A Roundup of Atlantis Theories

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

Too many Atlantises. An embarrassment of Atlantises. One Atlantis, two Atlantis, red Atlantis, blue Atlantis …

Atlantis is Now Off the Coast of Cuba

This article describes an intact granite city, with pyramids, discovered off the West coast of Cuba, about 2,000 feet down, in December of 2001. As our old friend KFM, of Bad Archaeology, points out, the city would be unlikely to survive intact like this if it actually dropped dramatically from what is now sea level, as Plato seems to describe. The article points out that there is another city, the Yonaguni Monument, off the coast of Japan, and Graham Hancock in his book, Underworld, points out that there are submerged megalithic cities in many places around the world, including off the coast of India. (Hancock has cycled through seriously advancing a number of different Atlantis theories, so he will be sort of the workhorse of this post.)

It seems to me that the city off the coast of Cuba is part of a worldwide phenomenon where sea levels were once much lower. We can include in this phenomenon Doggerland (which will make another appearance later in this post), and the land bridges known to have once connected Asia to the Americas and the Indonesian islands to the mainland.

If you are an old-earth believer and have to juggle millions of years, multiple cooling and warming periods, slow but somehow effective continental drift, and some confusing archeological indications that humans were perhaps around well before they should have been … good luck. As someone who believes that the history of the earth is measured in thousands or tens of thousands, but not millions or billions of years, my guess is that this period of low sea levels plus advanced civilization came right after the Great Flood.

You would have a much colder, rainier climate as the earth adjusted to the recent cataclysm (about this more in a minute). You would have had frequent snow and rain storms, with all this precipitation getting frozen in the rapidly forming ice sheets, causing Earth’s water supply to be greatly reduced. Meanwhile, you would have Noah’s children and grandchildren branching out as quickly as possible, building megalithic cities wherever they went, still remembering the techniques and technology (and possibly still assisted by the giants and gods) that they had seen pre-Flood. This period of low sea levels would have had to last long enough for people to disperse and to build, but it need not have been very long. It could have a been a matter of a few hundred to a thousand years. As the climate stabilized, you would have had floods covering settlements and civilizations in different parts of the world. This, I believe, is the reason we have an embarrassment of Atlantises.

There have also been assertions that the reason for the Bermuda Triangle phenomenon is that Atlantis lies underneath it. (Note that the west coast of Cuba is outside of the Bermuda Triangle.) This theory certainly appeals to those who are interested in the potential paranormal effects of the lost city, but I do not know of any actual submerged city found in the Bermuda Triangle area. (If you do, please enlighten me in the comments. I’m always looking for another Atlantis to add to my collection.) This article discusses how ocean-floor mapping technology can create lines that look like city streets.

Atlantis as Antarctica

Graham Hancock makes the case for this in his book Fingerprints of the Gods. He posits that the evidence points to an ancient, advanced civilization which was destroyed by a cataclysm, and asserts that the refugees from it seeded their scientific knowledge, in code form, by creating new religious cults all around the world that featured certain sacred numbers.

If you’ve been reading Out of Babel for a while, you know my assessment of all of this is that it’s right, but not in the way that Hancock thinks it is. Among other things, his scientific materialism and evolutionary beliefs make it impossible for him to imagine that people groups like the Maya, for example, would have come up with advanced mathematics on their own, so he needs to posit a more “advanced” civilization bringing these things from without.

Anyway. For his advanced ancient civilization, Hancock realizes he needs a continent-sized homeland (because, again, his evolutionary beliefs about man require that such a civilization develop gradually, over millennia, from hunter-gatherers to farmers and so on). Antarctica is a good candidate because it’s an entire continent; there is some evidence that it was mapped before it was quite so covered in ice; its general pre-ice outline corresponds roughly to Plato’s description of Atlantis; and there is a theory available for how it could have gone from being in a temperate part of the Atlantic, to being at the South Pole, in a relatively short amount of time. Hancock calls this “earth crust slippage” and posits that it happened about 20,000 B.C.

Now for the version I find more plausible: Creation scientist Dr. Kurt Wise presents his team’s model for “continental sprint” in this video. I find Dr. Wise’s model persuasive as a model of the Great Flood, and as we will discuss, it could explain the Atlantis legend wherever in the world Atlantis proves to have been. However, even if you buy into “continental sprint,” it does not follow that Plato was describing Antarctica when he wrote about Atlantis. If all the land on the earth were breaking up, the ultimate fate of that portion that later became Antarctica would seem like a minor detail.

Atlantis as North America

This one was put forward by Graham Hancock, after he abandoned his Antarctica theory, in his book America Before, a review of which I react to here. Although weak, the theory relies on the fact that there are large structures, either megalithic or earthworks, which align to different astronomical features and/or function as observatories, all around the world, including in North America. For example, the pyramid complex at Teotihuacan appears to be a model of the solar system; the Giza Plateau appears to be a model of Orion, and Serpent Mound in Ohio, which sites towards the sunrise at solstices, may be according to Hancock a model of the constellation Draco.

All that to say, anywhere you can find a large astronomical structure, you can make a case for Atlantis, and Hancock has made that case for North America.

Atlantis as the Cyclades Plateau in the Aegean

This article, which I posted last summer, asserts that Plato’s descriptions of Atlantis are admirably matched by the Cyclades Plateau (now the Cyclades islands), which would have existed when sea levels were 400 feet lower than they are now. The Cyclades Plateau is a rather large formation right in the middle of the Aegean. (If we consider that lower sea levels would have also expanded the coastlines of the rest of Greece, then it would have been even closer to the mainland.) This is an attractive theory in terms of its being what Plato was actually talking about (since he makes Atlantis contemporary with Athens), but it does depend upon this:

Recently, a four year study that included a thorough analysis of Plato’s work established that serious errors by early translators allowed for the mixed messages in the translated document.

Atlantis as Part of Doggerland

Yet another underwater location that used to be inhabited when sea levels were lower, Doggerland was a vast region that stretched between England, France, Holland, and Scandanavia, and is now the relatively shallow southern part of the North Sea. Archaeological discoveries have handily established that this area was once inhabited, here and here among others. As with other now-submerged human habitations, the reader’s preconceptions will determine how long ago you believe it was inhabited, and for how long.

This article describes an entire book which puts forth a detailed theory Plato was describing Doggerland. Apparently, Atlantis had a large, roughly rectangular plain surrounded by “ditches,” which the author thinks could also be translated “dikes.” He imagines the inhabitants of AtlantiDoggerland using these dikes to keep the sea back from a certain region of Doggerland for a period of time. Without some very expensive underwater archeological expeditions (in a notoriously dangerous sea), there is no way to confirm whether the ruins of a large city lie where this theory would predict. The maps are well worth looking at.

Atlantis as the Richat Structure

The Richat Structure, of the “Eye of the Sahara,” is a large (c. 40 km) formation of concentric rings of stone located in present-day Mauritania. Because of its size and remote location, it is hard to spot except from orbit.

Depending upon how you calculate, the structure matches the recorded dimensions of Atlantis quite well. There are also, of course, explanations about how this structure could have formed geologically. I’m not enough of an expert to assess these, but I am more skeptical of geological explanations than I used to be, now that I’ve seen “mountains” that turned out to be pyramids with insides, and geologists’ attempts to explain how a single fossilized tree could cross-cut millions of years’ worth of sedimentary rock layers. In other words, could go either way.

For the Richat structure to be Atlantis, we have to imagine that it was once nearer to coast and was inundated by a tsunami or something of that nature. This theory actually works fairly well with the geological model that Dr. Kurt Wise presents above. “Continental sprint” would have included many earthquakes and resultant tsunamis. Africa, in the model, does not move as much as the other pieces of Pangea, but it would still have undergone earthquakes and, possibly, some uplift.

On this theory, with his tale of Atlantis Plato somehow retained a memory of a pre-Flood incident (and read Athens back into it?). Below is a video of Pastor Joel Webbon discussing the theory with Brian Suave and Ben Garrett of Haunted Cosmos. They get into local lore around the Richat structure, how this dovetails with Greek legends about Atlantis, and how this all could have been plausible in a pre-Flood world haunted by gods and nephilim.

Conclusion

When I first started composing this post, I thought I was going to come out in support of the Richat Structure. Now, I just don’t know. The Haunted Cosmos guys make it sound very plausible, but a few of the other candidates are also plausible (some less so). There does not seem to be any way to “find” Atlantis without sacrificing at least some of what Plato has to say about it. (For example, Athens existed before the Flood? Before there was a Europe?) This makes it really difficult to favor any one theory (although we can probably discard others). What is clear, is that the prehistoric world had many sophisticated cities, lots of things built with megaliths, pyramids on almost every continent, and that there was a period when many human settlements were submerged as sea levels rose. The details are a matter of speculation, of the kind suitable for someone writing a novel.

4 thoughts on “A Roundup of Atlantis Theories

  1. I’m leaning towards the Richat Structure as Atlantis. The Haunted Cosmos guys making it sound convening.

    So many cultures have stories of cities being shallow up by the ocean. Just like how there flood myth from all around the world.

    How could the world not be a millions or billions of years and still have people come up in the last ten thousands of years?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Jennifer Mugrage's avatar Jennifer Mugrage

      In theory, it certainly could be that way. There are other reasons I’m skeptical of the old earth theories.

      Gradualist theories were first developed intentionally so as not to have subscribe to “catastrophism” – the belief that our current world owes its features to a series of disasters, because this version of history was also taught in the Bible, so of course it could not be true. The new, freethinking idea was that everything we see today, came about through the same slow subtle geological processes we observe today, just extended over a lot of time. But the closer you look, the harder that is to support. A lot of this is in the Kurt Wise video, and you can find other stuff on the Is Genesis History? YouTube channel. Long story short, we find evidence of earthquakes *much* stronger than any seen today, and it would take mud tsunamis to produce the fossil beds that we find, since when things die naturally, they don’t normally get fossilized. Continental drift, which was thought to be continuing into the present day, is not really happening consistently; for example, you can find sediment on the seafloor locations that are supposed to be either subducting or separating by a few centimeters every year.

      Another problem is that this gradualism comes with the idea that the human race also developed very slowly, beginning as animals basically, slowly developing things like language, clothing, and religion, and getting more and more advanced as time went on. That idea, IMO, has been thoroughly debunked by the discovery of sophisticated megalithic cities and observatories all over the world. Human “species” like Neanderthals, who were once portrayed as not “modern,” keep being vindicated when we find evidence of beads, fiber making, fishing, art, religion. Old alphabet systems keep getting found. And archaeological sites yield carbon-14 dates that differ wildly from sample to sample and can’t be fit into any coherent historical scheme.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. I’m more in the boat of I don’t think we will ever know how old the Earth truly is. Different sources always have a different number ranging in the billions.
        Some people believe that first Genesis to mean that the Earth is six thousand years old. Due to the symmetry I take it to be more of a poetic form to how God created the world. There are other part of the Bible that are written as poetry.
        In a way it like other creature myth were the storyteller take on a poetic narrative to mystified the audience in how the world came to be.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Jennifer Mugrage's avatar Jennifer Mugrage

          I agree we are not going to come up with an exact number … nor do we need to. However, note that the different sources you mention are all modern ones, coming since the science of geology switched from a catastrophic to a gradualist model. Billions of years is our modern conventional wisdom.

          Yes, I agree that Genesis 1 is poetic. As a linguist, I’m not convinced that “day” must mean 24 hours, because “day” is used to mean era in other parts of the Bible, such as in the prophets – “the great and dreadful day of the Lord.” However, just because it’s poetic doesn’t mean that it means nothing. For example, the description of God making Adam full-grown, out of the dust of the ground, and breathing life into him, cannot be stretched to mean “the same thing” as God starting a process of natural selection and mutation that eventually, through one-celled animals and so on, led to human beings. It has to mean that God created the animals according to their kinds and that people were people from the very start.

          I also don’t think the genealogies in Genesis must necessarily be complete. “Father” in Hebrew can also mean “grandfather” or “ancestor,” and we see genealogies regularized to make a point in other parts of the Bible – for example, in the first chapter of Matthew. So, I wouldn’t commit to saying we can take the genealogies and ages in Genesis, and come up with an exact span of time from creation to Abraham. However, again, this doesn’t mean the historical record stretches infinitely. I’m prepared to accept that the lists skip generations, but not millions of generations.

          Notice that in the comment above, my arguments for thinking the earth as we currently see it is in the thousands, not the millions, of years old are coming not from Scripture, but from the physical evidence. Gradualism can’t account for the fossils, mountains, and old earthquake folds that we see. Carbon-dating is basically just dead reckoning, since we don’t know starting carbon levels, and it can be thrown off by things like volcanic explosions and asteroid strikes. And, although I am not against the family of man being older than a wooden reading of the genealogies would suggest, geneticist Nathaniel Jeanson in his book Traced has pointed out that the rate of mutation between father & son is more than twice as fast as previously thought, which yields much younger genetic ages for the different lineages. That’s why, years ago, I started out like you, agnostic about the age of the earth and not really caring about it either. Then I moved towards accepting traditional dating for the history of human dispersion from about 10,000 B.C. forward, but thinking that the earth was probably in the tens of thousands, not the millions of years old. Now, the more evidence like Jeanson’s that I hear presented, the more I think it might be even younger.

          Like

Leave a reply to Jennifer Mugrage Cancel reply