Talk:Atlantis/Archive 1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
and one more less stupid theory
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/1554594.stm http://www.geolsoc.org.uk/template.cfm?name=Atlantis
If plato speak about it, it is more likely to be near greece.
"Jacques Collina-Girard, from the University of the Mediterranean in Aix-en-Provence, says it could have been sited on an island close to the Strait of Gibraltar, and would have vanished below the waves about 11,000 years ago - just as Plato said it did.
Collina-Girard's evidence is based on a study of sea levels that prevailed as the last Ice Age was ending. His assessment of the coral reef data shows the coastline off the southernmost tip of Spain and around Gibraltar 19,000 years ago to have been 130 metres (422 feet) below what it is today.
This would have exposed an archipelago, with an island at the spot where Plato reported Atlantis to be in his work Timaeus.
Nobody seems to have to have thought of the clearest indication given by Plato - that of an island at the mouth of the Pillars of Hercules" end of the quote
proper place for conspiracies to run free
trying to get a conspiracy based wiki up and running. http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikiconspiracy. check it out, add input. most of all help me get it running (I'm kinda amature over here)--Matt D 02:36, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
America America America
People are so American-centric that even in the case of Atlantis they manage to put that in debate, reaching almost the ridicule. I think that the guy that wrote that should go in a boat from Greece to the US. This article needs NPOV, when a reasonable guy starts reading the article imidiatly thinks: "what an impossibility." Lets talk about the Iberian Findings and those from Greece. The only ones that are credible and not from a book that wants to sell in the USA. And take of all that non-sence, or manage to put it has a curiosity. -Pedro 02:35, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Locations
can we sort the location theories by region, please? so that we have the places actually known to the Ancient Greeks in one place, and the crackpot theories of Cuba/America/Indonesia in another? Can we also compact the horrible, unwikified, fawning India/Indonesia paragraph cut down to at most a quarter of its present length? dab 17:08, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- +1 I agree. Marcok 22:58, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I have stumbled upon this site . Which claims to have found the true Atlantis in the Meditranian. They have Maps and 3D animations of the locations. the link to their site is. http://www.discoveryofatlantis.com/800/index.html aquaris
- thanks god, i'm not the only one that has brains in here. I would reduce the info about Cuba/America/Indonesia/India/Sri lanka to just one paragraph and stating that all these theories are very highly unlikely. The Spanish theory of the golf of Cadiz is very promissing and fit almost in everything. I think people should know that in the 18 century (???) there was found ancient pottery in the Azores, and the pottery travelled to mainland Portugal, nothing more is known about that, it is lost since then. -Pedro 20:10, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- ...and here I thought that the "real" City of Atlantis was in the Pegasus Galaxy! Silly me! VigilancePrime 06:45, 1 October 2005 (UTC) (that's a reference to the TV show Stargate: Atlantis for those who didn't get the joke)
Locations
Deleted the reference to Riven the Seer under the Mid-Atlantic section. Confusing, poor grammer, and seemingly blatent nonsence added by one guy in order to express his particular viewpoint. Perhaps someone can rework it.
It's been up since Jul 29. Surprised it last that long untouched.
As here:
The modern day legendary Riven, The Seer, proposes Atlantis to be a mid-sized Continental island in the Atlantic Ocean based out of the Amperes/Gettysburg Seamounts that was destroyed in several stages from Asteroid and Meteoric showers combined with a major Transform Fracture adjacent to the Atlantic Ridge.In 1979 a Russian expedition team found traces of a civilization at the Amperes Seamount which was published in the New York Times. The final catastrophe occuring at 6482 bC for the time also of the Great Flood that pushed civilizations into the eastern mediterranean. Later Atlantis controlling it's foundations up to Tyrhennia and Egypt from their Lake Tritonis Region no later than 1500 bC. Riven also translated the 10 Kings of Atlantis and the meaning of the name Atlantis into Fatherland and discovered the word Araklum in Etruscan scripts that relates to the mysterious Orichalcum element found in Atlantis. He argues that this battle must have been prior to 3100 bC and that the Narmer Palette and Gebel-Arak knife(4000 bC.), found in Egypt prior to King Menes(3100 bC), is evidence of an earlier foreign Sea-People invasion. His destruction theory is also based on the Eye of Ra Myth, the eruptions of Mt.Hekla and Mt.Vesuvius,the ecliptic alignment of planets on Nov 1,6482 bC, All Saints Day, and the flooding of the Black Sea from the Bosphorous straites opening. He has quite the visual website detailing Atlantis, it's location and maps with a list of the Ten kings of Atlantis and links to research sites about Atlantis called Tribes of Atlantis by Riven. The Atlantis story is a retelling by Plato and not a myth as many scholars attest because of Plato and his idealistic philosophies. The Original authors were Solon and Dropides who told the story to Critias elder who told it to Critias junior. Critias detailed the story to Socrates where it was later adapted by Plato. In 570 bC, in the time of Pharaoh Amasis, the extremely elderly Egytian Priest, realizing the end of Egypt was near, let the secret of Atlantis finally fall from his well guarded lips. --Ailric 17:51, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I think that info is very useful, why delete it? Keep it in the article and remove the stupid info about India and Indonesia. Keep that info. BTW who is Riven? -Pedro 20:16, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Here's the deal: Some theories of "Atlantis" are patently rediculous. The idea of there being an entire continent in the middle of the Atlantic is positively preposterous, for the simple reason that there are two oceanic plates there which are parting from one another. An island, yes; a continent, no. Also, it is very POV - "myth" is one of the strongest theories there is for Atlantis, and stating "it is not a myth" is PoV. The other problem is, of course, the numerous poor assumptions, including the final sentence. Also, the whole thing is unsourced. Riven, the Seer? Its the name of a Myst sequel, but otherwise I've never heard of them. A link to them, or to their webpage, or whatever would be nice. If someone can source and salvage (i.e. NPOVify it), then I'd have no problem with it being in the article as it is (sadly) less crazy than several theories regarding Atlantis (anything involving extraterrestrials/another hidden/lost race comes to mind). Titanium Dragon 23:02, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- There are in Portugal some very old myths that Portugal was to Atlantis, the same that North Africa to Southern Europe (these myths are not very credible, they are supositions by some investigators). Also, It depends what you consider a continent. The Azores has ancient and enormous volcanoes (so they were very active in the past). Imagine the area of the Azores with much less water, it would create a 'continent' smaller than Europe, but has big has Turkey. Even if that info is crazzy it keept my atention, India and Indonesia did not. The Alien thing, oh God!
I would focus attention on the Spanish findings (an island near Cadiz). The pillars of Herculis are the pillars of Herculis aka Gibraltar. I believe in the ancient Greeks, they were not dumb. They manage to put their gods and myths, but at the end there is always had some truth behind it. I also think that many theories are very sad and low-minded and make Atlantis seeming ridiculous. I would keep that in the article, NPOV it, making it a sharp curiosity it could help in an investigation, it seems to have real myths, and real myths are always helpful. places that deserve attention:
- Golf of Cadiz
- Cyprus
- Santorini
- Azores
- The Black Sea
-Pedro 19:00, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Huh??
" Proclus tells us that Crantor reported that he, too, had seen the columns on which the story of Atlantis was preserved as reported by Plato: the Saite priest showed him its history in hieroglyphic characters."
- Ok. According to one person, someone else saw some columns. Were these physical marble-type columns like the ruins of Athens? Either something was written physically on those columns or else a story was written about those columns, which was reported by someone else to someone else. Please clarify this sentence. - Omegatron 01:59, May 1, 2005 (UTC)
- Also there are like twelve different lands mentioned in this paragraph. Is one of these supposed to be related to Atlantis? Please break them up into separate paragraphs if this island and this island and this other land are all separate mentions by separate people. - Omegatron 02:03, May 1, 2005 (UTC)
"the Atlanteans were Hyperboreans were Nordic supermen who originated on the North pole"
- This article almost needs a cleanup tag. - Omegatron 02:30, May 1, 2005 (UTC)
Plato
Plato is a bullshit artist extraordinaire. We rely on him greatly--unfortunately because he's often our only source, either because others (such as Socrates) didn't leave writings of their own, or because other writings were lost or deliberately destroyed over the centuries.
Just because Plato passed on some rumor doesn't mean that the details are true--or even that the rumor wasn't just some story he made up to illustrate a point. Remember, this is the same guy who said that humans (the heterosexual kind, that is) were created as hermaphrodites and split into male and female by Zeus to confound them, and the guy who said that Achilles and Patroklos was the greatest love story of all time--which may be an interesting interpretation but certainly isn't to be found in the Iliad. He also has an inflated sense of his own importance, as described in his cave parable and expounded upon in The Republic.
Finding destroyed civilizations in the Mediterranean Sea is a fascinating exploit and more power to those who carry it out. But let's have some perspective here. Even if Plato did hear something that had a kernel of truth to it (e.g., the Sardinia theory is correct), he has absolutely NOTHING valuable to say about it! All Plato gives the archeologists working in the field is the buzzword "Atlantis" which they can bring up in conferences to raise the profile of their research and possibly bring in more grant money. For that, let him be praised. For everything else, ignore him--he's full of bunk.
- On a related note, I tried to clean up the Plato section this morning - I didn't remove the "needs help" notice 'cause I wanted to let others decide if it's at least readable now. I did NOT try to add or subtract, just enhance the readability. (It's late and I can't sleep...so I did some work.) VigilancePrime 06:50, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
- In case anyone is keeping track, I tried to tidy the explanation of the Timaeus and Critias dialogues up a bit. It seems a little more mention could be made of the actual context, that is, that these dialogues were clearly meant as a fictional, philosophical work and a continuation of Plato's Republic. The war of Atlantis vs Athens (which Plato never wrote which the surviving Critias dialogue is leading up to) was meant to demonstrate the strength of the perfect society developed in the Republic (Athens) against a society representing the opposite values (Atlantis). Furthermore, the dialogue itself was not based on any real conversation; Critias was Plato's grandfather and probably did not converse with Socrates; meanwhile, the dramatic date of the dialogues is many decades before 360 BC, and the supposed conversation takes place when Plato was only a few years old. This is normal form for Plato, as is his insistance that the story is "true"; he says this before all his "tales" even ones that are obviously false. I'd put all this in myself, but I haven't yet figured out how to format entries well and someone else may be able to do it better.
Plato Pt. 2, and general grumbles
Not to mention that he only invented Atlantis in the first place as a ficitonal example of a society destroyed by its own behavior. This page needs big help. It's so POV, it's not even funny. Maybe there's a statement somewhere here about mainstream historians' (and archaeologists', geologists', etc.) opinion on this topic (I.E. that atlantis never existed), but I am not about to sort through all the cruft to get there. I may take a crack at cleaning this one up soon.
To any atlantis-believers who may be bothered by my skeptical attitude - don't worry! even though I think atlantis is a myth in the most literal sense of the word, i also think that all of the varied opinions and stories about it are what makes it interesting - and i'll treat everything in an npov, respectful manner and avoid stepping on toes). Basically, I plan to increase the size of the introduction, and include the academic consensus promeniently, but leave in as many of the other theories as I can - removing only those that are written with irredeemably bad style or do not come from notable published works (using a very low threshold for notability).
It will probably take me a long time to get around to doing this. ZacharyS 03:44, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
Dates
Since all of OUR information derives from Plato, perhaps the dates he was writing these works would be important to state? As it is, it's not even mentioned until much later in the Modern Revival section, where one can do the math and get the time period. This is a rather clumsy way of doing things. CFLeon 00:26, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
This page
Can "someone" set it up so that it can be viewed on a normal screen rather than having to scroll left and right?
Given that Plato was writing from the eastern end of the Mediterranean, geography towards the far west might have been a bit fluid.
From various sources it appears that stories of eg the Thera eruption and the destruction of the Cretan civilisation might well have contributed to the development of Atlantis as an idea - a process of syncreticism might well apply.
Pseudohistory
This article needs to be re-written. It presents pseudohistory as actual history. Plato used Atlantis as an allegory for a moral message, as he was fond of doing (The Republic), and people started taking it literally. Now, New Agers have taken it as a myth of theirs, even though it is fiction and was intended to be recieved as such. This is mind-boggling. As Carl Sagan explained in his book The Demon-Haunted World, there is absolutely no evidence for Atlantis and there never has been. Maprovonsha172 17:09, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
Nonsensical
Which parts are nonsensical? not that I am defending the "existence" of Atlantis, I just want to know which parts need improvement or are disputed. --Revolución (talk) 00:26, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
Plato's account
did Plato's account mention natural or divine causes as the reason Atlantis was destroyed? Or were the divine elements of the story added later? --Revolución (talk) 19:20, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
'Other locations'
50,000 to 10,000 years ago, the oceans were 100 meters (300 feet) shallower and the world's offshore continental plateaus were exposed and dry. Glaciers held the difference in ice located mostly in interior highlands. It is hypothesized that global climate may have stabilized between arctic highlands and tropical seas (at least along the equator); and that Atlantis was not one city, but a global, nautical civilization whose cities ringed every continent along these lowland plains. When enough ice melted to top off the oceans, often catastrophically (thousand foot tsunamis coming from inland, volcanoes, earthquakes, 40 day rains, etc.), this civilization was smashed and drowned completely. What little we recall of it, we call Atlantis.
this is highly speculative and unlikely. Would anyone support removal of this section? --Revolución (talk) 23:32, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
- I went ahead and deleted it. --C-squared 03:13, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
Moving content to individual pages
This article is getting too long and unwiedly. I have moved some the content to a new page. It doesn't mean that it doesn't need to be cleaned up, but hopefully will be in more manageable chunks. Reflex Reaction 19:39, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
I have also removed many of the representations of Atlantis. It's a popular myth, every single show or book that mentions Atlantis unless it is a significant part of the story doesn't need to be listed. Individual episodes of TV shows are not noteworthy, those can be put into an individual article or show synopses, not here. Reflex Reaction 20:20, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
I have moved some of the lengthy POV discussion to an archive page. Reflex Reaction 18:06, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
discussion of multiple pages on "lost lands"
Should we merge the articles Lost Lands, Lost city, Phantom island together?
And one more thing: do you think the title Mu (lost continent) is appropriate because it's probably not actually a real lost continent. Should it be Mu (legendary continent) or Mu (mythical continent? --Revolución (talk) 15:58, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
- I agree about the merge. I also suggest that another article created apart called List of lost lands. Regarding Mu, I think Mu (mythical continent) would be the right title. Cheers -- Svest 14:35, 1 October 2005 (UTC) Wiki me up™
New article
I've just created a new article Atlantis in fiction that I had to split from this main article. -- Svest 00:57, 23 October 2005 (UTC) Wiki me up™
Atlantis and Sumeria
Is possible that Atlantis of Platon was Sumeria, in anteluvian era?
--Ionn 20:43, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
Selling website
- I removed, now twice, a link to atlan.org as it tells nothing about Atlantis but only seeks to sell a book. I do not believe that it is appropriate here, and after comparing it to other links on the Atlantis page, I believe that judgement to be correct.
- IF someone would like to COMMENT on why this link should be there, we can discuss it here and come to a consensus. Until then, it will continue to be removed.
- On a side note, it is listed under location THEORIES, and yet the site seems to assert that they have found it and everyone else is wrong. I think that's a secondary conflict and would seek resolution to that as well.)
- VigilancePrime 19:56, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
Atlantic ocean Atlantis and the Vertical tectonics
The section data is not 'original research' as all the sentences are well documented on sources and adds nothing more to those same sources, either esoteric or scientific peer-reviewed (presented below on the references section); as so, I'm going to revert your edition/erasion as it has no grounds. --GalaazV 23:13, 14 February 2006 (UTC) Also it contains sourced information on authors and publications about Atlantida, not yet available in this article earlier editions and as so is not 'innapropriated'. --GalaazV 23:18, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
- Even if sourced (and there seems to be only one person in that regard), the text you placed in this article is just a diatribe in favor of vertical tectonics, and puts forward no theory on the location of Atlantis nor an explicit explanation of what happenned to it and when. As it adds no useful information on the topic of Atlantis itself, it is inappropriate. BTW - If you are David Pratt, then you should see the guideline WP:AUTO. --EMS | Talk 23:53, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
Oh, but it adds useful info as you may read, in the section and in the sources, that are not available at the article. By the way, the majority is not always correct, as any of us can see by looking to our history (even in recent events). As so I put it here if someone really wants to know and perhaps investigate valuable data on this topic, myth as some regard it, which goes through different cultures and civilizations. --GalaazV 00:05, 15 February 2006 (UTC)