No.
Atlantis
- Thread starter shijing
- Start date
No.
So it's from other forum that I had read, thank you Laura for answer and sorry for this mistake
It's okay.
You can search the sessions thread for any mention of Atlantis and get the scoop.
Bosphorus1982
Jedi
An underwater object possibly from Atlantis
mrtn
Dagobah Resident
Please provide a source (possibly this one, from google image reverse search), otherwise it's of no use.
FWIW, Randall Carlson has recently initiated a multi-part discussion of the facts surrounding the mystery of Atlantis on his YouTube channel Kosmograhpia. He has done 2 shows so far, shown below.
FWIW, Randall Carlson has recently initiated a multi-part discussion of the facts surrounding the mystery of Atlantis on his YouTube channel Kosmograhpia. He has done 2 shows so far, shown below.
As expected an excellent and pretty interesting rundown/summary on Atlantis. As I said elsewhere, I think Randalls ideas about Atlantis based on solid evidence and historical/linguistic inquiries on what Plato actually said are the best approximation I‘ve come across so far about where Atlantis might have been located and why and how it vanished:
I thought it was an excellent summary too @Pashalis . The quotes of Solon were a kind of confirmation of what the Cs have said. I like the part where Randall said he would love to get a peak of the historical "registers".
Solon discovers his record of history is a bit incomplete:
The story of Phaethon is explicated to be a representation of "the declination of bodies moving around the earth and in the heavens" which is how the comets and catastrophes seem to been foretold as past events.
We see that the Cs are telling much the same history...
Session 10 December 1994:
It sadly looks like those scientists who know are not going to "disclose" such knowledge (at least not willingly?). Glad we have Randall Carlson.
I‘m nearing the end of the so far published new Series/Podcast about Atlantis mentioned above from Randall Carlson. It is absolutely fascinating and stunning! Hope he will put some of this knowledge in his upcoming books which he is currently writing. Great stuff.
Last edited:
Can you give us a summary of the stuff you found more stunning for those of us who don't have time to watch?
altomaltes
Padawan Learner
Great job !!Atlantis
I hadn’t originally planned to do a specific Atlantis thread, but during the time I was collecting data for the Cassiopaean timeline and Kantek threads, so much of the Atlantis information was mixed in I thought I should go ahead and put it into a thread of its own. I thought about comparing the C’s Atlantis material with that of Plato and Cayce, but since the Cassiopaean timeline project looks like it may provide a good comparative platform for that kind of information, I thought I would wait until it was up and then start adding it there. Below is the primary information I was able to gather and organize about Atlantis (with a bit about Lemuria as well):
Background
Lemuria
I assume the last reference is to the ‘Fall’ that occurred approximately 309,000 years ago. This seems too early for the end of Lemuria if the original Lemurians were Orientals (East Asians), but perhaps there is an explanation that I haven’t hit on yet.
Duration of Atlantis
We know that the three races of Atlanteans were the one we now know as ‘Native Americans’, the Paranthas (who have cousins along the edge of India and Southeast Asia, and in Papua New Guinea and Australia), and the Kantekkians (see Population and Demography below). Although it is not explicitly stated, I also make the tentative assumption that the three incarnations of Atlantis were punctuated by the major cataclysms discussed later in the following way:
First incarnation of Atlantis
First cataclysm (Mars)
Second incarnation of Atlantis (perhaps now including Kantekkians? – see below)
Second cataclysm (Venus)
Third incarnation of Atlantis
Final cataclysm (crystals)
There are a couple of seeming discrepancies in the timeline for Atlantis, but these may only be apparent depending on what our assumptions are. The first discrepancy is between the durations given of 100,000 years versus 70,000 years. One hypothesis is that the 100,000-year duration marks the absolute beginning of the Atlantean civilization prior to the Kantek evacuation, whereas the 70,000-year duration marks the beginning of the period of Atlantis which included the evacuees from Kantek as the third Atlantean race. Since the Kantek evacuation occurred around 80,000 years ago (let’s say between 78,000 BC and 80,000 BC, approximately), this would mark the end of Atlantis at around 10,000 BC to 8,000 BC. The latter is close to the ‘Otto Muck’ date for the final breaking up of Atlantis, and it is also possible that the Atlantean civilization may have lasted longer than the ‘breakup’ of Atlantis itself.
The second apparent discrepancy is between the end dates for Atlantis – 12,388 BC for the ‘flood’, and 8498 BC for the ‘final breaking up’ of Atlantis. Looking at the wording closely, it seems that these two events are not necessarily the same. In fact, the first date may coincide with the second of the three cataclysms (caused by Venus), not the third (caused by crystals). See the Destruction of Atlantis section below for more details.
Size and Location
To compare: this would be a bit less than half the size of Australia (2,970,000 square miles), or a bit larger than India (1,269,221 square miles).
Population and Demography
In general, it looks as though the Atlantean civilization covered most of the northern hemisphere, with the Paranthas generally in southern Eurasia, the Kantekkians in northern Eurasia once they established themselves after the evacution to Earth, and the 'Native Americans' occupying the area in between and also including the Americas. South America being the only place in the southern hemisphere (besides Antarctica, see below) that may be indirectly connected to Atlantis -- the other present-day continents such as Africa and Australia and their native populations are never mentioned in this context. As I mentioned in the Kantek thread, I have a working hypothesis that northeastern Eurasia (where Nostratic languages are primarily spoken but where there is a general Asian phenotype) was a place of intense contact between Kantekkians and the 'Native American' Atlanteans, although I haven't ruled out the possibility of Lemurian descendants being in the mix somehow as well.
Climate
Pre-Mars cataclysm
Post-Mars cataclysm
Karmic inheritance
Bear in mind that the Semites and the Jews are not the same people, so when it is said above that the Semites had 'a significant role in the collapse of Atlantis', this isn't necessarily because of negative karma -- another interpretation is that they were one of the outside groups that fought against Atlantean tyrrany toward the end.
Science and Culture
Extraterrestrial travel
Destruction
Three cayaclysms
First cataclysm: Mars
Second catalysm: Venus
‘The Flood’
Third cataclysm: crystals
There seems to be some confusion regarding the role of Mars and Venus in the first and second cataclysms – in general it seems to be the case that Mars played the central role in the first cataclysm, whereas Venus did in the second, but one gets the impression that both planets were somehow involved in both instances.
Post-Destruction
Displaced Atlanteans
Post-Atlantean Sites
Finally, this is a list of sites and structures which have been asked about, and which post-date the destruction of Atlantis:
Lizard Sites
Mohenjo-Daro
Angkor Wat
Tiahuanaco
Oak Island
Nephalim-related sites
Baalbek
Easter Island
Human Sites
Stonehenge
Avebury
Pyramids
Chaco Canyon
Malta
As Corto Maltese points out below, this specific part about Malta may be inaccurate:
About the "drones", see Science and Culture above.
Macchu Picchu
This date would actually make Macchu Picchu Atlantean, but I am listing it here for the sake of completeness.
Nazca Lines
Yonaguni
Damien in Kabul
Please feel free to post comments, questions or corrections!
clerck de bonk
Dagobah Resident
And here's part three in the seriesFWIW, Randall Carlson has recently initiated a multi-part discussion of the facts surrounding the mystery of Atlantis on his YouTube channel Kosmograhpia. He has done 2 shows so far, shown below.
Carlson starts of by explaining the history of Atlantis and how it basically originated or came to us by one work; Plato’s accounts given in Timaeus and Critias. He then cites a number scholarly works that where dedicated to Atlantis and sort of gives a rundown on how exactly "what we commonly know" about Atlantis has been created/changed over the decades, mainly by a few scholarly works in which straw man arguments and red herrings were established, based on which the subject and people who work on it got ridiculed and distracted from what Plato actually told us. If you are not familiar with the hard science and the terms scholar use in their works (in geology for example), it is hard to understand what they say. Carlson explains many of those terms, so that it is understandable for a layperson what they are actually saying. So it is easy for nefarious "scientist" to fool the public by making authoritative statements about the subject. If you look closely on what has actually been published in scientific works though, as Randall has over the decades, it becomes quite clear that there already existed a wealth of good scientific work on the subject and the surrounding circumstances and related fields/studies. So even at the time those straw man scientists established their dismissal of the subject, it was clear that what they stated so categorically isn't true, for people who look closely at things. To really understand that though, you have to be able to read and understand scientific language which most people can't.
Those few works, even though they were clearly flawed and plain wrong in what they stated as "facts" then became what most scholars and critical people referred to, when they tried to discredit the idea. That happened in the 70ies. Before that point there were a number of very interesting scholarly works published, reaching back all the way to the 19hundreds (and actually centuries back), that set out very well reasoned arguments based on different kinds of evidences. Then the straw man "scientific works" in the 70ies set out to basically destroy all that. For example; the idea that we are talking about a "sunken Continent" was first really established as a straw man argument in a work in 1978 in which the authors ever so slyly changed what Plato actually said from an "Island" to a "continent" in a matter of a couple of sentences. Plato talked about an Island though and the authors of this work changed it to "continent" (on purpose I think) in order to discredit previous good works.
He cites a number of examples in that regard in which the language was changed ever so slyly and thus what we actually know about Atlantis today (or think we know). With the end result that beginning in the 70ies, scientist and ordinary people began to look for Atlantis anywhere and everywhere on the globe except at the pretty explicit area Plato has given us. He also explains how then all sorts of things that were never mentioned by Plato (partly a result of works like the above) started to emerge where people all of a sudden talked about things like "electricity" and "flying planes" (and other "high tech" things) in regard to the Atlantis story. All of which was never mentioned by Plato. Carlson also gives historical context about the controversy that goes back centuries about what Plato said and that there are different camps. Some think everything he told us there is basically fantasy or myth while others take a more literal approach on it (he really meant what he said, so to say) and so on.
Then Carlson cites extensively out of Plato's own writing (while also explaining some translation controversies) and what some translated words and phrases meant in the original greek. What becomes clear is, that our main source on Atlantis, namely Plato, was very explicit both in terms of location and on the actual reality of what happened to Atlantis in his work.
Then Carlson takes this as a hypothesis (that much of it can be interpreted literally), and looks for evidence of what Plato told us there in the scientific literature (and he has read a lot of it!). Then Carlson walks us through one scientific paper after the other and explains what those scientists already knew decades, even centuries ago, about the mid Atlantic ridge for example and in particular the exact area that Plato describes. He also explains the mechanisms and scientific terms applied by those scientists, like "isostatic rebound" and "emersion" versus "immersion" and "subarial recrystallization".
Carlson also refers to a work published in 1880 by Ignatius Donnelly called "Atlantis: The Antediluvian World" which set forth 13 proportions (that were later attacked and "disproved" by the aforementioned fraudulent works in the 1970ies on the basis of its "wrong geology", which Carslon shows wasn't wrong even at that time). Donelly's propositions involving various fields including geology, linguistics etc. were as follows:
Carlson also explores a bit the myth of Phaeton. One work he cites there is The Commentaries of Proclus on Timaeus of Plato in Five books (translated from the Greek by Thomas Taylor, 1820). Randall makes it clear that very early on, the myth of Phaeton was explicitly referred to as a real event by authors like Proclus (*412–485 C.E.) and even in their own words connected to a comet. So very early on, after Plato mentioned Atlantis, there were already well established traditions that Phaeton as well as a number of other things like the fall of Atlantis could have had a lot to do with comets. So Carlson suggest therefore, that it would be foolish, given that fact, to not look into that direction when discussing Atlantis from the get go.
Carlson also exemplifies what the scientific literature said and says by explaining it in layman terms and using the latest satellite image capabilities and so on to get a better grasp of what they are actually talking about visually. That also applies to things like crystallization of certain stones in the air versus under water and other mechanisms known in geology and other fields.
Carlson also makes it clear that later works like Edgar Casey viewing of Atlantis are interesting but that one doesn't even need to go into that speculative direction to prove that what Plato mentioned has a high probability of actually have taken place, based on scientific papers alone.
Last edited:
I think when we look at what the C's have said about Atlantis and compare it to what Plato actually said and Randall is mentioning, I think there is a good likelihood that it fits quite well together. While the C's talk about Atlantis being mainly a global civilization, it is worth mentioning that Platos Atlantis had "many colonies" (a colonial power) which by definition reaches much farther than its epicenter. Just like the US-empire could be considered a "global civilization" today which has not just one home base but has reached a global reach. There are a lot more similarities to today in that regard.
It should also be mentioned that Plato (as Randall also points out) does not only tell us about the "Island Atlantis" but another landmass that is behind it, namely (most probably) North-America. So indeed, the epicenter of Atlantis could have been very near to today's North-America. If the island that could very well have sunken right around the mid Atlantic ridge (in accord with Platos story) was Atlantis, who is going to say, that this was actually the main center or just one center of Atlantis since it was a colonial power? So I think from that alone it is not out of question that another major center could have been North-America, just like today.
It should also be mentioned that Plato (as Randall also points out) does not only tell us about the "Island Atlantis" but another landmass that is behind it, namely (most probably) North-America. So indeed, the epicenter of Atlantis could have been very near to today's North-America. If the island that could very well have sunken right around the mid Atlantic ridge (in accord with Platos story) was Atlantis, who is going to say, that this was actually the main center or just one center of Atlantis since it was a colonial power? So I think from that alone it is not out of question that another major center could have been North-America, just like today.
It could but remember that according to the possibly time periods, there was an ice age on most of the period of time of Atlantis existence! So big part of the US was covered in ice. Interesting observation nevertheless.
