Mystery Solved? Atlantis

This entry was posted on 5/16/2007 6:32 PM and is filed under Oddities.

My second husband was a bit of an eccentric.  He believed he had a past life in Atlantis and that he and I were literally bound together for a time in that world.  I never really took him seriously, and he has since passed on, but recently I ran across the website Atlantis Was a Real Place.

This is a fascinating website!  The author breaks down this history of Plato's original work and cross references modern day knowledge to form his theory.  Information on the Bimini Road is included, but more interesting to me was the story of Oak Island in Canada's Nova Scotia province.  Aparantly there is treasure there!  Fascinating information on the disappearance of horses on the continent and various other research items are featured.

Atlantis Was a Real Place

Atlantis Was a Real Place, the Americas

Recent discovery: The kingdom of Atlantis included North, South, and Central America, which was divided into ten countries or kingdoms, and each country had its own King. One of the countries was also called Atlantis, which had a royal city called Atlantis. Near the royal city was a small rectangular island called Atlantis. The King of Atlantis was the ruler over the other nine Kingdoms. The first ruler of the Kingdom was called Atlas, and the continent, country, city, and island were all named after him. That is why Atlantis is sometimes referred to as a continent, a city, or an island.

Originally, three different moats surrounded the royal palace. Plato referred to the moat formation as three zones of water and two zones of land. As time went by they covered over the moats and cut three canals through the peninsula on which the royal palace was located. The construction of the canals divided the peninsula and formed two triangular islands. The island of Atlantis held the royal palace.

I have matched the terrain features that Plato wrote about with present terrain features found in the Tampa Bay area. Plato described Harbour Island as the small island of Atlantis. You will find that Plato recorded and published the story just as it was told. He even recorded the discussions leading up to the story. In reading his dialogue, you will notice several obvious mistakes made in translating the story from Egyptian to Greek and from Greek to English. The biggest mistake occurred when travelers came upon a shoal of mud and thought it was left over from the sunken island. They were wrong. The Americas did not sink. Neither did Atlantis.

You are invited to review the facts and see for yourself that the Americas, from South America to Alaska were once the great kingdom of Atlantis, a single nation. The land formations of the royal city are still laid out the same as they were over 11,000 years ago. They are best viewed from the air. See Tampa FL.

Read the short version of Plato’s story at www.atlantiskingdom.com/ to learn more about Atlantis and the Americas. Then read Atlantis Conspiracy to get the complete story.

I was astounded at the similarities between this man's research and the memories Mark would related to me.  I'm certain the two have never met, and frankly Mark was not the most well read individual--he much preferred comic books to any other sort of literature.  The common elements in this author's work and Mark's own memories have encouraged me to rethink the idea that Mark was just odd--and having this sort of "confirmation" of the theories of this author make me trust his work more.

 

Trackbacks

• No trackbacks exist for this entry.

Comments

• 5/18/2007 7:57 AM F.Bass wrote:
  The only true Plato's Atlantis in http://www.GeorgeosDiazMontexano.com/ and http://www.AtlantidaPlaton.es/ and http://www.laAtlantida.es/ or http://www.laAtlantida.info/
  Reply to this
• 5/24/2007 10:48 PM Sue wrote:
  Interesting post Robin! Good work, I enjoyed reading it!
  Reply to this
• 3/16/2008 1:36 AM oak island wrote:
  ATLANTIS MEMO
  Mid Summer 2005 First Nations Keith Ranville set out from his Vancouver home to investigate a at the time a Oak Island's diminishing place of interest. But a new Oak Island beginning emerged through Keith's traveling research studies a simple unencrypted solution was generated to resolve this 213 year-old elaborate treasure mystery. The close examination of Oak Island clues proclaimed a interesting triangle theory' in-which was instrumental in locating the core to understanding and reviving the Oak Island treasure mystery.
  
  
  Oak Island's neighbouring Birch Island perceives a obvious impression of a large incise triangle' shaped into the earth' obscured from ground view. Google Satellite is the best way to view the Birch Island triangle.
  Cont... http://oakislandmoneypitblogspotcom.blogspot.com/
  Reply to this
• 4/30/2008 9:49 AM Jason wrote:
  Hello Oak Island (Keith Ranville),
  
  This is a new theory for you, tired of Birch Island and decided to go back to Oak Island? Once again I ask you to back up your claims and show us how you came up with these findings.
  
  I wouldn't have any problem with you spamming the internet with your theories but when you're doing it to seek money from people I'm afraid I must speak up.
  
  You know as well as me that you have no claim to the island, no treasure trove licence and no respect from the owners or other researchers as you have viciously attacked them on your secret identity blog.
  
  http://sinclair-clan.blogspot.com/
  
  This link will take you to this blog, the isp addresses match those of your personal blog.
  
  Your letters of reference from various professionals, upon contact verification by myself and others, has proven to be either false or revoked.
  
  Keith, you should think about reigning it in. It's getting out of hand.
  Reply to this
• 5/1/2008 6:46 PM F. Bass wrote:
  7. The Acropolis of Atlantis should have been routinely reachable from Athens by sea; and at some time it must have contacts with the Greeks.
  8. At the time, the Atlanteans should have been at war with Athenians (Poseidôn against Athena).
  9. The Acropolis of Atlantis should have sunk entirely or partly below the water.
  10. The Acropolis of Atlantis was destroyed in Cecrops, Erechtheus, Erichthonius and Erysichthon times, before Theseus’s times.
  11. The Acropolis of Atlantis was 50 stadia from the sea.
  12. Atlantis had a high population density, enough to support a large army (10,000 chariots, 1,200 ships, 1,200,000 hoplites)
  13. The region of Atlantis involved the sacrifice of bulls.
  14. The destruction of Atlantis was accompanied by an great earthquake (seismôn) and a Kataklüsmos: “cleaning by liquid or waters” (tsunami?).
  15. After the destruction of Atlantis, the passage of ships was difficult.
  16. Elephants were present at least in a part of Atlantis, and ivory was used.
  17. Hot and cold springs were present in Atlantis.
  18. Atlantis lay on a coastal plain of 3000 stadion of Maxima length, and 2000 stadion from the sea until approximately in the middle of the plain; surrounded by mountains falling into the sea.
  19. Atlantis controlled other colonies or states of the period.
  20. Some Winds in Atlantis came from the north.
  21. The Atlanteans constructed canals in the plain where was the Acropolis.
  22. In Atlantis they were constructed “aqueducts over the bridges”.
  23. Atlantis were “beneath the sun” (huph’ hêliôi), expression that it indicates was - most of the year - in a sunny place.
  
  24. Every 5th and 6th year, they sacrificed bulls.
  “Milos Conference Match”, reviewed and corrected by Georgeos Díaz-Montexano (2005-2007).However there are only some few points that are obligatory, the other ones they could be left as secondary. I have been able to reduce to only 10 indispensable or obligatory points. These points are the most exclusive or characteristic in Atlantis, that is to say, those points that cannot be ignored, and that they are not common to all the civilizations, that is to say that cannot be with easiness in any place of the world. In this reduction of points I have omitted the figures and measures, because the studies of the diverse codexes and MS demonstrate that big contradictions exist. Consequently, the figures of the measures and distances neither the figures of the dates can be considered as sure elements in the scientific discussion.These are that is to say the 10 key points that are obligatory, that it should complete any theory on Plato’s Atlantis, so that it can be considered as a serious and rigorous intent of approach to the enigma of Atlantis.
  1. The Atlantis should have been located where an Insular-Land used to be and where parts of it may still exist.
  Reply to this
• 5/1/2008 6:48 PM F. Bass wrote:
  2. The Insular-Land Atlantis should have been located “before the mouth” of the Pillars of Hercules, but in the Pelagus Atlantic, not in the Mediterranean neither in another sea or the ocean.
  3. The Insular-Land denominated like Atlantis were divided by Poseidôn in ten parts or districts, and one of those ten parts was an extremity that arrived until one part of the Pillars of Hercules, and its denomination was Gadeira.
  4. In Atlantis, in its ground, a native human species arose, that is, indigenous a human species or endemic, that is to say, that the first human beings of Atlantis did not come from any other part of the world but that were born in he himself ground of Atlantis.
  5. Atlantis must have sheltered a literate population with writing system, and endemic or indigenous language, with metallurgical and navigational skills, and use of chariot-horses.
  
  6. Elephants were present at least in a part of Atlantis, and ivory was used.
  7. The Atlantis Acropolis lay on a rectangular coastal plain, surrounded by mountains falling into the sea.
  8. Atlantis were “beneath the sun” (huph’ hêliôi), expression that it indicates was - most of the year - in a sunny place.
  9. The war between the Atlanteans and Athenians occurred in Cecrops, Erechtheus, Erichthonius and Erysichthon times, before Theseus’s epoch, that is, in the times of Mycenaean Greece.
  10. The Acropolis of Atlantis should have been reachable from Athens by sea; and at some time it must have contacts with the Greeks.
  Any hypothesis or theory that it doesn’t respect these obligatory points, simply not even are not entitled to be considered as a serious or scientific hypothesis. Some considerations on the points 4 and 5.The study of the languages of old Iberia Nêsos that had writing, as Tartessians, Turdetanians, Iberians, etc., it demonstrates that the old residents from Iberia, before the arrival of the phoenicians, Greek and Roman, they spoke some languages that don’t belong, that is to say that are not kindred, of none of the linguistic well-known families; consequently, it is impossible to sustain any hypothesis on the origin of the old residents from Iberia, without before to demonstrate that the civilizations proposed as cradle of Iberia, have the same languages. Conclusion. The proof demonstrates - until the moment - that the old civilizations of Iberia like Tartessians and Iberians are absolutely original, autochthonous, indigenous, endemic, that is to say that they had their origin in the same Iberia Nêsos, from the most remote antiquity, that is to say, from before the human being that lived in Iberia learned how to speak.
  Reply to this
• 5/1/2008 6:50 PM F. Bass wrote:
  The languages of Iberia, like it passed with the language of Sumerian, they were born in the same floor of Iberia makes hundred of thousands of years, or makes millions of years, because nobody has been able to demonstrate - so far - that the languages of Iberia derive of other well-known languages. When one compares the old languages of Iberia with other old languages that neither has well-known family or demonstrated as it is the case of the Sumerian, or of Basque, then the conclusion is that the old languages of Iberia, that is to say, the language of Tartessians, or the language of most of the tribes Iberians, is not Sumerian, neither it is Basque, in spite of so near Basque being geographically. Plato’s texts locate Atlanteans like inhabitants of the lands that are next to Atlantic Pelagus, “before the mouth” of (pro tou stómatos) Hercules’ (Gibraltar) Pillars, and next to the region of Gadeira, that is to say, in the environment of the strait of Gibraltar, and the costs of Iberia and Morocco, but always in Atlantic. This same all the authors of the antiquity that spoke of these three geographical points, say and that they spoke of Atlantis. Consequently, it is an unquestionable fact for any person that respects the scientific rigor and the truth. Then, if Atlanteans was inhabiting of the Atlantic costs of Iberia and Morocco, then Atlanteans cannot have been Etruscos, neither Sumerians, neither the same inhabitants of any other place of the Planet. Plato’s Critias affirms that Atlanteans had an autochthonous origin, that is to say, indigenous, endemic, starting from Euênôr that was the first human being that arose in Atlantis, being born of the own earth, that is to say that didn’t come of any part. Plato is informing us that Atlantis overcomes its origins to a human autochthonous, indigenous, endemic population that had its origin in the same floor of Atlantis that didn’t come or it descended of any part, and the scientific proof they demonstrate that in Iberia - almost a million years ago - it also arose kind of a hominid autochthonous, indigenous, endemic, that is to say that didn’t come of any place, because although one believes could come from África, the true fact is that it is an unique species that has not been found. so far. in any other place of the world. This species has been baptized as “Homo Antecessor”, that is to say, the predecessor of the human modern species; and lastly, we have seen as well as in Iberia, the oldest civilizations had an autochthonous, indigenous, endemic language that didn’t come from any place of the world. Critias also tells us that Atlanteans had its own grammar or it notarizes, and logically its own language. As before said that they were natives of a human autochthonous, indigenous, or endemic species, then it is logical to suppose that their language was also autochthonous, indigenous, or endemic, that is to say, born in the same floor, and not derived of any other nation or linguistic family.
  Reply to this
• 5/1/2008 6:52 PM F. Bass wrote:
  Conclusion: Plato’s descriptions point to Iberia, at least like a part, or very important extension of old Atlantis Nêsos, and the autochthonous, native, or endemic character of Atlanteans, it is also confirmed by the evidences scientific pickups in Iberia. Not it exists in any other place of the planet, another Nêsos (island / peninsula) that has been next to Hercules’ Pillars, next to a region of Gadeira, and next to a sea Atlantic, and that has also had a human autochthonous, indigenous, or endemic species, that is to say that has not come of another place, and that has also had an autochthonous, indigenous, or endemic language, that is to say, a language that has arisen in same Nêsos, that is to say that has not derived of other languages. Only Iberia Nêsos gathers all these requirements that are obligatory, because, simply, all these key points or indispensable requirements are all data that are written in Timaeus and in Plato’s Critias.
  
  More Info in: http://www.GeorgeosDiazMontexano.com/
  http://www.laAtlantida.info/
  http://www.AtlantidaPlaton.es/
  http://www.laAtlantida.es/
  http://www.Antiquos.com/
  Reply to this

Leave a comment