Replies

Im sure the're where many lands where people lived that submerged, but... you guys don't seriously believe everything this article claims right?

1) All details of this supposed "mu" came from some "ancient tablets" that conveniently disappeared and nobody even saw or translated except for one man. That ranks high on my bullshitradar.

2) Majority of evidence is basically nothing more then vague references in other writings and cultures of 'a land' or 'a land to the east' and 'a civilisation that was destroyed' etc.

Considering how many lands and cultures and civilisations there where, is it really smart to just presume that all references to cultures and lands all refered to the same one?

3) The article claims that the description of Atlantis matches Mu-land perfectly. Well i guess there are SOO many descriptions of Atlantis that are ever so different that maybe one actually does. But he refers to Plato and Plato's description really does mention Atlantis past the Pillars of Hercule. So, not really a perfect match. Also, was there pure copper ore (orichalchum) in that land? Was there immense quantities of gold? How can the guy know, if the area is submerged? How can he possibly claim it is a perfect match?

Most of Plato's descriptions was about the structuring of the society, the marvelous buildings etc.
In place of that Sundaland there are a few "statues and blocks". How does this proof a perfect match? Are the blocks layed out in concentric circles? Is there a huge canal?

Still claiming that the description fits seems like hammering the evidence to fit the theory to me.

4) The whole concept of one sole culture sending emissaries to every corner of the world to teach the poor smucks how to peel a banana and lay one piece of stone on another also scores high on my bullshit radar.

But I could be convinced if there was some evidence. Like, hundreds of identical ship drawings all over the world with "Mu" written underneath. Or, African -type skeletons buried all over the world, preferrably with the same artefacts in their graves.

Do you guys realize the scale of such an enterprise?
And no evidence but a few references to unnamed cultures and lands in writings, who could be refering to about every culture and land, and the supposed translations of old tablets of which nobody ever heard of till some guy wrote a book claiming he discovered them, and nobody ever heard again from.

This is NOT science.

Im sure the're where many lands where people lived that submerged, but... you guys don't seriously believe everything this article claims right?

Blam likes the ideas in Oppenheimer's book, me, not so much. But regarding belief, I post a lot of topics that I don't necessarily agree with, just because they are food for thought. There are FReepers who don't like this or that, and I'm one of them :') but I don't get all that hot and bothered any longer, other than last week...

My view of Atlantis is -- if it existed and wasn't just a literary device -- Plato's description of its location is quite clear and specific, and there's no need to look in the Baltic, the Antarctica, northern Africa, Thera, Crete, Anatolia, Peru, Wisconsin, or a host of other places that people have claimed it was located.

During the glaciation, ocean levels were much lower. All other things being equal, the climate would be better at a lower altitude, and the food supply would be also. Furthermore, glaciation has happened a number of times in the past 2 million years. So, that's where most of what we call humanity really comes from, and the search for human traces under the ocean has barely begun.

No, it's not science. It's an interesting theory, though. The money quote in the article:

"Many scientific communities are sadly all too like religions. In spite of all the evidence against their theory, their doctrine and dogma must be observed and preserved!"

Boy, ain't that the truth. Sort of like what Schoch and co get from the Egyptologists, or anyone who disagrees that immediate radical action is necessary to combat anthropogenic Global Warming.

There are some fascinating black holes in our collectively murky prehistory and quite a bit of still unreconciled (to my satisfaction) evidence. I'm willing to listen and research and value the sensible theories while disregarding those which are less so. Multiple pyramid-building post-Neolithic cultures independently developing on various continents never sat well with me as a theory.