally Posted by Biggins

The above is only one example source, of which there is many saying the same thing, in teaching, in net location, in research papers and in many books (some of which I possess from studying this subject for decades).l

Look. There is absolutely no consensus that the Piri Reis map represents anything to do with an ice-free Antarctica.

[Biggins]

Originally Posted by Doc Ruby

Okay well to save any talking at cross purposes here, are you saying that you believe there was an Atlantean-type civilisation in Antarctica (which has been covered in ice for 34 million years), and if so what is your impression of what it might have been?

I and others have suggested given a good number of evidence that exists, to say that a civilisation might have existed on the northern tip of whats NOW known as the South Pole.
The then climatic conditions was very much indeed possible.

Taking into account that humans being what they are sometimes by nature, great yarn tellers and oft times enhance parts to make a story interesting and keeping that in mind, if a civilisation did exist, its indeed possible that they were to of even modicum intelligence - not the fanciful one of mythical status as espoused Plato for example - but as a civilisation that knew many things regarding natural science and its place amid the stars and understanding of great technical construction (later passed onto other communities when they left due to the incoming disaster which forced them to eventually migrate).

Originally Posted by Doc Ruby

Look. There is absolutely no consensus that the Piri Reis map represents anything to do with an ice-free Antarctica.

Sorry but wrong.
The map you linked to did indeed indicate parts of South America BUT what you missed is another part of the map which by MANY, there is no debate about.
See this further Piri Reis map for example and look to the EAST on the right.
It is THIS part of the map that shows the northern tip of the NOW land under the Southern Pole.
It is not under debate as to its accuracy - it is as modern technology has been able to show, VERY accurate as to what exists under the present day ice.
The part on the RIGHT, even shows VERY ACCURATELY the rivers that even today, has been acknowledged, to actually exist as streams under the present day large ice.

A simple google search using the text "Piri Reis map south pole" will point you to many research papers and very educated explorers and cartographers whom all say the same thing - as well as modern day scientists - that the EAST part of the map is an exact representation of the northern tip of the land now under the South Pole ice. The map is being accurate even down to the underlying water steams which they have found today using our available technology.

Have a further read: https://www.forbiddenhistory.info/?q=node/70
Sample paragraph:

As stated by Colonel Harold Z. Ohlmeyer in his letter (July 6, 1960) to you, the Princess Martha Coast of Queen Maud Laud, Antarctica, appears to be truly represented on the southern sector of the Piri Reis map. The agreement of the Piri Reis Map with the seismic profile of this area made by the Norwegian-British-Swedish Expedition of 1949, supported by your solution of the grid, places beyond a reasonable doubt the conclusion that the original source maps must have been made before the present Antarctic ice cap covered the Queen Maud Land coasts.

[Sound of Silence]

Originally Posted by 44leto

I prefer the British Isles I am use to that one. That doesn't make me feel less Irish, but I wish it made me feel more British.

It might make you feel British.

It won't make you British.

[Doc Ruby]

Originally Posted by Biggins

I and others have suggested given a good number of evidence that exists, to say that a civilisation might have existed on the northern tip of whats NOW known as the South Pole.
The then climatic conditions was very much indeed possible.

Taking into account that humans being what they are sometimes by nature, great yarn tellers and oft times enhance parts to make a story interesting and keeping that in mind, if a civilisation did exist, its indeed possible that they were to of even modicum intelligence - not the fanciful one of mythical status as espoused Plato for example - but as a civilisation that knew many things regarding natural science and its place amid the stars and understanding of great technical construction (later passed onto other communities when they left due to the incoming disaster which forced them to eventually migrate).

Okay so what you're saying here is that you believe there were great civilisations which predate the accepted mainstream. In this I'm inclined to agree with you.

Anatomically modern humans have been around for the last quarter of a million years. Take a baby from 200,000 years ago, raise him or her in the modern world, and you would notice nothing unusual about them.

And yet, we only have solid records for the last 1% of that period. The other 99% of the time we weren't sitting around banging rocks together; some might imagine the stone age as a period of unshaven hunter gatherers moving from disaster to disaster, but this is a stone age culture. So was this, and only three cities on earth were larger than it at the time. This dates from long before the last ice age.

So where's all the evidence? Probably dunked under about thirty meters of water, mud and silt at this point. Cultures build along coasts, so when the ice age ended, anything too near would have been drowned, hence the flood myths. I haven't anything more solid that that, but I do believe we'll turn up this evidence in future.

Originally Posted by Biggins

Sorry but wrong.
The map you linked to did indeed indicate parts of South America BUT what you missed is another part of the map which by MANY, there is no debate about.

There is no debate about it because there is no connection. Take a good read through this painstaking, methodical and scientifically accurate debunking of the Piri Reis myth. If that doesn't convince you there's not much left to be said on the matter.