|
|
1954 cont.
Atlantis-a Geological Survey, By E. H. Nutter (a summary of
various theories)
From a mythological point of view the existence and loss of
Atlantis may be considered proved, even if there is still argument about its
position (Placed-City-Locate pun). Investigation in to cultural, ethnological,
floral and floral distribution appears also to indicate the previous existence
of an extensive land somewhere in the
Bellamy and Sykes- Hoerbiger Moon
Capture Theory is considered most probable with destruction of Atlantis as
linked with some anomalies in Mediterranean region geology.
Watkins and Bradley-climatic
conditions as cause by grand conjunction of sun and planets, or Venus thrown
off orbit into the asteroid belt (yet seems unlikely). Bradley estimates destruction at 14-15,000 B.C.
Dr. Malaise- Evidence of submerged 'Atlantic'
rivers that must have been changed from their present position of ocean level
by some 12,000 feet, more than sufficient to have brought the Atlantic Ridge at
one time above water.
With Tulip he agrees the effect was the breakdown of the 'vault' in the earth's
crust. Malaise thought it was the weight of the ice cap during the glacial age,
and Tulip the sedimentation and the gradual contraction of the earth caused the
collapse. Dr. Malaise had further evidence from a Swedish Oceanographical
Expedition, which show the ocean bottom at the top of
the ridge is consistent with the formation of wave action. Those either side
are very different from each other, though both contain volcanic ash, give
further evidence that they were completely separated towards the later end of
the Tertiary. He estimates the date of sinkage at
about 25-30,000 years ago, or 23,000-28,000 B.C..
Professor Boneff suggests that
Atlantis may have been lost due to close approach, or collision with an
asteroid and the resulting tidal wave. If it was a collision we do not see why
land in some parts did not stay up by the impact?
The above are the only fully fledged theories advanced, but
there are several articles giving more corroborative evidence.
Dahl and Hain-
Evidence of the Mid-Atlantic Ridge above water.
Kiss-Explains the 'Seas of Mud mentioned by Critias as being Ice Floes with their upper surfaces melted
into sludge. It must be remembered Pumice can be included as this description
also.
Sawyer- Quotes the large number of asteroids which have
fallen on West Africa, which is evidence in favor of Hoerbiger's
Theory concerning the breakup of the Tertiary Satellite, but not the existence
of Atlantis or not. He mentions the existence of a more or less continuous
strand line along the South and
Hinzpeter -Endeavors to estimate the age when Atlantis flourished by
the "Varv" dating of the Glacial Regression
and obtains a period of 6,000 years between 17,000-11,000 years ago, or
15,000-9,000 B.C..
He questions the dating by decay of radioactive particles,
but does not prove his case.
Who is right? Dr. Malaise has the advantage that his theory
is based on orthodox geology but he fails to account properly for the
simultaneous inundation of the
Fire,
Flood, and Famine (Chapt. 3, Demonology and Disaster)
by Hugh Soar (a summary) a map to.
