In my review of the pilot episode of History’s revived In Search Of with Star Trek actor Zachary Quinto as host, I noted that the show seemed to stand with one foot in Leonard Nimoy’s shadow and another in the standard History channel mold of wallpapering the screen with nutjobs pretending to be experts. Over the course of its run, In Search Of has covered many topics of no interest to me, including high-concept ideas like life after death and mundane subjects like sinkholes, the subject of an entire episode. As the season comes to a close, not much has changed since the pilot, but the audience for the series never really grew beyond the spillover from its Ancient Aliens lead-in, nor did the series build much of an independent fan base. Last week’s episode, the first to air without a new Ancient Aliens as lead-in, fell to just one million viewers and a 0.17 share of the 18-49 audience. For comparison, the show’s primetime rating is the same share and fewer viewers than the noon Inside Politics newscast on CNN. I don’t bring this up to laugh at In Search Of as much as to make the point that there is a ceiling on the audience for the kind of uninspired retread program that In Search Of represents, and tonight’s two-hour finale exemplifies that way cable “documentary” shows—and I use the term loosely—waste time recycling old garbage and calling it something new and exciting. In fact, the original In Search Of did the same investigation in its first season, clocking in at just a half hour, and it was wilder in its speculation and broader in its scope—covering Edgar Cayce, Charles Hapgood’s map claims, and Ignatius Donnelly’s ideas—and more definitive in its ridiculous conclusion that “the memory of Atlantis is no myth; it is history.” By contrast, our In Search Of is a more milquetoast affair, in the style of modern pseudo-documentaries that want to imply a lot while saying very little and taking up as much time as possible watching people walk around and look off into the distance. Indeed, so similar are the segments of this episode to two recent Atlantis documentaries that it almost seems ridiculous to offer much of a review of the episode at all. I almost want to just pull paragraphs from my earlier reviews and call it a day, so little new was contained in this show. (Disclosure: I was invited to appear in this episode, but I declined because I was not able to travel to Africa on short notice for the shoot.) The first half of the episode is basically the same as James Cameron and Simcha Jacobovici’s NatGeo Atlantis documentary from January 2017, right down to the appearance of amateur historian Robert Ishoy and religious historian Richard Freund in both, and the second half mirrors with uncanny precision the same information portrayed last September in the Science Channel’s Mysteries of the Missing with Terry O’Quinn. Both Mysteries and In Search Of adapt theories presented by the late Michael Hübner that were reported in Mark Adams’s 2015 book Meet Me in Atlantis, the fairly obvious inspiration for the episodes, and both use Andrew Gough, giving that Heretic magazine ignoramus best known from his appearances on Forbidden History the same platform to recycle the same unoriginal ideas. But the problem is deeper than that. The hypotheses put forward for Atlantis in this episode are old, so old that they have been discussed to death, with no new revelations, and no discovery of Atlantis. This two-hour episode covers three primary hypotheses: (a) Atlantis was a memory of Minoan civilization in the Aegean. (b) Atlantis was located in Sardinia and identified with its Bronze Age Nuragic culture. (c) Atlantis is located in Morocco, in what is now the Sahara Desert. None of these hypotheses is new.
Given the lack of originality in these ideas, and the fact that all have been discussed and critiqued for a century or more, there is little left to offer in this review than a brief description of what In Search Of made of the old material, and whether they had any inkling that their new ideas were not new. HOUR ONE The show opens with a summary of Plato that is just wrong, since Quinto claims that Atlantis vanished without a trace, while Plato clearly tells us that Atlantis left behind a giant pile of mud that blocked part of the ocean from being navigable. This is indicative of the quality of the episode and the depth of research that went into its production. The producers started with the assumption—never proved—that Atlantis existed, and through circular reasoning, it attempted to prove the reality of Atlantis by interpreting various data points in light of the assumed reality of the fictitious city. To launch the quest, Quinto meets with Ishoy, who is described by the ludicrous title of professional “Atlantis historian.” He hands him a list of 51 traits of Atlantis derived from Plato’s writings, which are used to frame the “investigation,” just as they were in the earlier documentaries. Quinto expresses his confusion as to why Plato would tell a false story without acknowledging it as fiction. Clearly, he has not read Plato. I suppose that makes the shadows in the cave a true story, too. Quinto also meets with a “paranormal investigator” who is “based in the Bermuda Triangle” and “only available via Skype,” and that makes me wonder why the producers insisted that I had to be in Africa to be on the show while this bozo gets to Skype in to say nothing of any importance. It’s probably worth disclosing that Ishoy and I have exchanged emails a few months ago when he complained that it was unfair of me to point out in a previous blog post that he holds no academic credentials in history, saying that it impugned his honor for me to describe his original credential—a college term paper he wrote decades ago—as poorly researched. Much of the first half-hour is given over to exploring some Bronze Age ruins in Greece, including underwater ruins and those of the Minoans’ great palace at Knossos, under the assumption, put forward by Figuer and Frost more than a century ago, that Atlantis might have been a Bronze Age culture destroyed by the Thera volcano—whose eruption he wrongly dates to 2000 BCE instead of the more accurate 1600 BCE (+/- a few decades). Quinto and the producers seem unaware of the origins of the claims they investigate, and they simply present the idea as conventional wisdom. They decline to address the shortcomings of the idea, namely that the Bronze Age cultures of the Aegean continued on for nearly four centuries after the volcanic eruption before the Bronze Age collapse that led to the Greek Dark Ages. The volcano blew up an island and weakened the Minoans, but it did not destroy a whole civilization. The show elides the fact that Plato placed the death of Atlantis in 9600 BCE, and Minoan civilization is not that old. They ask us to take Plato literally, except for the parts that don’t fit. Frankly, the show is slow, and that paragraph above represented the entire content of 20 minutes of screen time, much of which was devoted to glamour shots of Quinto looking pensive and confused, and frequent repetition of suggestive narration, largely without factual foundation. As the second half-hour opens, the show claims that the Minoans worshipped Poseidon, based on the appearance of tridents, but this is not secure at all, since Poseidon was (a) a Greek god not Minoan, (b) of Indo-European origin, (c) well-attested as a god of the earth (he is the earth-shaker) as far back as Linear B, but not firmly connected to the sea until Homeric times. The evidence for Poseidon at Knossos is not Minoan; it is Mycenaean, from the time, long after the Thera volcano erupted, when the Mycenaeans had assumed control of Knossos. He was assimilated to the Minoan bull cult but there is no way to trace this back before the Mycenaean invasion, and at any rate the evidence suggests Poseidon was the Indo-European horse god before being reassigned to the sea. In the second half-hour, Quinto tells a whopper of a lie, claiming that “scholars around the word” support the claim that Atlantis had colonies all over the world, and the show recycles Ignatius Donnelly’s claim that Atlantis spread advanced culture all over the world. I suppose it depends on what you mean by “scholar.” On the History Channel, the term seems to refer to people who pretend to be historians and can chant litanies from nineteenth century books with the firm conviction that they had invented them all by themselves. Much of this half-hour is given over to retracing the steps of Cameron and Jacobovici’s documentary from last year, right down to having Ishoy assert, falsely, that the Nuraghe civilization of Sardinia was that of Atlantis. A supposed mystery is raised in the form of petroglyphs that two men assert are a lost alphabet that they intend to decipher. Quinto promises to check in with them later. The show declines to provide much by way of facts about prehistoric Sardinia, nor do they clearly acknowledge that Sardinian civilization does not date back to 9600 BCE, the date when Plato placed the extinction of Atlantis. For some bizarre reason, Quinto tries to gin up interest into Sardinia by likening the dangers to visiting Nuraghe sites to the fictitious “curse” of Tutankhamun, a curse invented in large measure by novelist Maria Corelli, ultimately from medieval Islamic legends about Egypt. But this is the History Channel, so why should a few facts get in the way of a sensational story? As the first hour comes to a close with nothing to show for it but some pretty high-definition photography of ancient sites and the ramblings of old men who have exempted themselves from the norms of historiography and of science, not a single opinion dissenting from the reality of Atlantis has been uttered, and I can’t fathom what the producers imagined I would have contributed to this program. I am rather relieved not to have been a part of it, and I fear that they never looked beyond the aesthetics of my website and actually thought I hunted Atlantis. Quinto ends to hour by saying that the civilization of Sardinia “might somehow relate” to Atlantis. The producers never did make that very clear, and Quinto’s unintentional acknowledgement of the producers’ incompetence is entirely apropos, particularly when Quinto admits that they are throwing spaghetti at the wall by hunting data points they can twist into evidence for Atlantis “anywhere we can find it and by any means necessary.” HOUR TWO The second hour resumes the quest for Atlantis on Sardinia, but they are clearly grasping at straws. Carvings resembling bull horns are said to be evidence of Atlantis because the bull was sacred there, but the bull was one of the most common symbols in ancient religion, of no particular uniqueness. Quinto is astonished and feels that there must be a connection between Minoan and Sardinian bull cults. Presumably, he is completely ignorant of all the other faiths that involved bulls and cows, not least of which the Indo-European culture of India, where the Vedic faith was full of bulls and cows of a sacred nature. (Hinduism retains this today.) Similarly, the appearance of black, red, and white stones are taken to be evidence since Plato spoke of such colors. They also happen to be the most common colors of stone used throughout the Mediterranean.
Ishoy repeats his claim that the circular Nuraghe towers represent Plato’s circular city of Atlantis, even though a tower is not a city, and no tower meets Plato’s assertion that the city was more than 100 stadia across. In Search Of, unlike its predecessor series, simply omits inconvenient facts rather than try to slap together some sort of explanation. I’ll note again here that the “checklist” has yet to address Plato’s date of 9600 BCE, and that Sardinia was never destroyed and sent beneath the waves. Plato also said that Atlantis had elephants, and no elephant have been alive on Sardinia in 30,000 years. Their bones were mistaken for those of giants. Freund pops up to tell us that the Atlanteans survived the disaster and moved to central Spain, which has been his bugaboo since his controversial 2013 documentary. Jessica Farrell, a self-described hematology expert, asserts that Rh-negative blood—associated in fringe literature with space aliens—is actually the royal blood of Atlantis. She runs a registry to track Rh-negative people, and she suggests that people with this blood type might be a different species of human and tend to seek truth, have a mission in life, and a bunch of other pseudoscientific traits she believes blood type impacts. This made me question Farrell’s credentials, and it turns out she is not exactly who In Search Of claims she is. Her LinkedIn page says she is a personal assistant by trade and has a business degree. She does not list any credentials in hematology. What is with the History Channel and assigning its amateur talking heads dubious pseudo-scholarly titles? Quinto discovers that he is Rh-negative, and Farrell tells him that this means he is “more likely” than not a descendant of Atlanteans. It’s worth noting that there is no evidence whatsoever that Rh-negative blood has anything to do with Atlantis since, as we might guess, no Atlanteans have ever been dug up to genetically test. The claim actually derives from the appearance of Rh-negative blood among the Berbers of the Atlas Mountains of Morocco. In other words, it’s circular reasoning. In the final half-hour, Andrew Gough joins Quinto in Sous Massa, Morocco to hunt for Atlantis, reenacting his appearance in O’Quinn’s documentary last year. What’s interesting is that in 2017, he was there to chaperone Michael Hübner’s brother to describe Hübner’s work, but now Gough refers to him only as a “German scientist” who crunched data and otherwise he talks on his own authority, broadly asserting that Morocco exactly matches what Plato described. That must be why Morocco is currently under a giant mud pile in the middle of the ocean. Oh, right: It isn’t. Gough must enjoy these free vacations, given the number of them he takes at TV channels’ expense. Given what the producers told me in the spring, I imagine that they envisioned me slotted into the role Gough is playing here, but I don’t think they would have been happy with what I had to say. Quinto asserts that the Morocco hypothesis is “a radical new theory,” even though it goes back perhaps to Alfonso X of Spain (depending on your interpretation of the text) and was widespread in the France of the Belle Époque. Even David Hatcher Childress devoted part of one his books to the idea several decades ago. Basically, the producers have no idea about the history of their own topic and are merely skimming the surface and passing off their cursory research as revelation. Online articles hyping Mark Adams’s book described the idea as “new” back in 2015, so that is as far as the show’s producers seem to have gone in examining the claim. Gough asserts that Atlantis wasn’t an island because Plato’s word for island, νῆσος (nesos), really meant anything that borders water. I guess he is referring to Sophocles’ poetic use of νῆσος to refer to the Peloponnesian peninsula, which is not the same as saying all Greeks used it to describe a coastline in general. So far as I know, and so far as Classics scholar James Diggle of Queens College Cambridge knows, that is the only use of νῆσος as a peninsula; from the time of at least Herodotus, there was a separate word for peninsula. Plato would have known it and used it. Gough further asserts that Moroccans have destroyed the “central city” of Atlantis by carting it off in trucks and grinding it up for construction material. This seems rather ridiculous since the Moroccans, being cultured people, are unlikely to be part of a vast conspiracy to destroy proof of Atlantis—and for what end? In the last few minutes of the show, Gough gives a nearly verbatim recreation of his claim from O’Quinn’s Atlantis documentary that the shore of Morocco has eroded formations that create natural harbors of red, white, and black stone like those Plato described. Quinto then remembers that his other kooks had asserted that there was a lost alphabet on Sardinia that they hoped to decipher. He updates the story at the end by quietly saying that they did not decipher it, despite a promise in Hour One that they would do so in a few days. It was a plot point that went nowhere, designed as a cliffhanger that the producers knew they would not resolve. Like everything else about this show, it was a tease and a cheat, a question posing as an answer. Quinto concludes that the show by saying that he believes Atlantis was likely real, and we get a montage of all the talking heads talking about the many places they believe Atlantis to be. But this actually undercuts the message since all of their many claims—from the Bermuda Triangle to Thera and beyond—cannot possibly be simultaneously true. The more people who confidently assert one location or Atlantis, the more obvious it becomes that none of them knows whereof he speaks. All of these men—and they are all men—want to believe in the unproveable. I ended up losing a lot of respect for Quinto, who accepts phony evidence and fallacious logic as though it were scholarly research. He is more gullible and credulous than I would have imagined, or at least agrees to play dumb on TV.
97 Comments
Hal
9/14/2018 11:23:37 pm
Incredible. I almost agree with this review. However you wrote such shows have a ceiling or upper limit of possible viewers. So, what show doesn’t?
Reply
Jeff Miller
9/15/2018 12:10:00 am
I have slogged through all the episodes. As soon as I saw the preview with Gough, I knew how this episode would go. I hope this show is cancelled. I really agree with your notion that this is very uninspired. It's so boring.
Reply
E.P. Grondine
9/15/2018 01:02:25 am
Hi Jason -
Reply
E.P. Grondine
9/15/2018 09:43:29 am
http://www.jasoncolavito.com/blog/strabo-and-aristotle-on-atlantis-what-alternative-historians-dont-know
Reply
P.G. Fontine
9/22/2018 03:32:49 pm
E.P. GRONDINE
Joes Scales
9/15/2018 11:20:06 am
"I ended up losing a lot of respect for Quinto, who accepts phony evidence and fallacious logic as though it were scholarly research. "
Reply
Doc Rock
9/15/2018 01:42:18 pm
I guess there is still decent money to be made by recycling much of the same fringe stuff that was on TV or in paperback 40 years ago.
Reply
Christie
9/15/2018 04:36:41 pm
I have ab- blood of which i saw no pile for in this episode and knowing my heritage and bloodlines, i know my blood type is very rare. I don't see many of these supposed things related to rh negative blood on myself. If you want to know about blood types all you need is a little research from well known professionals and experts in pathology. There is plenty of evidence out there, you just need to know where to go.
Reply
Karen
9/16/2018 10:32:58 am
Please hook me up with the web site for Jessica Farrel. I have a negative O blood type and I saw her list. I have done my DNA through Ancestry website and what I found out was shocking compared to my family's verbal account. They swear I am not adopted but I am different than all of them. Go figure. Please email me her website.
Reply
Hugh’s poo
9/16/2018 02:11:07 pm
Pfftt. Ungh sorry Karen. You can call her directly at BR549.
Reply
Matt Agajanian
9/16/2018 09:08:07 pm
Phooey! I wholeheartedly wanted this reincarnation of the Nimoy classic to shed light on one of my favourite mysteries. Perhaps that O’Quinn option may give me a more plausible and valid collage of answers to the Atlantis mystery.
Reply
Matt Agajanian
9/16/2018 09:36:04 pm
From your vantage point, Jason, let me ask. Is finding Atlantis akin to chasing ghosts? In your research, was there an actual Atlantis or it’s a part of Plato’s library of writings?
Reply
Hanslune
9/17/2018 11:12:57 am
Excellent review of what was a 'milquetoast affair' glad I missed it.
Reply
Machala
9/17/2018 01:12:37 pm
I have not seen all of the "new" In Search Of programs, but I have watched parts of several - including the final episode - and aside from rather trite content and commentary, my biggest criticism of the show is how it was shot and edited. From a cinematographic perspective the setups are staid and unimaginative and the lighting does nothing to enhance the viewing experience. The editing alternates from ragged jump cuts to overlong close-ups of the talking heads that look like the cameraman set up the shot, turned the cameras on, and then went for a beer, and let the cameras run, - counting on the director or editor to sort out the cuts.
Reply
AmericanCool"Disco"Dan
9/18/2018 12:25:26 am
I stand by THC. All I can say is more for me!
Reply
Bob Jase
9/17/2018 01:48:02 pm
Every week millions of people attend worship services at some religious meeting place. I expect that its the same mind set that keeps programs like this in business. Believe in the evidenceless needs repeated reinforcement.
Reply
AmericanCool"Disco"AndyGriffith
9/18/2018 02:02:39 am
What it was, was football.
Reply
Titus Pullo
9/17/2018 08:16:47 pm
I feel asleep about a 1/2 hour into it. The part where Zac went to Greece to dive in 6 ft of water reminded me of something from American Unearthed when Scott Walter spent most of an episode driving some mini sub or something. Not relevant to the story but chews scenery for minutes..
Reply
Phantom
9/18/2018 05:14:58 pm
The difference between the original "In Search Of" and its reboot on History Channel is that the original was concerned with information (no matter how dubious), while the reboot is primarily concerned with entertainment. In today's environment, the need to entertain trumps the need to inform. The choice of Zachary Quinto as host suggests a parody, whether intentional or not, of the original ("new" Spock replaces "old" Spock), while the idea of giving their kook commentators titles seems to be in line with the Discovery Channel's Forbidden History series. Whenever I see Andrew Gough on a program I know I'm being taken for a ride. The man is a publicity whore specializing in topics where facts are discarded in favor of wild theories that can never be proven or disproved. Did Hitler escape the bunker at the end of the war? Gough's your man. Are extraterristals living among us? Gough's your man. Are gigantic ants responsible for unsolved disappearances in New Mexico? Gough's your man. Whatever nonsense he's spouting is always covered with an academic title of sorts, as if to convince viewers that he actually knows what he's talking about. That he and his cronies are still able to mine a living from a mythical reference by Plato is proof of H.L. Mencken's observation on the American public.
Reply
Joe Scales
9/18/2018 09:34:09 pm
"The difference between the original "In Search Of" and its reboot on History Channel is that the original was concerned with information (no matter how dubious), while the reboot is primarily concerned with entertainment."
Reply
AmericanCool"Disco" Dan
9/19/2018 01:22:44 am
You, my friend, my brother, sound like someone who is mad as hell and isn't going to take this anymore.
Joe Scales
9/19/2018 09:38:58 am
Funny that. I was shouting the very same sentiment out my window last night.
Sad, but true: Nothing new.
Reply
Frank
9/20/2018 10:53:00 pm
At last the great scholar and part time compiler of the information on Atlantis, herr Franke, chimes in. And what are you hunting in Sicily, if not some strange and partial Atlantis of your own?
Reply
@Frank:
Hanslune
9/21/2018 05:55:14 pm
Howdy Mr. Atlantis
Reply
@Hanslune:
Reply
Hanslune
9/21/2018 08:34:06 pm
As predicted a lot of the usual mental gymnastics, and of course evasion and NASA 'Never a straight answer'.
Reply
@Hanslune:
Reply
Hanslune
9/22/2018 12:25:02 pm
Ah Sicily - good luck then in convincing anyone to believe you. Since 2008 huh, spreading like wild fire is it.
Reply
@Hanslune:
Reply
Frank
9/23/2018 01:09:38 am
Pardon me, I had not intended to start a personal feud between you, an expert proponent of Atlantis, and Hanslune, a staunch skeptic for the reality of Atlantis. I just wanted to point out your contradictory position on Atlantis, since you claimed to be a "non" hunter of our turned-evil empire of Atlantis. Clearly you are, and you even propose a location where your hunt has lead you to, Sicily.
@Frank:
AmericanCool"Disco"dan
9/22/2018 01:29:45 pm
Sicily, Pillars of Hercules, Solon was wrong, ancient languages....Herr Obersturmgruppendummy Francke lives to promote his website. I've enjoyed watching you take him to task, chasing him around the Orion Nebula.
Reply
Frank
9/23/2018 04:07:53 pm
Mr. Franke,
Reply
@Frank:
Reply
Hanslune
9/24/2018 02:00:43 pm
Oh, my by Jesus' sweaty feet and just take me out and slap me dead with frozen hominy.
Reply
Frank
9/24/2018 09:11:40 pm
I must assume that you are referring to Mr. Franke, as I'm not anything remotely resembling an intellectual, I think. Although I'm not certain if the intellectual class includes Atlantis hunters, does it? Mr. Franke claims to be a special hunter, and not the run of the mill idiot hunter, when it comes to Atlantis hunters, as he segregates himself from them, because he has a very special academic rifle which he uses to shoot down all the clues of his prey, Atlantis.
Reply
@Frank:
Hanslune
9/25/2018 10:42:00 am
""I must assume that you are referring to Mr. Franke, as I'm not anything remotely resembling an intellectual, I think.""
@Hanslune:
Frank
9/25/2018 02:26:21 pm
Mr. Intellectual Atlantis hunter, that's you, Mr. Franke. Thank you for the short list of noteworthy intellectuals who believe in Plato's Atlantis, but I already had a good idea that some of those named by you had interest in Atlantis. But I doubt that any of them were as accurate as you are about its location. You are assuming that I know little about this business of Plato's Atlantis, and that is why you are giving me the basics about it. And you must assume that I know even less about Plato's philosophy. You must have forgotten that this is not the first time that we exchange compliments on this forum of comments. Although you are not a mystic like me, I do see that
Reply
Joe Scales
9/25/2018 03:47:24 pm
Again, half as long...
Reply
@Frank:
Reply
AmericanCool"Disco"Dan
9/25/2018 06:14:04 pm
You've trotted out the "Herodotus was wrong" argument before and turned it around to mean "Plato was right because Herodotus was wrong." Look, something shiny!
Frank
9/25/2018 08:15:55 pm
Not just Herodotus, as Plato also said that Egypt was at least 10,000 years old. Not to speak of what Plato said about the existence of civilizations many ages before the great and terrible deluge (Flood). Why don't you go hunting Plato's Egypt of 10,000 BC instead of Atlantis? At least hunting an Egypt that old has its advantage over a questionable location for Atlantis, as we already know the place where to look. And in the Atlantis story that old Egypt was never destroyed. Or better still, how about the Athens that fought against Atlantis, why don't you hunt that? It should be easy, as that Athens of 9,600 BC was said to be in the same place as our modern Athens is, and was also very well described in the Critias too.
@AmericanCool"Disco"Dan:
@Frank:
Frank
9/26/2018 10:27:41 am
Franke,
Reply
@Frank:
Reply
Frank
9/26/2018 07:31:24 pm
Let us make one thing clear, my dear Franke. From you I want nothing but truth, the whole truth. I want you to admit to yourself that you are a real dunce. What you call my BS about Plato's cave are precisely the same sentiments that Socrates gives. I had only cited Plato's English translation. Albeit, one that you do not approve, Jowett's. You are like some of the other dunces seeking Atlantis, as they too use translations as a way of getting around the truth of the essence of Plato's thoughts. The essence of the allegory of the cave is the same with all the translators and translations. Since you claim great language skills and, apparently, also grand philosophical understanding, you happen to differ with all the real genuine scholars. They all give us a flat earth while you give us a round one. Is this what you are claiming?
Hanslune
9/26/2018 01:02:11 pm
Disastrous.
Reply
@Hanslune:
Reply
Joe Scales
9/26/2018 09:15:48 pm
"T. Franke is still posting - make it stop......pls"
Reply
Frank
9/27/2018 10:10:37 am
Sorry Joe, I just read this post of yours directed at Hanslune, as I spotted my name in parentheses. I like the "parables" you cite. I clicked something thrice, as Mr. Mighty Hunter has stopped, so far. Should Franke return, I will take your advice and try to go back to Kansas. But is Kansas a real historical place? Will not Mr. Franke still follow anyone there, if he thinks there is something of an historical-critical value to be garnered there?
Joes Scales
9/27/2018 01:40:08 pm
Again. Half as long.
Hanslune
9/26/2018 01:25:14 pm
Aquila non capiat muscas
Reply
Joe Scales
9/26/2018 01:49:01 pm
What's the Latin expression for saying you're done with a pointless internet argument when that's clearly not the case?
Reply
Hanslune
9/26/2018 01:56:04 pm
Hey Joe
@Hanslune:
Reply
AmericanCool"Disco"Dan
9/26/2018 04:09:28 pm
You've added "moving the goal posts" to cherryy-picking. Your argument now, in addition to "How would you find Egypt based on Herodotus's incorrect statement about its age? Therefore Plato [and Franke] are right about Atlantis" you further argue "Herodotus was wrong about the location of places he had not been to therefore Plato [and Franke] are right about Atantis."
Reply
Frank
9/26/2018 06:40:30 pm
But that's the point that Franke's wants to make, because Plato had been in Sicily, thrice, we are told. Therefore Plato could describe what he saw. I'm assuming that Franke has been there too, unless his comment on Sicily being a nice place was gotten by him through second and third sources, or through pictures and videos. The only problem is that Franke must be a poor listener, or a blind one, because what Plato describes is not what Sicily is, and neither what Franke sees, or hears. But Franke has taken care of that very nicely, he believes. Franke claims that Plato used Sicily and the Greek colony city of Siracusa's politics as a model for the story of Atlantis. Franke wants his cake and eat it too. Franke, whenever he will complete his great hypothesis, will give the world an Atlantis that existed only in Plato's mind, but also a real physical place, a real role model Atlantis on which Plato based it. As I told the great hunter, he plagiarized an idea and concept from Rudberg, and is developing it into what is his childhood dream of his. He wants to unify the skeptics, and the hunters of Atlantis, giving each what they want. In other words, as in the world of physics, Franke wants to find the theory of everything (his Atlantis) to unify the macro universe physics of Einstein, and the micro physics of Quantum Mechanics.
Reply
@Frank:
Americancool"Disco"Dan
9/27/2018 03:27:05 pm
Again, moving the goalposts. To be clear, even though I am going to repeat it back to you, I do not accept your argument "that Plato made up a 100% invention with Sicily as the model".
AmericanCool"Disco"Dan
9/27/2018 03:36:14 pm
"Again, I want to say, that my work cannot be so bad, if this forum of skeptics gathers several of my readers."
@AmericanCool"Disco"Dan:
@Americancool"Disco"Dan:
AmericanCool"disco"Dan
9/27/2018 04:10:18 pm
"True, but the knowledge about my works which they show makes them my readers."
@AmericanCool"disco"Dan:
AmericanCool"Disco"Dan
9/27/2018 05:44:09 pm
"- Hanslune carefully avoided to comment on my questions about Cecil Torr and Christopher Gill.
@AmericanCool"Disco"Dan:
Reply
Americancool"discodan
9/27/2018 03:17:06 pm
AGAIN, repeating your argument back to you is NOT acceptance.
@Americancool"discodan:
@all:
Reply
AmericanCool"Disco"Dan
9/27/2018 06:18:30 pm
"Well, somebody has to stop this. And it is me, who does it. I will not answer any more in this thread."
Reply
Hanslune
9/27/2018 06:02:08 pm
The point of all this was to see if you would clearly state your position without trying to drag people through the same boring sludge of your tedious arguments.
Reply
Frank
9/28/2018 02:27:50 am
Franke said: "Plato was, of course, right in his belief in the antiquity and continuity of Egyptian culture, but he seems to have overestimated the age of the existing monuments." And: "Hence the assumption that the Egyptians might possess contemporary records of events nine thousand years before the time of Solon is in full accord with Plato's own beliefs about the age of the earliest monuments."
Reply
NO FAKE NEWS.
Reply
Americancool"Disco"Dan
9/28/2018 04:13:48 pm
"T. FRANKE
Frank
9/28/2018 05:12:05 pm
Franke, you are dork. Come on, you were caught with your hand stuck in the cookie jar. Now you want to worm your way out of the rotten apple, or rather the rotten cherry you picked from Alfred, and not Thomas, Taylor. You praise Alfred Taylor as being "great" and now you are wanting to demean him because I cited the obvious thought he had on the reality of Atlantis. Again, read the entire commentary Alfred Taylor gave on Atlantis, before you put your foot in your mouth again. I stopped short of all A Taylor's arguments on what he thought Plato based the story he made up on Atlantis, and also his prehistoric Athens. Also, if we read Alfred's translation of the Timaeus and Critias, he has a whole appendix dedicated to the story of Atlantis. See Appendix II
AmericanCool"Disco"Dan
9/28/2018 07:58:49 pm
Yeah! Show some respect!
AmericanCool"Disco"Dan
9/28/2018 08:02:00 pm
Forgot to add: Well-executed change of subject! Keep moving those goalposts and picking those cherries.
Frank
9/28/2018 11:59:43 pm
My dear Franke, as far as financing the translation of Rudberg, you wasted your money, just as you are wasting your words here to defend your hopeless position of a haphazard "researcher" of an historical-critical Atlantis, and all your nonsense and idiotic positions on Plato's Atlantis. Neither you nor Rudberg show any understanding of Plato's Atlantis.
Reply
Matt Agajanian
10/1/2018 07:13:13 pm
Hello all.
Reply
Frank
10/2/2018 01:25:52 am
Matt,
Reply
Matt Agajanian
10/2/2018 02:53:11 pm
Frank, yes, I see your point. Like Sade’s song ‘Never As Good As The First Time,” the original edition is always the most satisfying.
Matt Agajanian
10/2/2018 04:28:18 pm
Frank, thanks again! I found a trio of books common to both Kindle and iBook. And all were translated by Benjamin Jowett. I picked up all three—the separate books and the paired-up volume. They were real bargains, too—either a buck or free.
Reply
Matt Agajanian
10/4/2018 08:04:22 pm
Hi all.
Reply
Frank
10/5/2018 10:10:00 pm
Matt,
Reply
Matt Agajanian
10/5/2018 11:23:30 pm
Frank (and all other comment authors).
Matt Agajanian
10/4/2018 10:44:41 pm
**CORRECTION**
Reply
Matt Agajanian
10/15/2018 06:20:03 pm
Hi all.
Reply
1/2/2019 12:07:15 pm
I am o negative rh I would like to find out more can you help me I do have my dna I would love to be in a study. all my life I felt like I was different from every one. Please let me know what you think. Thank you for your time
Reply
Cea
1/9/2019 02:20:06 am
Hey Jason, you prosaic sycophant:
Reply
Cea Lager
1/9/2019 02:42:07 am
Umm? Maybe that was unfair. Show me an example of where the iconoclastic (A philosophy that tears down idols and defaces history) mo-heds left the local historical artifacts unadulterated... OHHH SNAP, you can't, because they DON'T. They chisel off facial features, shoot mortars at giant buddha sculptures, and deface everything they stumble across while LOOTING. These POS iconoclasts would still be riding camels back and forth trading salt and spices if "we" hadn't told them that we were drilling for icky black stuff they have been traversing over for MILLENNIA. Oops. Lawrence of arabia should have been drawn and quartered for dragging these tribes into the 20th century. Now they have gold plated supercars, and we are busy shooting ourselves in the foot over what to do with our GIGANTIC oil reserves. Let them DRINK their oil and pound sand.
Reply
Your comment will be posted after it is approved.
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorI am an author and researcher focusing on pop culture, science, and history. Bylines: New Republic, Esquire, Slate, etc. There's more about me in the About Jason tab. Newsletters
Enter your email below to subscribe to my newsletter for updates on my latest projects, blog posts, and activities, and subscribe to Culture & Curiosities, my Substack newsletter.
Categories
All
Terms & ConditionsPlease read all applicable terms and conditions before posting a comment on this blog. Posting a comment constitutes your agreement to abide by the terms and conditions linked herein.
Archives
October 2024
|