When is a myth not a myth? When it is proven to be true, of course. Long time believers in the Atlantis mythos may sleep easier tonight with this news coming from researchers. Then again...
What I find most interesting is the time line correlation between the estimated date of the earthquakes and tsunamis allegedly responsible for the one-day destruction (not beggaring the 'Is it a day in the biblical sense?' question) and the possible upheavals resulting from the massive melting of the ice pack over the northeastern side of North America in the waning days of the last mini-ice age that afflicted this region of the world I inhabit with an ice cover over 183 feet thick. On the other hand, the bummer is the total absence of sonar readings of man made structures or other indications of a “civilization” or even of “inhabitation.”
I like happy endings as much as the next guy. So it is nice that the folks who believed in the Platonic description of the Atlantis myth may be vindicated. Who knows? Perhaps in 2500 years, Intelligent Design might be proved true. I kinda doubt it, and I sure won't be losing any sleep over a belief system espoused by the yahoos who were picked first for dodgeball in fifth grade and were last seen standing in line for Gigli.
<>
5 comments:
ask sylvia bvrowne about atlantis one time existance.
Well, Anon Y. Mouse, "sylvia bvrowne"(sic) isn't an authority whom I would cite regarding much of anything, least of all the myth of Atlantis...
Instead of looking at a mini ice age, maybe we should perhaps open up the possibility that life as people existed about 12,000 years ago. if this were the case, then the first polar shift of the earth's axis may be a plausible explanation for its sudden drop into the ocean. But then again I could be crazy
Hi Joseph,
I'm not sure what you are getting at in this comment you left on the Snooze. Did some of it get lost between keyboard and commitment of text to the comment box, perhaps?
I, too, am open to the concept of "pole shift" as a possible explanation. However , let us consider how that would have impacted the area alleged to be the possible Atlantis venue.
The original article has since disappeared from ready recall at the CNN site, but it was very similar to this one which appeared on the BBC:
BBC - August 15, 2005
A submerged island that could be the source of the Atlantis myth was hit by a large earthquake and tsunami 12,000 years ago, a geologist has discovered.
Spartel Island now lies 60m under the sea in the Straits of Gibraltar, but some think it once lay above water.
The finding adds weight to a hypothesis that the island could have inspired the legend recounted by the philosopher Plato more than 2,000 years ago.
Evidence comes from a seafloor survey published in the journal Geology.
Marc-André Gutscher of the University of Western Brittany in Plouzané, France, found a coarse-grained sedimentary deposit that is 50-120cm thick and could have been left behind after a tsunami.
Shaken sediments
Dr Gutscher said that the destruction described by Plato is consistent with a great earthquake and tsunami similar to the one that devastated the city of Lisbon in Portugal in 1755, generating waves with heights of up to 10m.
The thick "turbidite" deposit results from sediments that have been shaken up by underwater geological upheavals.
It was found to date to around 12,000 years ago - roughly the age indicated by Plato for the destruction of Atlantis, Dr Gutscher reports in Geology.
Spartel Island, in the Gulf of Cadiz, was proposed as a candidate for the origin of the Atlantis legend in 2001 by French geologist Jacques Collina-Girard.
It is "in front of the Pillars of Hercules", or the Straits of Gibraltar, as Plato described. The philosopher said the fabled island civilisation had been destroyed in a single day and night, disappearing below the sea.
Sedimentary records reveal that events like the 1755 Lisbon earthquake occur every 1,500 to 2,000 years in the Gulf of Cadiz.
But the mapping of the island carried out by Dr Gutscher failed to turn up any manmade structures and also showed that the island was much smaller than previously believed.
This could make it less likely that the island was inhabited by a civilization.
The original Platonic myth does NOT place these events in Pre-history. Rather, it was within memory of the verbal traditions of nomadic wanderers from the North of present-day Italy. Probably within a 1000 years or so. Certainly not any older than 3500 B.C. That is only +/- 5500 years from now. Less than half of the 10-12000 years theorized to be the time frame for the birth of human civilization after the end of the last major ice age 13,000 years ago. Heck, about the only thing we had around here (Maine & Atlantic seaboard) were the mysterious "Red Paint People" -- they pre-date all historical Indian tribes in this region.
I find insufficient evidence for pole shift as a viable explanation at this time, but then again, the theory of pole shifting is relatively new (less than 200 years old) with few proponents doing actual research to prove the theory, so that may all change in future.
In any case, thanks for your comment and welcome to the world of blogging.
Cordially,
wil
Pretty blog photo. Ugly attitude.
Post a Comment