Forums | MacLife

I think that if it were a credible news source the editor would have caught the misspelling of "civilisation." 

It says it has crosses on it BUT it also says it has writing on it dated back more than 5500 years

Anyone else see anything wrong with that?

I think that if it were a credible news source the editor would have caught the misspelling of "civilisation." 

isn't that the english spelling of the word that americans have formed into "civiliZation"?

If there was a poll I'd vote for prelude to a game.

First of all, "Professor Winwood" says "They must be stars because if it were the solar system, there would be 9 of them." There were only 7 planets (including the sun and moon). Maybe the "Atlantians" only counted the actual planets visible to the naked eye, huh? That would make 5 stars.

Second, he says that the spiral depicts an orbit and that the stars appear to move clockwise. However, all orbits know (and simulated) are COUNTER-clockwise. That is, unless the Atlantians could make stars and planets spontaneously reverse direction.

Third, something buried in the dirt for 5500 years wouldn't be that clean. Well, if it were gold it would look clean, but the fact that there's no dents on it, and that it looks brassy tends to make me believe that it's a hoax. Not to mention the fact that the "news stories" use phrases like "will be posted during the coming weeks, as the enigmatic professor deciphers more of the symbols" makes it sound like a story, not news.

Oh, and anything that's this well preserved, this old, and this sophisticated would have made the news, even with the war in Iraq. It would be bigger than the Rosetta stone discovery, and would force the changing of all the textbooks that state that people of this time were not able to make such sophisticated devices.

And what is it with these Atlantis freaks and crystals?

That's so retarded. Even for fiction it's hideously bad.

Second, he says that the spiral depicts an orbit and that the stars appear to move clockwise. However, all orbits know (and simulated) are COUNTER-clockwise. That is, unless the Atlantians could make stars and planets spontaneously reverse direction.

Actually, the direction of an orbit depends on your point of observation. We are North Pole snobs. We prefer to  think that the North Pole is "up", so the Earth rotates in a counter-clockwise direction. This "snobbery" translated itself to planetary orbits. If the "Atlanteans" were "South Pole snobs" they would prolly have clockwise rotations and orbits.

Though this has no bearing on the fact that the site is crap. 

Second, he says that the spiral depicts an orbit and that the stars appear to move clockwise. However, all orbits know (and simulated) are COUNTER-clockwise. That is, unless the Atlantians could make stars and planets spontaneously reverse direction.

Actually, the direction of an orbit depends on your point of observation. We are North Pole snobs. We prefer to  think that the North Pole is "up", so the Earth rotates in a counter-clockwise direction. This "snobbery" translated itself to planetary orbits. If the "Atlanteans" were "South Pole snobs" they would prolly have clockwise rotations and orbits.

Though this has no bearing on the fact that the site is crap. 

...and since one of the theories of atlantis (one of the more far out ones, that is) has atlantis actually being anarctica (antartica?), they may well have been south pole snobs..  The theory (which was the premise of a novel I read once) was this:

10,000 or so years ago, the "skin" of the planet was in a very different position.  you have to imagine it like the crust of the earth is the like the skin of an orange.  If it weren't actually atached, you sould slide it all around without moving the core.  So anyhow, you have the core (and hence magnetic poles and all that) in the same place but you rotate the crust of the earth around the core.
(stay with me...)

ok so imagine you are in the middlle of the atlantic, between africa and south america.  Now take that spot and rotate the whole crust of the earth north from that point.  This would take antartica north and the pacific and parts of the far east south,  hence putting antartica in a lovely sub-tropical region, ripe for a great civilization.  (this would also conveniently leave the african basin and middle easern "cradle of humanity" in roughly similar environmental positions to thier modern day places.)

So then along comes a huge meteor or comet which strikes the earth somewhere in canada (there is some huge crater up there, yes?) and at such an angle and with sufficient force to "shift" the entire "skin" of the earth around to roughly it's present postition.

The calamity happens so quickly and with such force that the accounts of atlantis "sinking into the sea in less than a day" could be easily accounted for.  The after effects of such a calamity could also easily explain "the deluge" which is accounted for in almost every ancient account of the history of the world (the flood, ie noah.)

I told you it was a pretty far out concept.

so do I believe this? No, but I'd like too.  It can be a lot of fun to come up with these kinds of crazy scenarios.

lateralis

pangea anyone?

STUFF

MORE STUFF

EVEN MORE STUFF

pangea anyone?

If what you mean to say is that the existence of pangea makes this immpossible, (again, not that I buy this story hook line and sinker) pangea was on the order of millions of years ago, not thousands.  I'm not sure, but I would think that the actual layout of the continents hasn't changed all that much since 10,000 or even 20-30,000 years ago.

lateralis