|08-08-2006, 02:18 PM||#3|
Join Date: Apr 2001
If true, it changes everything we know about history. I listened to the guy speak on Coast to Coast last night, and the picture he painted was pretty fantastic... He says they found 50 correlating features between what they found and the way that Plato described it. That's remarkable if true.
|08-08-2006, 03:30 PM||#5|
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Denver, CO
Wonder if they found evidence of the quake that they claim allowed the Atlantic to flood the Mediteranean basin. This would also mean the Atlantic ocean receded quite a bit with all that water emptying into the Med and there would be evidence of that as well, so did they find this evidence also?
|08-08-2006, 11:11 PM||#6|
Ring of Famer
Join Date: May 2004
I think it is one of those things I am going to ask God to answer or show me in a vision when I get to heaven.
Was altantis real
was it really an apple.
show me a dinsosaur and how they were in their enivronment
How did the inca, mayans and Egyptions do it
Show me Rome in the height of its glory
the giants spoken of in the Bible
what was your proudest achievement and what did you most regret.
|08-09-2006, 05:04 AM||#7|
Join Date: Aug 2005
I love Atlantis things, and this one seems fairly credible, but there have been so many. Like "The Late Great Planet Earth." And especially the Edgar Cayce followers who found the ridges on the ocean floor near Florida in 2002 (?) on the exact date Cayce predicted it ... only to be debunked.
Then there's this book:
I still love this book - and it did convince me that the Giza Pyramids were built by a civilization or a technology lost to the modern world. I still believe Giza is the greatest mystery on Earth.
But this book also theorized that Atlantis is buried under Antarctica ... and that Antarctica was once located in temperate waters further north ... and it was the "bridge" over which so much ancient Euro/African culture was conveyed to Central/S. America. It explains Macchu Piccu, too ...
But in the 15 years that have passed since I read it, I'm not sure the "under Antarctica" hypothesis still grips me (not to mention its "earth crust displacement" theory ... a bit nutty actually).
One important bit of proof in the book: An ancient Turkish navy admiral named Piri Reis had 3 thousand year old maps of an ENORMOUS island in the Atlantic - whose coastline appears to be nearly-identical to that of today's Antarctica. These maps were discovered around 1900 ... and the strange part, of course, is - how did a 500 BC navu guy from Turkey know about Antarctica? Antarctica wasn't discovered until the late 1800s....