INTRODUCTION
AS STATED IN THE SERIES INTRODUCTION, THESE first two volumes focus on matters pertaining in any way to the legend of Atlantis. In this second volume, we focus on the other region the Egyptian priest gives us some geological information about, i.e., Greece and the Aegean, which he describes in the context of Atlantis and its destruction. We are, of course, interested to see if the recent geological history of the Greek/Aegean region reflects incremental uniformitarianism, as we’re led to believe, or the old priest’s rather more dramatic narrative ofevents.
Having taken a close look at Plato’s Atlantis legend itself in volume 1, and from as many angles as could possibly have something to offer, including the geological and astronomical, we should, by now, have a good idea of what it actually says, at least about everything except Greece and the Aegean. We have heard from many of the parties involved, both ancient and modern, including those with one or another axe to grind, most of whom hail from academia, and most of whom condemn the legend as fiction, and its author as an imaginative poet, orworse.
At the same time, we saw that there are still some well-established academics who hesitate to dismiss the legend out of hand, and feel that there may be an historical fact or two lurking in the background. While they are certainly a small minority, these few academics do signify that not all scholars studiously toe the line of orthodoxy. This gives us some modicum of hope, atleast.
We spent a good deal of time on the newly created subdiscipline of geomythology and its treatment of Atlantis and other myths. We saw that the approach taken by these academics was little different from any academic anywhere. Most demonstrated disinterest, or perhaps evasion, when it came to giving any myth a proper scientific treatment. This was unsurprising, considering the reluctance of academic geologists to challenge any of the dearly held theories of the uniformitarian establishment, as Berger, for example, made clear. As he suggested, perhaps it’s time for some Chinese scientists or physicists to getinvolved.
In this volume, we will have no hesitation at all in challenging the theories of uniformitarianism, and we will often use physics to do so, while we may meet the odd Chinese scientist also. Since the priest gives us a good deal of geological information about ancient Greece (Athens) we will now use that to conduct a geological “test,” shall we say, of Plato’s legend, which we could also call his “geological theory.” As we saw from Dorothy Vitaliano, in chapter 8 of volume 1, there is little difference between a geological theory and an etiological myth, and hence, Plato’s legend is, in essence, an etiological myth concerning the formation of the present-day world.
The priest describes the country in both a general way, as regards its overall size, shape and topography, and also in a more detailed way, pertaining to its soils, sediments, plants, and climate. More importantly, the priest also presents a description of the catastrophe’s effects on Greece, simultaneous with the destruction of Atlantis out in theAtlantic.
We have, therefore, quite a lot to work with, especially as compared to some of the legends we examined in volume 1. Still, our examination of those legends showed that some do provide quite a lot of information—much of it unaddressed by academic geomythologists, who clearly hadn’t much interest in “elucidating” the nature of the geological events that gave rise to those legends. However, we saw that a simple comparison of one or two legends with the geological evidence suggested that those legends were quite likely valid reports of actual events. This volume is essentially a massively expanded version of that comparisonprocess.
The reader will, of course, understand that much of what I say in this book contradicts the uniformitarian explanation, and much else is considered complete heresy. However, the whole point is to test uniformitarianism, so it can’t be helped if the results of the experiment are not to academia’s liking—I’m just following the science, as academics themselves say, and I can’t help where it leads, as they alsosay.
We begin with a look at the structure of Greece and the Aegean, both being a single landmass, in reality; it is just that some of it, the Aegean area, is now underwater. We know that the region experiences occasional earthquakes and volcanic er