Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Earth

Researchers Find Possible Atlantis Location 218

Posted by samzenpus
from the does-aquaman-know? dept.
An AC writes"It seems that Plato's Atlantis has a new spot candidate. Some archaeologist used satellite imagery to identify a structure in an once tsunami-ed Spanish plain. From the article: '"This is the power of tsunamis," head researcher Richard Freund told Reuters. "It is just so hard to understand that it can wipe out 60 miles inland, and that's pretty much what we're talking about," said Freund, a University of Hartford, Connecticut, professor who lead an international team searching for the true site of Atlantis.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Researchers Find Possible Atlantis Location

Comments Filter:
  • Yawn (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mseeger (40923) on Sunday March 13, 2011 @05:48PM (#35474556)

    Yet another repeating news story.... How many times Atlantis has been located by now? 100+ times at least. What's the next news? Transparent Aluminium again?

  • Make it stop (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Samantha Wright (1324923) on Sunday March 13, 2011 @05:57PM (#35474604) Homepage Journal
    The truly boggling thing about people who believe in Atlantis is that they believe in Atlantis. Even Wikipedia doesn't [wikipedia.org]. (Or, at least, whatever corrupt bureaucrat obsessively controls that article.) Seriously, Slashdot, this is the kind of crap we're told we should expect from the "History" Channel, not our favourite hyperbolic tech news site!
  • I'm appalled (Score:5, Insightful)

    by zill (1690130) on Sunday March 13, 2011 @06:30PM (#35474792)
    Is anyone else sickened by these people that capitalize on natural disasters?
  • Re:Make it stop (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 13, 2011 @06:59PM (#35474908)

    Most "mythical" cities have turned out to be real. Often they are less awe inspiring that the fables but they are generally real. Odds are there was a city that corresponded to the stories of Atlantis that was less impressive but the odds of it being identified are nearly zero. In truth it may have not been called Atlantis by the residents. One of the problems is over the last 10,000 years there have been hundreds of small civilizations that have not been found or identified. In a single location there could have been dozens of different cultures or civilizations. In the British Isles there have been quite a number and it's one of the proposed locations for Atlantis, believe it or not it fits a number of the conditions for Atlantis if you go back to when sea levels were lower. It will probably never be identified but it probably existed.

  • Re:Yawn (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Scrameustache (459504) on Sunday March 13, 2011 @08:56PM (#35475570) Homepage Journal

    The worst part of it is that Plato made up Atlantis just to set up a hypothetical argument.

    People used to say that about Troy. Then someone dug it up.

  • Re:Yawn (Score:5, Insightful)

    by schmidt349 (690948) on Sunday March 13, 2011 @09:33PM (#35475770)

    See, a lack of evidence leads _reasonable_ people to extreme skepticism. It is not an open invitation to invent a crackpot theory and then plug your ears while shouting "LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU."

    Moreover, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. If you want to take Plato at his word you don't just get to point to a previously-undiscovered set of ruins somewhere in the Med and say "Atlantis!" You need to prove

    a) that it was inhabited 8,000 years ago
    b) that Athens was inhabited 8,000 years ago
    c) That an apocalyptic war was fought between the two

    because these are all parts of Plato's story.

    You also don't get to say "the Egyptians told Solon/Plato/whoever" because archaeology proves that at the alleged time of this apocalyptic war the Egyptians (if you can call the Faiyum A culture "Egyptian" for any reason other than that the happened to leave near the Nile river delta) were still a Neolithic people with no system of writing.

    Moreover, since all available evidence tells us that b) is not only not true but impossible, you're putting the cart before the horse trying to prove a) or c). If someone tells me, in earnest, that the CIA has been instructing him to kill the Pope by way of a radio embedded in his brain, nothing short of a CT scan showing me the radio and a bug detector showing signal origin at Langley is going to convince me that he's not insane. I don't start speculating on why the CIA would want the pope dead.

    I realize that this type of reasoning from evidence rather than speculation is not the usual fare at the UFOlogy seminars and astrology club meetings you drag your knuckles to every night, but do pay attention, you might learn something.

Harrison's Postulate: For every action, there is an equal and opposite criticism.

Working...