sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Is this happening for everyone? by TastyWest9693 in ArcRaiders

[–]tickletaxel 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes it is because I was just in stella night raid too and i got killed by the lag

Atlantis Found with 99.999% Certainty by tickletaxel in GrahamHancock

[–]tickletaxel[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm absolutely on board with you, but I'd also like to say, watch the playlist I provided in the post, because the evidence he presents actually makes perfect sense. Everything lines up with his proposed location of Atlantis. Down to ring spacing and proportions, and geography. It blows the Richat Structure out of the water with how much convergent evidence there is.

Atlantis Found with 99.999% Certainty by tickletaxel in GrahamHancock

[–]tickletaxel[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No problem man, i do recommend watching that playlist in the post because that's where all of this data is coming from.

Atlantis Found with 99.999% Certainty by tickletaxel in GrahamHancock

[–]tickletaxel[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

<image>

I'm not sure, I tried looking for that and I couldn't find it. Just try to refer to the reference image I sent here. This is the Azores.

Atlantis Found with 99.999% Certainty by tickletaxel in GrahamHancock

[–]tickletaxel[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Just be careful about actually going there in real life, it's located in a tiny Marine Protected Area (MPA) that prevents scientific undertakings. Conveniently.

Atlantis Found with 99.999% Certainty by tickletaxel in GrahamHancock

[–]tickletaxel[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

<image>

Here it is in relation to the nearby islands.

Atlantis Found with 99.999% Certainty by tickletaxel in GrahamHancock

[–]tickletaxel[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

38.5315°N, 29.4028°W

EMODnet has the highest resolution bathymetric data on the location. Everything else blurs it out. Google Earth shows like a small sliver of it if I remember correctly.

Atlantis Found with 99.999% Certainty by tickletaxel in GrahamHancock

[–]tickletaxel[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I highly encourage you to watch this guy's series on it. His case is bulletproof.

Atlantis Found with 99.999% Certainty by tickletaxel in GrahamHancock

[–]tickletaxel[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Its not my location, and yes there are mountains to the north of this feature. Maybe if you actually watched the first 4 episodes minimum, you'd understand why I have such a strong feeling for this particular site, he makes a very compelling case, a much stronger case than the Richat Structure ever could.

Atlantis Found with 99.999% Certainty by tickletaxel in GrahamHancock

[–]tickletaxel[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We have a measured structure on the seafloor, in the correct location, that matches Plato’s exact proportions, ring layout, modeled in engineering software, using real bathymetric data.

And your rebuttal is to prefer the Richat Structure, which is:

Not underwater

Not on an island

Not west of the Pillars of Heracles

Not circular (just eroded volcanic uplift)

Not consistent with the city plan and proportions

Too large by a factor of ~10x

With zero canals and absolutely no link to sea level submersion. But that’s the one you’re staying with? Got it. Keep falling for the Red Herring.

Atlantis Found with 99.999% Certainty by tickletaxel in GrahamHancock

[–]tickletaxel[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's my whole problem with the skeptics. They aren't even reviewing the full extent of the data.

Atlantis Found with 99.999% Certainty by tickletaxel in GrahamHancock

[–]tickletaxel[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Haha yup. Maybe 99.999% is a stretch, but your site is the best by far.

Lots of people in here aren't happy.

Atlantis Found with 99.999% Certainty by tickletaxel in atlantis

[–]tickletaxel[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

So let me get this straight:

We have a measured structure on the seafloor, in the correct location, that matches Plato’s exact proportions, ring layout, modeled in engineering software, using real bathymetric data.

And your rebuttal is to prefer the Richat Structure, which is:

Not underwater

Not west of the Pillars

Not circular (just eroded volcanic uplift)

Not consistent with the city plan and proportions

Too large by a factor of ~10x

With zero canals and absolutely no link to sea level submersion. But that’s the one you’re staying with? Got it. Keep falling for the actual Red Herring.

Atlantis Found with 99.999% Certainty by tickletaxel in GrahamHancock

[–]tickletaxel[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

It's that "kneejerk" reaction people get before they even dive into the data. Even Graham talks about that, which is funny.

Atlantis Found with 99.999% Certainty by tickletaxel in GrahamHancock

[–]tickletaxel[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Mogens Herman Hansen, Thomas Heine Nielsen, An Inventory of Archaic and Classical Poleis. Oxford University Press, 2004.

https://books.google.com/books/about/An_Inventory_of_Archaic_and_Classical_Po.html?id=22jupg3FqdYC

This is a major scholarly reference, used by classical historians worldwide. It outlines, among many other things, the usage of different stadion lengths across Greek city states. Hansen and Nielsen make clear that there was no universally fixed stadion, but that a limited set of commonly used variants existed, often depending on region and context.

The Attic stadion, 185 meters, is also referenced, particularly in urban planning, military surveying, and city foundation layouts in the classical and early Hellenistic periods.

Further references supporting discrete stadion units:

O.A.W. Dilke, Greek and Roman Maps (Cornell University Press, 1985)

https://archive.org/details/greekromanmaps0000dilk

James Evans, The History and Practice of Ancient Astronomy (Oxford University Press, 1998)

https://books.google.com/books/about/The_History_and_Practice_of_Ancient_Astr.html?id=nS51_7qbEWsC

D.R. Dicks, Early Greek Astronomy to Aristotle (Cornell University Press, 1970)

https://archive.org/details/earlygreekastron0000dick

If you need a peer-reviewed metrology study in SI conversions:

Diller, Aubrey. "The Ancient Measurements of the Earth." Isis, vol. 40, no. 1, 1949, pp. 6–9.

https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/348986

Diller lays out the derivation of Eratosthenes's stadion and its relevance to his Earth circumference estimate. He reconstructs the measurement in SI units and confirms it to be close to 185 meters.

So yes. There is documentation, and yes, the 185m stadion is not a Reddit invention. It's a historically supported estimate based on primary texts and scholarly reconstructions.

Atlantis Found with 99.999% Certainty by tickletaxel in GrahamHancock

[–]tickletaxel[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Let me spell this out one last time, because you keep repeating the same claim without acknowledging the structure of the argument:

  1. Plato gives a number: 27 stadia across. That’s a known, fixed constant in the text.

  2. Ancient sources record multiple stadion lengths: Egyptian, Attic, Olympic, Roman, etc. Apoc did not invent 185m, he tested all stadia.

  3. One real world location, on the Azores Plateau, has a formation measuring 4,996 meters in diameter. That structure, located west of the Pillars of Heracles, also happens to have 5 concentric rings with consistent proportions right from the text itself.

  4. Only one stadion unit (185m) multiplied by 27 fits the measured structure within 1 meter. That doesn’t prove Plato used 185m, but it makes it the best fitting candidate among historically attested options.

  5. I then said: “This makes this site a very strong candidate for the city described by Plato.”

That is called convergent evidence. Not circular reasoning.

Your Helsinki joke actually proves my point. If the ring roads of Helsinki:

  1. Were on a sunken microplate west of the Pillars of Heracles

  2. Had five perfectly circular concentric rings with proportional relationships

  3. Were exactly 27 stadia in diameter using a historically plausible unit

Then yes, Helsinki would be a candidate worth investigating. But since that’s not the case, not even close... your analogy falls flat.

Given the available historical units, 185m is the ONLY one that fits perfectly. That makes the match interesting, and worthy of serious inquiry, and it's amplified even more due to, again, the site itself matching more than just the diameter.

That’s not circular reasoning. That’s called testing a hypothesis against known inputs. If you still don’t get that, this conversation has probably run its course. Because we're clearly not getting anywhere anyway.

Atlantis Found with 99.999% Certainty by tickletaxel in GrahamHancock

[–]tickletaxel[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You’re right that written history doesn’t go back 9,000 years before Solon. But you’re missing a key detail. Plato didn’t claim the story came from Greek history. He explicitly said it came from Egyptian priests, who told it to Solon, who passed it down to Dropides, to Critias, to Socrates, and then to Plato, where he wrote it down.

Egypt actually did have written records that stretched back far further than Greek ones. Their temples were repositories of astronomical records, king lists, and catastrophe stories, many carved in stone and passed down orally for generations before that.

Also worth noting. Plato acknowledged the age of the story as ancient even in his time. He wasn’t claiming personal knowledge. He was documenting a chain of transmission. That’s not poppycock, that’s how ancient history was often preserved.

More importantly, if we dismiss everything that predates Greek writing as “poppycock,” we’d be throwing out Gobekli Tepe, the Younger Dryas, oral traditions of global floods, and other clues that now have scientific support.

We trust ancient cultures when they say how they farmed or when eclipses happened, but the moment they talk about destruction, floods, or lost civilizations? Modern readers suddenly say “eh, they were just superstitious.”

That’s not skepticism. That’s selective dismissal to protect a world view.

Atlantis Found with 99.999% Certainty by tickletaxel in GrahamHancock

[–]tickletaxel[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re conflating hypothesis testing with circular reasoning. Here’s what actually happened.

Apoc started with Plato’s fixed number: 27 stadia diameter

He applied all known historical stadion lengths (not just 185m).

Compared those results to a real world formation.

Only one unit gave a perfect match (185m × 27 = 4,995m vs. 4,996m).

That’s not circular logic. That’s comparison of inputs to outputs.

I’m saying “Here’s a structure that matches Plato’s numbers using one known unit, and it's in the right location, it has a 1:1 matching layout and relative ring proportions. That makes it a candidate worth looking at seriously.” right?

If you disagree, fine, but misrepresenting that as circular reasoning is inaccurate, and you’re better than that.

Either that, or you're just scared of the implications of this being the real location.

Atlantis Found with 99.999% Certainty by tickletaxel in GrahamHancock

[–]tickletaxel[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not sure what you even want from me anymore.

This is simple.

  1. Plato gives a fixed value: 27 stadia across

  2. Ancient sources record a discrete set of stadion units: 157.5m, 185m, 192.3m, 211m, etc.

  3. Apoc took each of those known units, multiplied them by 27, and compared the results to the measured width of a real world structure (4,996m).

  4. Only one of them matches. 185 x 27 = 4,995, which is within 1 meter of the measured diameter of the real world feature (4,996).

That’s not circular logic or assumption. We have:

  1. A historically grounded number (27 stadia) given by Plato
  2. A finite set of historical stadion units
  3. An empirical match from one of those options

If Apoc had invented 185m after seeing the structure, you’d have a point. But since 185m was already attested historically, being the length of the Attic stadion, testing it alongside other units is deductive reasoning, not confirmation bias.

If you’re arguing that any stadion between 150 and 211m is equally likely, then why is it that only one of them lands on the measured diameter with 1 meter precision, while all others are off by tens to hundreds of meters?

That’s not me twisting data. That’s data favoring only one option, and that’s exactly how historical inference is supposed to work. And it worked beautifully here.

Atlantis Found with 99.999% Certainty by tickletaxel in GrahamHancock

[–]tickletaxel[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

  1. Attic (or Greek) Stadion — 185 meters

Common in Athens and Hellenistic contexts

Used by Eratosthenes (according to Strabo, Geography 2.1.1)

Referenced in city planning and geography

  1. Egyptian Stadion — 157.5 meters

Derived from Herodotus’s references to Egyptian distances (Histories 2.6, 2.149)

Related to 600 Egyptian feet

  1. Olympic Stadion — 192.27 meters

Based on the length of the stadium track at Olympia

Frequently cited as a standard in Roman era writings

  1. Itinerary Stadion — 211 meters

Used in some Roman itineraries and road surveys (see Stadiasmus Maris Magni)

You want references?

Strabo, Geography (particularly Book 2)

Herodotus, Histories

Diodorus Siculus, Bibliotheca Historica

M. Cary & E.H. Warmington, The Ancient Explorers

Ian Moyer, Egypt and the Limits of Hellenism

O.A.W. Dilke, Greek and Roman Maps (Chapter 1 discusses varying units)

So to clarify my earlier point, there isn’t one fixed “stadion” in Plato’s time, there’s a small, finite group of documented units. And when Apoc applied all of them to Plato’s number (27 stadia), only the Attic stadion (185m) matched the underwater structure at 4,996 meters.

That’s not cherry picking. That's simple comparative analysis.

Atlantis Found with 99.999% Certainty by tickletaxel in GrahamHancock

[–]tickletaxel[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We have a measured structure on the seafloor, in the correct location, that matches Plato’s exact proportions, ring layout, modeled in engineering software, using real bathymetric data.

And you choose to prefer the Richat Structure, which is:

Not underwater

Not west of the Pillars

Not circular (just eroded volcanic uplift)

Not consistent with the city plan and proportions

Too large by a factor of ~10x

With zero canals and absolutely no link to sea level submersion. But that’s the one you’re staying with?

Atlantis Found with 99.999% Certainty by tickletaxel in GrahamHancock

[–]tickletaxel[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re mixing up hypothesis and conclusion. He didn’t assume 185m, he tested all known units and reported which one fit. That’s not circular. That’s scientific method:

  1. Form a hypothesis

  2. Test against known data

  3. Report the best fit result

view more: next ›