ATLANTIDA

nema potrebe da gledam film, izvoli foto dokaz :cool:

Piri_Reis_map_interpretation.jpg


ipak, vrlo impresivno ucrtana mapa, izuzetno stara... treba napomenuti da je fakat bio podvig preci atlantik u koekakvim brodovima...

Veoma interesantno...:think:
Mada, zar Atlantida nije bila ultra razvijena, koliko znam, Inke, koje su tu zivele su bile na nizem stepenu razvoja od ostalih naroda.
 
The Controversy

The Piri Reis map shows the western coast of Africa, the eastern coast of South America, and the northern coast of Antarctica. The northern coastline of Antarctica is perfectly detailed. The most puzzling however is not so much how Piri Reis managed to draw such an accurate map of the Antarctic region 300 years before it was discovered, but that the map shows the coastline under the ice. Geological evidence confirms that the latest date Queen Maud Land could have been charted in an ice-free state is 4000 BC.


The official science has been saying all along that the ice-cap which covers the Antarctic is million years old.
The Piri Reis map shows that the northern part of that continent has been mapped before the ice did cover it. That should make think it has been mapped million years ago, but that's impossible since mankind did not exist at that time.

Further and more accurate studies have proven that the last period of ice-free condition in the Antarctic ended about 6000 years ago. There are still doubts about the beginning of this ice-free period, which has been put by different researchers everything between year 13000 and 9000 BC.
The question is: Who mapped the Queen Maud Land of Antarctic 6000 years ago? Which unknown civilization had the technology or the need to do that?

It is well-known that the first civilization, according to the traditional history, developed in the mid-east around year 3000 BC, soon to be followed within a millennium by the Indus valley and the Chinese ones. So, accordingly, none of the known civilizations could have done such a job. Who was here 4000 years BC, being able to do things that NOW are possible with the modern technologies?
 
The Controversy

The Piri Reis map shows the western coast of Africa, the eastern coast of South America, and the northern coast of Antarctica. The northern coastline of Antarctica is perfectly detailed. The most puzzling however is not so much how Piri Reis managed to draw such an accurate map of the Antarctic region 300 years before it was discovered, but that the map shows the coastline under the ice. Geological evidence confirms that the latest date Queen Maud Land could have been charted in an ice-free state is 4000 BC.


The official science has been saying all along that the ice-cap which covers the Antarctic is million years old.
The Piri Reis map shows that the northern part of that continent has been mapped before the ice did cover it. That should make think it has been mapped million years ago, but that's impossible since mankind did not exist at that time.

Further and more accurate studies have proven that the last period of ice-free condition in the Antarctic ended about 6000 years ago. There are still doubts about the beginning of this ice-free period, which has been put by different researchers everything between year 13000 and 9000 BC.
The question is: Who mapped the Queen Maud Land of Antarctic 6000 years ago? Which unknown civilization had the technology or the need to do that?

It is well-known that the first civilization, according to the traditional history, developed in the mid-east around year 3000 BC, soon to be followed within a millennium by the Indus valley and the Chinese ones. So, accordingly, none of the known civilizations could have done such a job. Who was here 4000 years BC, being able to do things that NOW are possible with the modern technologies?

prvo bilo bi lepo da navedes izvor odakle je ovo citirano.
drugo, pogledaj sliku :cool:
 
prvo bilo bi lepo da navedes izvor odakle je ovo citirano.
drugo, pogledaj sliku :cool:

A odakle si ti stavila sliku?

1:50 Dakle mapa je superponirana

Pretpostavljam da stavljas :cool: zato sto mislis da si ispala mnogo pametna jer bi te crvene linije sa tackama koje se odnose na drugu mapu a po tvom misljenju trebale biti jednake duzine. Jel to?
 
Poslednja izmena:
A odakle si ti stavila sliku?
[YOUTUBE]
=E0H9FK9vgvc&feature=player_embedded#at=189[/YOUTUBE]

3:05 Dakle mapa je superponirana
Pretpostavljam da stavljas :cool: zato sto mislis da si ispala mnogo pametna jer bi te crvene linije sa tackama koje se odnose na drugu mapu a po tvom misljenju trebale biti jednake duzine. Jel to?

sa wikija. a odakle tebi tekst?
ps, smajlice stavljam zavisno od raspolozenja.
pps, kao sto vidis, tacke se slazu u potpunosti, ili ti treba druga slika?
 
prvo bilo bi lepo da navedes izvor odakle je ovo citirano.
drugo, pogledaj sliku :cool:


o, zaboga, moram se složiti sa Milicom....
Odlična slika, Milice, gde si je našla?
Ali, znaš šta me zbunjuje? Zasto je mapa zakrivljena u krajnjem južnom delu istočne obale, čak toliko, da svako pomisli da je Antarktik u pitanju??? Jer, ako su tako precizno mogli da je nacrtaju, zašto su je nakrivili tako? Jer, ako je ostatak mape, da kažemo sever, savršen, čemu onda to "krivljenje" juga?
 
o, zaboga, moram se složiti sa Milicom....
Odlična slika, Milice, gde si je našla?
Ali, znaš šta me zbunjuje? Zasto je mapa zakrivljena u krajnjem južnom delu istočne obale, čak toliko, da svako pomisli da je Antarktik u pitanju??? Jer, ako su tako precizno mogli da je nacrtaju, zašto su je nakrivili tako? Jer, ako je ostatak mape, da kažemo sever, savršen, čemu onda to "krivljenje" juga?

precizno za ono vreme.
jug nikako ne moze predstavljati antarktik jer bi u tom slucaju juzna amerika i antarktik bili povezani kopnom, zar ne?
 
Nesto se pitam...Potonuce nekog ostrva te velicine, posto cenim da je bilo povece, trebalo bi da izazove promene u nivou Svetskog mora...Da li je moguce da ima veze sa legendarnim potopom?
 
Nesto se pitam...Potonuce nekog ostrva te velicine, posto cenim da je bilo povece, trebalo bi da izazove promene u nivou Svetskog mora...Da li je moguce da ima veze sa legendarnim potopom?

Upravo... I istrazivaci koji su se bavili nekim drugim stvarima a ne Atlantidom su uvideli da se nesto jako znacajno desilo pre 12.000 godina. Na to ukazuju i neke druge stvari kao sto su mitovi.

@Piri Reis

O njemu cu kasnije, mnogo vise volim o 10.000 BC da pricam. :)
 
e ovako.. u temi Ahil sa srpskim ocilima dovatili smo se teme u vezi atlantide,pa mislim da bi bilo u redi i krajnje zanimljivo da iskupimo i podijelimo znanje i price koje smo culi od drugih a i u istu ruku procitali u vezi nje..:per:
 
znaci poslao sam zahtjev za ovu temu,bilo da je ukradena ili ne drago mi je da je pokrenuta,vjerujem da i sve vas zanima skoro sve u vezi nje kao i mene :)

Da, na ovoj temi imas desetine starnica a svi prilaze Platonovoj Atlantidi kao da je on bio istoricar a ne filozof.
Platon je pre svega filozof a njegovo delo "Kritija" nije dovrseno, tako da pred sobom imamo alegoriju ucenja o idejama ali koju Platon nije stigao da razjasni. Zbog toga vekovima ljudi prilaze Kritiji bukvalno trazeci oko sebe tu famoznu Atlantidu.
Na pogresnom mestu trazite. Atlantida je u nama u onome sto "ne nastaje i nestaje, vec uvek jeste" kako bi rekao Platon..
O tome imate moju temu na filozofiji:

Platon - Atlantida
http://forum.krstarica.com/threads/284269&highlight=atlantida
 

Back
Top