Atlantis the Lost Continent Finally Found

by Arysio Santos

  There is also a considerable evidence of similar giant maritime invasions of a sudden, cataclysmic nature provided by geological features such as drumlins and scablands, particularly evident in the continent of North America. These features provide evidence of giant floods which somehow managed to loft enormous areas of continental glaciers, perhaps rafting them off to sea. ↑125

  The methods used to study the mechanism of sea level rise in question here do not record instantaneous events such as, say, giant tsunamis, but only determine the average values of sea level rise lasting long enough to cause coral reef drowning and stranding. Put otherwise, scientific curves are smoothened by averaging, and fail to record the sharp peaks associated with almost instantaneous changes wrought by sudden maritime invasions and tsunamis.

  Actually, the uncertainty in the graph here is about ±25 meters, an enormous amount in sea level variation, which is normally measured in a few millimeters per century or so. The very fact that the end of the Pleistocene was attended by widespread mass extinctions of all sorts tells the tale of its sudden, catastrophic nature. Cf. also here and here and here and here. The last of these links is very interesting, as it provides solid evidence that the end of the Pleistocene was caused by a volcanic paroxysm of sorts, just as we have been arguing for the last two decades and more. ↑126

  We also note that the inescapable reality of catastrophic extinctions of global extension irrefutably prove the falsity of Darwinian Uniformitarian Evolution. Darwinian Evolution and Darwinian Geology are both Uniformitarian in nature, and cannot be amended in order to comply with the realities of Catastrophism. As a matter of fact, both the above aged Victorian doctrines were devised by Darwin and Lyell for the specific purpose of disproving the Catastrophist views of earlier researchers such as Baron Cuvier, Comte de Buffon and William Buckland who, of course, believed in the reality of the Flood as most well-informed persons presently do. ↑127

  Much as Darwinism once pretentiously ousted Catastrophism, Catastrophism now returns revived and triumphant in order to debunk Darwinian Evolution. Any attempt to save that doomed, outdated, unscientific Victorian theory is wholly specious, and must be faced as such by all persons interested in truth, rather than in convenience. This outdated Victorian theory is an offshoot of Polygenism, and was concocted in order to further the Colonial interests of the British Empire during the Victorian Age.

  According to Sir Karl Popper, the basic requisite for a theory to be deemed scientific is that it be falsifiable. If a theory cannot be falsified, that theory is to be deemed unscientific, period. Darwinian Evolution and Darwinian Geology are both based on the Uniformity Principle, the main tenet of both. Moreover, this principle – postulated by the two scholars but never actually proved – is the very foundation of Darwinian Evolution Theory, even today taught in essentially all primary and academic institutions the world over. ↑128

  The Uniformity Principle frontally denies the possibility of global cataclysms of an unusual nature such as the Flood and the Ice Ages. But the reality of these global cataclysms is now established beyond any reasonable doubt. Hence, Darwinian Evolution has been irretrievably falsified by well-established geological facts and the only acceptable solution is to trash the whole theory as outdated and unscientific.

  ________________________________

  7 Hæckel’s Lemuria is an unreal, gigantic landbridge which theoretically stretched all the way from Madagascar in Africa to the central Pacific region, far beyond the Far East. This landbridge – which in fact never was – pretensely served to explain the diffusion of lemurs (a small primate) all the way from Madagascar in Africa to Indonesia, where they also abound.

  Even worse is Col. Churchward’s Mu, the huge sunken continent of the midPacific. Most experts concluded that “Col. Churchward” was a fraud, and so were his alleged discoveries in the central Pacific region. Curiously enough, Hæckel’s proposal is quaintly reminiscent of some ancient conceptions of Taprobane as a mythical sunken land in this (wrong) region of the world.

  But Plate Tectonics Theory eventually rendered Hæckel’s hypothesis superfluous, and it was finally discarded. Both Mu and Lemuria were fated to doom, as soon as geologists realized they never existed at all. With their scholarly demise, these fabled sunken lands soon fell in discredit among the public, and Theosophy soon lost its former popularity, except perhaps within certain circles of dedicated devouts.

  However, it is quite possible that Haeckel and others – who made a lot of in situ research – actually heard the legends on sunken continents which are recurrent in the whole region of the South Seas. And so, they got their inspiration – as is so often the case – and decided to transfer Lemuria to the realm of scientific hypothesis. In fact, this is the way Science advances.

  New proposals are tentatively accepted, tested out, and discarded as soon as they are found to be invalid. Curiously enough, the name of Lemuria seems to be connected with the dead ancestors. The name of the lemurs – the eerie nocturnal primates of the whole region – is derived from the one of the Roman ancestors, known as lemures, due to their spooky habits. The name of Lemuria is derived from the one of the feast (Lemuralia), where the dead ancestors of the Romans were commemorated. ↑129

  These dead ancestors are of course the same as the dead Atlanteans, killed en masse by the cataclysm which ended up submerging the whole place. This coincidence is extremely important. First, it shows the reality of the great carnage, in fact the one of the Flood. Second, the connection with Indonesia and the Far East cogently proves that these terrible events actually happened there. No matter what, it is interesting to observe the capricious way in which these proto-historical events keep coming back to us in such surreal ways.

  ________________________________

  8 These names respectively mean, in Latin or Greek: “Sea of Atlas” (Atlanticus Mare); “Sea of Cronus” (Kronius Mare); “Great Sea” (Mare Magnum); “True Ocean” (Alethinos Okeanos); “Ocean Sea” (Mare Oceanus); Occidental Ocean (Occidentalis Oceanus); Oriental Sea (Eous Mare) and, more simply, “Ocean” (Latin: Oceanus; Greek: Okeanos = “going around”). Another of its common epithets was Mare Externum (“Outer Sea”).

  Marco Polo, in his Travels, calls the Pacific Ocean – which he reached from China, via the Silk Road – by the name of Mar Ozeano (“Ocean Sea”). And the great explorer also explains that this Ocean Sea is the true ocean, the other seas and oceans being merely its arms or extensions. This fact shows where Columbus actually obtained the name of his Mar Oceano.

  0

  Columbus also named the Sargasso Sea in accordance with the ancient traditions on the Pacific Ocean as a sea loaded with dangerous sargassos (seareeds or kelp) strong enough to cause ships to wreck. This pristine tradition on the Sargasso Sea derives from India, as is so often the case. It has also to do with the “innavigable sea” of Atlantis as reported by Plato and others. In the famous Map of Ptolemy, this perilous sea is the Pacific Ocean, and is literally named Mare Prasodum (“Sea of Sargassos”).

  We will return to this theme further below, when we discuss the Ocean citing the ancient texts of Plato, Homer and Herodotus, among several other Classical authorities. In the Orphic traditions, Kronos (or Saturn) was usually identified with Hercules. Cf. Damascius, De Principiis 123b; Athenagoras, Pro Christianis, 18:20, and the comments on these passages made by Kirk and Raven in their seminal book on the pre-Socratic philosophers of ancient Greece.

  This undeniable fact is of extreme practical importance. The twin figures of Atlas and Hercules, the two main rulers of Atlantis, are often confused. And this is particularly the case in relation to their famous pillars, attributed sometimes to one or to the other hero, or even to both of them. Atlas and Hercules are also the same as Atlas and Gadeiros, the twin rulers of Atlantis, according to Plato. Gadeiros is an alias of Geryon, himself the older avatar of Hercules, and he also seems to be the alias of Atlas himself.

  These two personages ultimately derived from the ones of Kri
shna and Balarama, the two greatest heroes of Hindu mythology. In reality, we have two such pairs of pillars, one in Gibraltar, attributed to Hercules, and one in Indonesia (Malacca Strait) attributed to Atlas. The fact that these pillars were indifferently attributed to both Atlas and Hercules can be checked, for instance, here and in the many sources quoted therein. ↑130

  We will comment this crucial dualism further below in detail. Suffice it to say here that the true Pillars of Atlas are the ones of Indonesia, and that the ones in Gibraltar or in the Bosphorus, etc., are no more than virtual “mirror images” of no great importance. In fact, every such feature has its true archetype in the Far East, and its “mirror image” in the Far West, at the opposite side of the world.

  It is strange to realize the close way in which Greco-Roman mythology and religion ultimately derive from Hindu archetypes. But this strangeness is merely the result of the widespread bias that human civilizations sprang independently from each other, which is false. It is merely the result of opinion, generally unscientific and unsupported by any evidence whatsoever.

  In fact, the ancient traditions are full of detailed references to Civilizing Heroes and their civilizing influence: Cadmus, Hercules, Atlas, Aeneas, Neoptolemus, Cecrops, Oannés, Gilgamesh, etc.. Even the Americas are no exception to this rule: Sumé, Tamandaré, Jurupari, Quetzalcoatl, Viracocha, Bochica, and so on. Actually, it is apparently impossible to find a single tradition which ascribes the invention of agriculture and similar arts and techniques to purely local efforts rather than to those of outsiders.

  As we said above, the word “ocean” (Grk. okeanos; Lat. oceanus) ultimately derives from the Sanskrit aşayana according to Kirk and Raven and some other experts. The Skt. aşayana means “round-going”, and implies the idea of a water body encircling the earth all around, as the ocean in fact does.

  In the ancient conception, the Ocean encircled the earth all around, like some sort of encircling ring (the Ouroboros Serpent). Even Homer depicts the world thus encircled by the Ocean (Il. 18:607, etc.). And so do many authorities, Plato included. Herodotus tells that “the ocean begins in the orient (east), where the sun is born” (Hist. 4:8) and that it encircles the earth (Hist. 4:36). Homer repeatedly uses the epithet of apsorrhoos (“which flows back into itself”), implying the idea of the Ocean’s circularity.

  Herodotus further adds (Hist. 1:202) that “the sea frequented by the Greeks (the Mediterranean?), that beyond the Pillars of Hercules – which is called the Atlantic and also the Erythraean (Indian Ocean) – are all one and the same sea.” The idea is again of the circular ocean. These references to the Circular Ocean, often named Atlantean or Kronius, could be multiplied ad nauseam.

  We note that the World Ocean in fact encircles the earth all around along the Line of the Equator but for small interruptions now bypassed in Suez and in Panama. The “earth” in question here should be understood as the Tierra Firme a concept which we clarify in more detail next. In some texts it corresponds to the Old World (Oikumene) and in others to the Peirata Ges (the Americas) of which Plato spoke.

  Several other ancient sources also affirm that the sun is born from the ocean (e. g., Homer, Il. 7:422; Hesiod, Theog. 775; Mimnermus, fragm. 10, Stesichoros, fragm. 6:1, Apuleius, Flor. 6; etc.). The sun is invariably said to arise in pristine Ethiopia, the Land of Dawn. And this Far Eastern Ethiopia is precisely the site of Indonesia (Eoos), where the Ocean starts, according to Herodotus’ passage just referred.

  A close study of the above passages (and several others such) suggests the idea that the sun crossed the ocean after it set in Gibraltar, and then returned to the orient, where it rested overnight, and thence rose again in order to start the new day. Apuleius (op. cit.) affirms that the sun rises in Indonesia (India extra Gangem): “where the ocean returns upon itself and the sun rises” (prope oceani reflexus et solis exortus).

  This world conception is discussed in our figures section, where we show an ancient Egyptian vase of the pre-Dynastic Period illustrating this curious belief. Justinus (Epit. 1:2:9) affirms that “Alexander invaded India aiming to extend his empire to the control of the Ocean and the Extreme Orient” (Oceano ultimoque Oriente). In other words, the Atlantic Ocean was apparently believed to extend all the way to the Orient, being coterminous and one with the Pacific Ocean, the “Ocean” proper.

  Columbus, who closely studied these and other similar ancient passages, was thus amply justified in his belief that he could reach the Orient by sailing via the west, across the Ocean Sea. Cf. also the view on this of the Libro del Conosçimiento quoted and commented in the next section of the present chapter.

  The Greek Dictionary of LSJ affirms that the Ocean “was conceived by the ancients as a great river [or stream or current] which compasses the earth’s disc, returning into itself, apsorroos” (cf. Il.18.399; Od.20.65). The “earth” in question here is the Old World, composed of Europe, Asia and Africa. And they add that it was “later the name of the Great Outward Sea, opposed to the Inward or Mediterranean Sea”. The Ocean was also called “sea” (thalassa, pontos) by the ancients, Plato also included, in order to avoid confusion with the River Ocean of Homer and other authorities. ↑131

  These erudite authors also quote (in Greek) a passage of Theopompos (Hist. Fr. 74 (a); cf. Aristotle’s De Mundo 393a17) affirming that: “Europe, Asia and Libya (Africa) are islands that are surrounded by the circle of the Ocean” (tên Eurôpên kai tên Asian kai tên Libuên nêsous einai has perirrein kuklôi ton Ôkeanon). I comment upon this passage of Aristotle, along with several similar ones from other authorities including Plato himself in other works of ours, and will not delve into it here except to note the use of “islands” instead of “continents” in this and other places”. ↑132

  No matter what, it is once again clear that the ancient conception of the Atlantic Ocean also included the Pacific and the Indian Oceans, and extended all the way to the East Indies. This, as if the Americas did not really exist or could somehow be crossed in Panama, at least by the sun and by heroes daring enough. Hence also derives the belief that the “Atlantic Islands” – which are the remains of sunken Atlantis, and were known to be situated in the Pacific Ocean – were somehow located in the western Atlantic Ocean.

  Hence also Columbus’ conviction that he could sail all the way to the East Indies by heading west, into the Atlantic Ocean. Blinded by the misconception that the “Atlantic Ocean” of today is the same one of which the ancients spoke in their sacred traditions, most researchers of Atlantis unduly confine their quest of Atlantis to the ocean now so named or, worse still, to the Mediterranean Sea where Atlantis never was.

  Small wonder then that over two millennia and a half of such interminable searches for Atlantis have never resulted in anything other than illusions and deceptions to all. The same thing applies to Palestine, where an even greater research effort for the biblical Paradise has achieved exactly zero results so far. As is clear, no matter how hard one looks in the wrong spots, nothing will ever be found.

  Suffice it here for us to point out that by the word “island” (nêsos) Plato and other ancients often meant what we now improperly call “continent”. This word – which actually means “container” – they invariably reserved to the strip of land (Peirata Ges) said to encircle the Ocean all around on the outside, “containing it”. And this strip of land in fact corresponded to the Americas, as we comment further below in the present chapter. Even more exactly, this Greek word often expressed the idea of “sunken land”, more or less like the Skt. dvipa.

  One should keep in mind that Plato invariably used the word nêsos (in the context of Atlantis) in contrast to the one of epeira or epeira ges. This word literally means “continent”, in the sense of “environing land”. But Plato’s contrast of the two words actually suggests a dualism of sorts, one as “firm land” (chersonesos or cheronesos) and the other one as a “water land” or, better yet, a “sunken land” (nêsos).

  As such, this “firm land” – which d
oes not sink and hence remains “dry” (xêros) – contrasts with the “island of Atlantis” which does so. Now, this word literally means “peninsula” in Greek. And we believe that it ultimately refers to the Peninsula of Taprobane for a series of reasons. Hesiod refers, in his Theogony (117), to this “wide-bosomed Earth, the ever-sure foundation of all the deathless ones”. This “ever-sure foundation” (hedos asphales aiei) is the unsunken portion of the “wide-bosomed earth” of Paradise (Gai’ eurusternos+), which sank away, and where the gods originated, in the dawn of time. ↑133

  This passage is dense and difficult, but its meaning is unequivocal, now that the true message has been mooted out. What Hesiod is really referring several centuries before the times of Plato – and almost in the same words, by the way – is the sinking of Taprobane with only its “skeleton” remaining emerse, when sea level rose by fully 130 meters, at the end of the Pleistocene, some 11,600 years ago.

  The Peninsula of Taprobane – also called Kra in the local languages – formed a sort of sternum (breastbone) which remained emerse when the lowlands of Atlantis disappeared under the waters. Hence its name as “firmament”, meaning more or less the same in Latin (firmamentum). Such is really the meaning of the “divide of the waters” in the memorable text of Genesis.

  We here limit ourselves to pointing out that the Sanskrit word kara from which derives the name of the Kra Peninsula is directly related to the Greek cheiros (“hand, claw, arm”). But it also designates the trunk of an elephant, in fact quite similar to the shape of the Malay Peninsula (Taprobane). From Sanskrit, the word entered the Greek language, being later converted, by means of a popular etymology, into the idea of cherros (“dry land”).

  ________________________________

  9 The Greek words used here are all linked to Perseus Project. It suffices to follow their links in order to access not only their translations, but a vast amount of erudite dictionary glosses, commentaries, links to the actual texts, search mechanisms and so on, which are available in this reputable academic source. I well realize that these linguistic issues are obscure and difficult for most readers. They are exegetical in nature and are better left to the specialists who, like myself, delight in this type of Byzantine discussion. But I here furnish the necessary tools for those of our readers who might be interested in trying their hand at it in a more or less professional manner. ↑134