What is compelling is that this structure imitates with a high precision the information we receive indirectly through Plato, from the original Egyptian reports.
Now understand that something this massive may well have a natural geologic foundation and it also seriously needs to. It makes no sense to actually build something like this at all, but make perfect sense to exploit it. Recall the Niagara Escarpment and how inviting that is for building purposes.
Now if we do go back 9,000 years we run smack into the end of the Dryas and the rise of agriculture. The Sahara was then wet and fully vegetated. The mountains to the north would also protect against cold winds from the North and the plain would be an excellent growing zone.
For all those reasons, we are looking at Plato's Atlantis and we can leave it at that. This does suggests something else. The fall of the Atlantic Bronze Age which took out the Coast of Spain, the mid Atlantic ridge and the Bahamas Bank likely took place in 1159 BC or only 3200 years ago. Much of this material is likely co mingled into the original story.
There is also the problem that this structure is at an elevation of 1300 feet. We also have possible scab lands between this location and the sea. Again we do understand that massive adjustments are indicated with the Atlantic basin. Both Hudson Bay moved up and the ridge likely moved down. This may have triggered an uplift of the Western edge of Africa and ten thousand years is enough to do it.
In fact, if Atlantis was blocked by mud as described, then it was an uplift. Right now, the only thing that stops me from assigning all this to 1159 BC is Plato's 9,000 years. However that could well be the time of the founding.
The Richat Structure
http://www.gigalresearch.com/uk/mystery-of-the-giant-blue-eye-of-africa-in-mauritania.php
The Richat Structure, also known as the Eye of the Sahara or blue eye of Africa, is a prominent geological circular feature in the Sahara desert in Mauritania near Ouadane. It is nearly 50 kilometers across and very visible from space. Initially interpreted as an asteroid impact structure because of its high degree of circularity, and then as a structure formed by a volcanic eruption that also seems improbable because of the lack of a dome of igneous or volcanic rock, it is now argued to be a highly symmetrical and deeply eroded geologic dome that collapsed. So it is now thought by many to have been caused by uplifted rock sculpted by erosion. But the fact that the "rings", are equidistant to the centre and that the Richat Structure is nearly circular remains a mystery.
And new questions arise. Some people are amazed by the resemblance of this structure with the representation we have of Atlantis by Plato. According to Plato, the island was circular, divided into concentric circles of land and water: "There were 2 of land and 3 of water... Atlantis when sunk by the earthquake became an impossible barrier of mud to voyagers sailing from hence to any part of the ocean..." And he spoke about a mount sheltering the city by North and "and encompassing a great plain of an oblong shape in the south "...etc... Atlantis in Greek means Atlantis, nesos : the island of Atlas. And we get near the geologic eye at the North the Mount Atlas. According to Plato, Atlantis was lying "in front of the Pillars of Hercule", and we are there just in front from South and not beside from East or West as many authors are searching...
So we are talking about a 100 millions years ago geological structure, we have to keep in mind this, but if old stratas were uplifted it is normal. And we get extensive hydrothermal alteration of rhyolites and gabbros and a central megabreccia created by hydrothermal dissolution and collapse there too.
We know also that 40000 years ago it existed huge lakes in Sahara. We know that Sahara was still with some humidity 6500BC. Sahara desert covering ten countries of Africa with 9,400,000 square kilometres was 100 Millions of years ago all covered by sea. So in any case I think that this is a research that deserve alot of attention.
Antoine Gigal - April 2012
The dikes are generally about 300 m long and typically 1 to 4 m wide. They consist of massive carbonatites that are mostly devoid of vesicles. The carbonatite rocks have been dated as having cooled between 94 to 104 million years ago. A kimberlitic plug and several sills have been found within the northern part of the Richat structure. The kimberlite plug has been dated being about 99 million years old. These intrusive igneous rocks are interpreted as indicating the presence of a large alkaline igneous intrusion that currently underlies the Richat structure and created it by uplifting the overlying rock".
So we are talking about a 100 millions years ago geological structure, we have to keep in mind this, but if old stratas were uplifted it is normal. And we get extensive hydrothermal alteration of rhyolites and gabbros and a central megabreccia created by hydrothermal dissolution and collapse there too.
We know also that 40000 years ago it existed huge lakes in Sahara. We know that Sahara was still with some humidity 6500BC. Sahara desert covering ten countries of Africa with 9,400,000 square kilometres was 100 Millions of years ago all covered by sea. So in any case I think that this is a research that deserve alot of attention.
Bright Insight
Published on 4 Sep 2018
Not only did the lost city of Atlantis actually exist, but its true location has been hiding in plain sight for thousands of years, completely unnoticed, as we’ve been looking in all the wrong places...Since everyone assumes that it must be under the ocean somewhere, such as in the depths of the Atlantic Ocean or the Mediterranean Sea, which have long been considered to be the most likely places for its existence. And no, I am not about to suggest that Antarctica is the hidden location of Atlantis, either. Because in this video, I am going to connect the dots on the exact words that Plato used to describe Atlantis, its location, and the geographical land features that surround it, which were recorded in Plato’s dialogues, the Critias and Timaeus. And the details that Plato shared of Atlantis, which I’m about to share with you in side by side comparison, will show you that the Richat Structure located in Mauritania Africa, also commonly referred to as the Eye of the Sahara, or the Eye of Africa…is the most likely location for the lost city of Atlantis.
EDIT: I have received many comments stating something to the effect of "This site (the Richat) is natural, so it's not Atlantis" Here is my response, and I will be discussing this in detail in part 2: Why would the Richat being a natural formation exclude it from being Atlantis? Civilizations have settled on natural geological land features throughout history, including today. And with the massive dimensions of Atlantis, do to the math on the circumferences of those 3 circles of water. Just how much digging/dredging would that require? So obviously it would make sense for Atlantis to have been built on a natural formation. Thanks for watching! There are MANY details about Plato’s description of Atlantis and its location that were not discussed in this video. I’ll be posting Part 2 (probably a week from now), which will include many fascinating aspects about the capital of Atlantis, and its 10-city empire. Help support me on my Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/BrightInsight Cheers, - Jimmy EDIT: At around the 16:06 mark, I meant to say "lower", not "higher", in reference to the earths sea levels 12K years ago. Point is still the same, in that there is a gap between sea levels and the Richat's elevation about sea level.
No comments:
Post a Comment