Ideas? sure. Aslong as I dont have to make up evidence to be interesting enough to get people to read it. That is the current way to go right?
I think the story of Atlantis told by Plato is as interesting as any story told by one ancient guy. And there are a lot. However, since Aztecs mention that there used to be this great empire called Atlan, and since
Atlan and Tis are Aztec and Inca words meaning City and Water, and Plato talks about how Atlantis was so tied to the sea, im willing to believe that Atlantis may have been located on or next to south america.
South america itself is after all past the pillars of Hercule, and it contains plenty of gold and copper.
Not to mention piramids, which everyone associates with Atlantis anyway.
Just because Plato said that Atlantis went down in the sea, doesnt necessarily mean that it is completely at the bottom of the sea. Perhaps only some of the islands, perhaps part of the coast, perhaps only the capital city. Perhaps not at all and the culture was only destroyed by a flood.
When half of Washington would burn to the ground, wouldn't newspapers claim that "Washington burns"?
Wouldn't that day be remembered as the day that Washington "went down in flames"?
Even though only half the city burned!People like dramatizing.
Besides, looking at the devastation of one tsunami,
i can imagine what it might do to a culture, who's majopr cities would have been localised at the coast, without foreign aid, canned food or emergency workers. Ir would end it.
This is only an idea, and i don't postulate that there is "in fact more evidence is cited here than for most other currently accepted theories for other civilizations" as that moron claims who postulated his idea.