To: blam; Ernest_at_the_Beach; FairOpinion; ValerieUSA
Zangger discusses the long history (circa 1885, much earlier than I'd thought) of the "Thera was Atlantis" idea, and beginning on page 44 cuts it to ribbons. It should be noted that Zangger has his own book about what was and wasn't Atlantis. ;') Check out pp 48-49 for a summary of the problems with the idea, and an amusing catalog of other things attributed to the eruption.
I bought this book in May, and having started it up tonight with some cherry picking, it looks like something I'm going to read in entire.
13 posted on
08/17/2004 7:30:28 PM PDT by
SunkenCiv
(Unlike some people, I have a profile. Okay, maybe it's a little large...)
"Even when, during the respective Thera Conferences, individual scientists had pointed out that the magnitude and significance of the Thera eruption must be estimated as less than previously thought, the conferences acted to strengthen the original hypothesis. The individual experts believed that the arguments advanced by their colleagues were sound, and that the facts of a natural catastrophe were not in doubt... All three factors reflect a fantasy world rather than cool detachment, which is why it so difficult to refute the theory with rational arguments." -- Eberhard Zangger, "
The Future of the Past: Archaeology in the 21st Century", pp 49-50.
56 posted on
02/06/2008 10:26:50 AM PST by
SunkenCiv
(https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/__________________Profile updated Wednesday, January 16, 2008)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson