Pages: [1]   Go Down
            Author                                        Posts          (Topic read 23763 times)
Paradigm shift happens.
Administrator
*****
Offline Offline
Location: On the cusp of change.
Join Date: Feb 14, 2009
Posts: 151

WWW

« on: July 18, 2009, 05:25:25 PM »
ReplyReply

The Discovery of Carney and Siple Islands on Schöner's 1524 World Globe


Whether the find should prove genuine or not, one of the more epiphanic moments occurring early on in my research was the discovery of an island set on Schöner's 1524 World Globe which very closely resembles Antarctica's Carney and Siple Islands in proportion and alignment to each other as well as to Western Antarctica's western coastline. The amazing accuracy of the discovery along with the circumstances leading to the islands' incorporation onto Schöner's globe reinforce the possibility that Antarctica had been charted in the ancient past. I detail this discovery in The Magellan Effect, but the actual process of discovery was as follows.

I had been researching information on Antarctica through Google, when an odd map began to randomly pop up in returned image sets. This map was the 1513 Piri Reis map (Fig. 1), a map which I soon found Charles Hapgood had heralded in his book Maps of the Ancient Sea Kings as depicting portions of the Antarctic continent. Although certain that the claim was false, for curiosity's sake I allowed myself to be distracted from my original research and delved into Hapgood's claim only to confirm that Hapgood had indeed performed an extremely poor analysis of the map in order to support his errant view.

Figure 1

Click on image to enlarge.

Piri Reis Map of 1513. This is all that remains of the map, the lower left fragment. Hapgood believed that the lower portion of the map is a depiction of Antarctica.

This little diversion did lead me to another map, however, which would soon become an object of obsession. The map that captivated my attention was the Oronce Finé 1531 World Map (Fig. 2). Unlike the Piri Reis map, Finé's portrayal of the continent shared similarities with the Antarctic continent that were far too great to easily dismiss. I began to analyze Finé's depiction of the continent and to a lesser extent Mercator's similar depiction on his 1538 map, both being depictions which Charles Hapgood included in his book and placed a substantial amount of focus on throughout his own validation process.

Figure 2
Click on image to enlarge.

Oronce Finé 1531 World Map. A double-cordiform projection which includes a rendering of the Antarctic continent 300 years prior to its first known sighting.

But unlike Hapgood who attempted to match every nook and cranny to points on modern Antarctica, I approached the map as though it were constructed with similar cartographic skill as allotted ancient Greek maps. I had determined that the superior detailing of the Western Antarctic region suggested that if the map were genuine, it had to have been charted by a civilization more acquainted with this region and to a far lesser extent much of Eastern Antarctica. This same sort of cartographic phenomenon can be seen in Greek maps where the level of accuracy quickly drops off as we look beyond their depiction of the Mediterranean. Finé's map strongly supported this view, with more accurate detailing between the Weddell and Ross Sea, including Ross Island set below a small point of land, the location of Sulzberger Bay (Fig. 3a), and the accurate arrangement of the three prominent mountain ranges on Western Antarctica. (Fig. 3b)

Figure 3
Click on image to enlarge.

a) - Modern map of Antarctica (left) alongside Finé's 1531 depiction of the continent. The Unfortunate Islands (Carney and Siple Islands) have been added in from Schöner's 1524 depiction of the continent (See Fig. 4) to create a composite demonstrating the extent of uncanny similarities these maps share with modern Antarctica.

Click on image to enlarge.

b) - Bathymetric view of Western Antarctica (left) alongside Finé's 1531 depiction. While the inclusion of nonexistent mountain ranges along the southern and eastern coasts of Finé's Eastern Antarctica expose the cartographer’s lack of full familiarity with Eastern Antarctica, the inclusion and accurate placement of A) the Ellsworth Mountains, B) the Executive Committee Range, and C) the northern tip of the Queen Maud Mountains in the area of Western Antarctica suggest that the civilization that charted the continent most often frequented the western half of the continent. Meanwhile, Finé’s incorporation of a lengthy narrow bay extending southward off the Weddell Sea mimics a basin (D) existing between two converging mountain ranges that form a similar point at its southern extremity.

So the next logical step in authenticating the design was to determine how the map came to be so greatly overscaled, in lieu of Hapgood's poorly reasoned explanation. The first scaling point was obvious. Magellan had discovered his famous strait just a few years earlier and cartographers were making varied attempts at depicting the strait's southern shore and the unexplored land attached. The second point was a completely different story. I recall sitting for hours at a time, days on end, staring intently at coastal forms on Finé and Mercator's maps looking for a secondary scaling point, knowing that it would have to be a very clear form like a bay or peninsula, but also knowing that I had to provide a reasonable explanation for its usage as a scaling point.

Near the end of every failed session I would look upon the pair of islands on Mercator's map named the Unfortunate Islands, give them a little consideration, then summarily dismiss them since they did not appear on Finé's earlier map and were likely a later discovery not available as a scaling point when the design was first introduced. After several days, perhaps it was weeks, of obsessing over these maps, I sat down for another fruitless search at the end of which I decided in mild frustration to discontinue what appeared to be a senseless pursuit, but as I was putting the maps away for the final time, I found myself again gazing upon Mercator's Unfortunate Islands. I was fully convinced that nothing would come of it, but not wanting to leave this item unchecked, I decided to halfheartedly research the islands.

When, with the help of Google, I found that these islands were discovered during Magellan's voyage, there was definitely a sense of excitement, but I knew that I still had the task of locating similar islands on Antarctica. Unfortunately Google Maps was not available back then and the maps that I could find online did not show evidence of these islands. I began to entertain the remote possibility that the islands may have been submerged under water or compressed by an ice shelf only to be revealed at a lower sea level or after deglaciation and isostatic rebound, but finally with rising doubts and dwindling options, I had the brilliant idea to abandon the comfort of my computer chair and reference a large world atlas in my possession.

Like online maps I had seen, the Getz Ice Shelf extended off Western Antarctica, but outlined within were the shapes of two similar sized islands paired together forming a narrow channel between very much like Mercator's Unfortunate Islands. Shortly thereafter I delved back into my recently acquired copy of Maps of the Ancient Sea Kings and soon became reacquainted with Schöner's 1524 World Globe which he constructed right on the heels of reports arriving in Europe of Magellan's discoveries meaning Schöner was the first to introduce this particular Antarctic design. Its depiction of the Antarctic continent is very similar in design to Finé's, but includes the pair of islands placed high in the Pacific just offshore from the portion of his continent resembling Western Antarctica. Suddenly the possibility was clear and strong that Schöner had affixed the continent to his globe by positioning Antarctica's Atka Bay at the tip of South America believing it to represent Inútil Bay lying in Magellan's strait, and rescaled and realigned the continent to also position Siple and Carney Islands high in the Pacific to represent the Unfortunate Islands. (Fig. 4)

Figure 4

Southern projection from Schöner's 1524 world globe where it would appear that he has affixed a map of Antarctica. Like his 1515 depiction of the continent, Schöner seems to be scaling and positioning older maps of unknown or unrecognizable lands to his globe by aligning key features of the continent that match up to recent discoveries.

Of course from there I began to study Schöner's previous works to verify he had used a similar method to create and scale his earlier iterations which lead to my discovery of Agrippa's long lost 1st century world map, The Map At The Bottom Of The World.

While I feel a need to maintain a rational level of skepticism regarding ancient mapping of a deglaciated Antarctica, I still feel that I have assembled the strongest evidence to date bolstering the authenticity of these maps.

I should also point out that the reason my research suddenly jumped to Atlantis was partially because there had to be an attempt at identifying the civilization capable of charting the continent, but also the fact that Siple and Carney Island were so accurately defined in the center of the 'more familiar' portion of the map suggested that perhaps we were looking at an island dwelling people, hence the Atlanteans...

Quote
In this island of Atlantis there was a great and wonderful empire which had rule over the whole island and several others. - (Timaeus [BJ])


Quote
All these and their descendants for many generations were the inhabitants and rulers of divers islands in the open sea. - (Critias [BJ])


-Doug
« Last Edit: September 13, 2011, 11:08:47 PM by Doug Fisher »

Newbie
*
Offline Offline
Join Date: Nov 23, 2010
Posts: 12


« Reply #1 on: November 30, 2010, 01:08:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Doug,
..So,I have done a bit more reading of your articles as promised  Grin , and I am finally getting my head around this one about Carney and Siple Islands. When I first read it I thought it was ok but that I should look into it a bit more, I must have just rushed through it originally because I didn't see how clear it really is that Carney and Siple are represented as the two islands Magellan discovered in the Pacific.
 I think, again, you are absolutely correct, but this time the implications are far more astonishing. The suggestion that those Antarctic islands had been mapped before they were covered in ice seems far-fetched but I feel that there is no way to deny your findings. As far as I'm concerned there is very little doubt now that Schoner had access to real ancient source maps of Antarctica. I had subscribed to Hapgood's ideas and already 'knew' that some ancient mariners must have mapped Antarctica, but like you say, Hapgood sometimes skipped over important problems with inadequate guesses such as the overscaling problem.
 You have definately added considerable weight to the evidence in favour of Antarctica being mapped in ancient times. Mind boggling stuff!
 In the article The Magellan Effect under the subtitle 'Schoner 1524 - Scaling Old to New' you write:
Quote
..The islands seem to be locked onto the Tropic of Cancer while the renderings of Western Antarctica..
Isn't it meant to be the Tropic of Capricorn?  Undecided
 
 Now, in my browsing on the net for Renaissance maps I came across one called the 'Paris Gilt Globe' of 1528 by an unknown author. Have you seen it before? You don't mention it in your articles and it seems to atleast confirm your ideas.
 
The beauty of this map is that it traces the path of Magellan's voyage right between the two islands in question. It certainly looks like the work of Schoner or possibly Finaeus.
 

 
Paradigm shift happens.
Administrator
*****
Offline Offline
Location: On the cusp of change.
Join Date: Feb 14, 2009
Posts: 151

WWW

« Reply #2 on: November 30, 2010, 01:26:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Moved this post into this thread as it explains Piri Reis' cartographic error and begins to build the case for understanding Schöner's error in affixing a world map to the bottom of his globe.

Early 16th Century Mapmaking

Hapgood wrongly believed that the 1513 Piri Reis map portrayed the Antarctic continent extending out along its lower edge. (Figure 1)

Figure 1

1513 Piri Reis Map

The map is actually incomplete, consisting of only the lower left portion, the remainder being long lost. While the map's full portrayal of the world is not entirely certain, it can most reliably be discerned by viewing another map of the same period. The 1513 Piri Reis map actually depicted the concept of a nearly enclosed southern sea like the Lopo Homem map of 1519. (Figure 2)

Figure 2

1519 Lopo Homem Map

Not only does the nearness in dates suggest that the cartographers would have been aware of similar cartographic designs of the time, but the unique depiction of the Rio de la Plata and the arced coast immediately beneath shared only between these two maps (Fig. 3) is a clear sign that the maps were based on the same design, the Lopo Homem possibly having been modeled after a fully intact Piri Reis map.

Figure 3

The 1519 Lopo Homem map's depiction of Rio de la Plata with an arced coastline beneath (left) is nearly identical to the Piri Reis depiction (right), strongly suggesting that they are very similar maps and that the complete Piri Reis map would have also depicted the same lateral extension which ultimately wrapped around a southern sea.

So where did this unorthodox design come from; what was the inspiration for this vast enclosed sea in the south? It was a map by Claudius Ptolemy from the 2nd century A.D. (Figure 4)

Figure 4

Copy of Ptolemy’s 2nd century world map found within a 15th century edition of Claudius Ptolemy’s The Geographia. The map incorporates a fully enclosed southern sea beneath Asia which is shored up in the west by an overextended African continent.

Ptolemy's map, however, depicted a fully enclosed sea with the African continent forming the western shore and extending down and across the sea's southern perimeter. How and why did Piri Reis suddenly substitute the South American continent as the western shore?

First off, Piri Reis and other cartographers of his time were well aware that Africa did not extend out in the manner Ptolemy depicted, as sailing around the tip of Africa was commonplace in his day with this being the lone sea route to the Spice Islands in the east. The Americas were being explored at this time in hopes of establishing an alternate route.

The problem cartographers like Piri Reis were running up against was how to depict new partial discoveries. The Strait of Magellan had not yet been reached or discovered yet, so no one knew the full shape or extent of the South American continent. So where would Piri turn to get his inspiration in depicting the remainder of a partially explored continent? He very candidly informs us with an inscription on his map:

Quote
No one now living has seen a map like this. I have composed and constructed it using about twenty maps and mappaemundi; these are the maps which were composed in the time of Alexander of the Two Horns, and which show the inhabited portion of the earth.The Arabs call these maps ja'fariya.

I have used eight ja'fariya map, an Arab map of India and four recent Portuguese maps - these maps show the sea of Sind (Sindhu-sagara), India (Arabian Sea) and China according to mathematical principles - and also a map of the western regions drawn by Colombo (Columbus). The final form was arrived at by reducing all these maps to the same scale. Therefore the present map is as accurate for the Seven Seas as the maps of our own countries used by sailors.


With a range of maps supposedly dating all the way back to Alexander the Great's day, Ptolemy's world map was undoubtedly among the mix as it was a much more common map that has survived to our day. Seeking inspiration from an existing map in hopes that there might be a previous charting of the region, Piri obviously surmised that Ptolemy's erroneous depiction of an enclosed sea might have been based on a legitimate geographical concept and subsequently rescaled the sea laterally substituting South America for Africa as the sea's western shore.

Such was the nature of cartography of the time, reconciling older maps—not necessarily genuine maps of Antarctica—to new discoveries. And this same flawed method would continue to be used to help fill in other geographic voids during a period experiencing a heightened pace of discovery and wonderment.

Enter Johannes Schöner 1515...

-Doug


* LopoHomem.jpg (80.74 KB, 500x343 - viewed 90921 times.)

* LopoPiri.jpg (79.94 KB, 500x311 - viewed 94722 times.)

* Ptolemy.jpg (47.55 KB, 500x360 - viewed 92351 times.)
« Last Edit: January 04, 2011, 05:48:20 PM by Doug Fisher »

Paradigm shift happens.
Administrator
*****
Offline Offline
Location: On the cusp of change.
Join Date: Feb 14, 2009
Posts: 151

WWW

« Reply #3 on: November 30, 2010, 02:09:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Geo,

Quote
In the article The Magellan Effect under the subtitle 'Schoner 1524 - Scaling Old to New' you write: Isn't it meant to be the Tropic of Capricorn?  Undecided

Truly sad and embarrassing.  Sad
I am partially aware of that error because I thought I corrected it in the past, but it even exists on my Graham Hancock submission of the article. I'll be sure and get that fixed. Thanks much.

And thanks very much for your positive take on this finding.

-Doug


TROPIC OF CAPRICORN ERROR FIXED!!   Dance2
« Last Edit: November 30, 2010, 10:09:12 PM by Doug Fisher »

Paradigm shift happens.
Administrator
*****
Offline Offline
Location: On the cusp of change.
Join Date: Feb 14, 2009
Posts: 151

WWW

« Reply #4 on: November 30, 2010, 11:38:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Johannes Schöner and Agrippa's Orbis Terrarum

I did read briefly the article about the Agrippa world map, I need to go over that one again more thoroughly because I am confused as to what it's implications are. I mean, I can see that the Agrippa map shows the Mediterranean on the inside of the C-shape and that it is C-shaped because of the Strait of Gibraltar (no land link), and generally distorted. I can see that the outside of the C-shape is a good representation of Greater Antarctica, but I am baffled as to why a map maker would do such a thing. I do realise that cartographical oddities were often made where regions on a map were made to look like people or animals etc. But why put the Mediterranean inside Antarctica?


I can see where you are getting confused here. You need to completely set aside any idea that the 1515 map was meant to represent Antarctica. It was not. Review my post above regarding the Piri Reis map. Piri was not attempting to depict Antarctica, he was attempting to depict the portion of South America that was yet to be explored. Likewise Schöner was not attempting to depict Antarctica, he was attempting to depict a purported strait and southern landmass exaggerated in a German tract from 1508.

Quote
...they found Brazil had a point extending into the sea. They have sailed around that point, and ascertained that the country lay, as in the south of Europe, entirely from east to west. It is as if one crossed the Strait of Gibraltar to go east in ranging the coast of Barbary. - Copia der Newen Zeitung auss Presillg Landt


The sailors had sailed into the relatively small San Matias Gulf, but suggested not only that they may have discovered a strait like Gibraltar, but also a southern land like the coast of Barbary. (Figure 1)

Figure 1

Map of the Strait of Gibraltar and the Barbary Coast.

Like Piri Reis, Schöner was tasked with representing a new discovery with very little to go on, except the existence of a strait at the 40th parallel and apparently a large coastline beneath. And also like Piri, I believe Schöner searched for his answer within a collection of older maps and found a badly worn or more likely a map in its early stages of creation that had no identifiable inscriptions on it. Therefore to him it was a mysterious unknown landmass. The map depicted both a strait—the English Channel—and the large landmass he was looking for and he placed the English Channel at the tip of South America and aligned the rest of Agrippa's World Map by centering its concentric center over the South Pole. (Figure 2)

Figure 2

Schöner’s scaling of an ancient map of the world onto his Globe of 1515. At the top, the first scaling point is the English Channel, which sits in place of a purported strait passing from the Atlantic to the Pacific. The second scaling point is the center of Agrippa’s circular commentary delineated by the concentric coastlines of Italy, Turkey and Mauritania, which he centers over the South Pole.

So if Schöner’s Globe was not incorporating an ancient map of Antarctica what is the significance beyond the discovery of a 2,000-year-old map? If in fact Schöner fit an ancient map like Agrippa's to his 1515 globe scaling it between the two points of the English Channel and the center of a circular sea, which indeed he did, then he most likely affixed an ancient map to his 1524 globe in the same manner. Therefore the 1524 depiction which most closely represents Antarctica was almost certainly an ancient map of the continent which he similarly scaled between two points, Carney and Siple Islands and Atka Bay.



-Doug


* Barbariae_Ortelius_1580.jpg (69.56 KB, 640x446 - viewed 3938 times.)
« Last Edit: January 04, 2011, 05:50:19 PM by Doug Fisher »

Newbie
*
Offline Offline
Join Date: Nov 23, 2010
Posts: 12


« Reply #5 on: December 02, 2010, 12:14:49 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Doug,

Now that I understand your theory concerning Carney and Siple islands and how they explain the overscaling of Antarctica on Schoners maps I can start to let the implications sink in. I do think you are correct about the overscaling on Schoners maps and the maps of others who may have followed Schoner's lead but I hesitate to declare it case closed.
 Magellan was under the impression that Tierra Del Fuego was the promontory of a great southern continent. The standard explanation why he and other explorers and cartographers believed a southern coninent either connected or abutted South America is that Ptolemy's ideas had influenced them. Ptolemy may have been very influential but I think this explanation is incorrect and that Ptolemy's idea only contributed to their conviction. Basically I am saying there must be more to the reason why Magellan and others thought that a continent connected onto South America.
 If Ptolemy had believed that there was an all encompassing southern continent why should it be assumed that he originated the idea? Afterall we know that Ptolemy was heavily influenced by Marinus of Tyre. Ptolemy may have been merely reiterating what he had received from tradition or better yet, ancient source maps.

  If it was Magellan's comment and Ptolemy's idea alone that triggered Schoner to make his map of Antarctica abutting South America and his map in turn influenced both Mercator and Fineus, how do we explain the Lopo Homem Map and the Piri Reis Map? I know you have explained that the Piri Reis map and the Lopo Homem map have clear similarities and that the Piri Reis map does not show Antarctica at all, but what about the U.S. Airforce cartographer's conclusion that the Piri Reis map does indeed show part of Antarctica?
 The Lopo Homem map cannot be said to merely show the coastline of South America turned eastward in order to fit on the chart as has been suggested of the Piri Reis map and if the two maps are similar then it may be that the missing parts of the Piri Reis map is like the Lopo Homem map. Since these maps cannot be said to be influenced by Schoner maybe it shows that there really was a good reason for the map makers to depict South America connected to Antarctica.

Seeing how Schoner had to really 'stretch' the data to make Carney and Siple Islands fit his interpretation of Magellan's Unfortunate Islands it seems to me there was more to his decision than you have assumed. I feel that Schoner would not have made such a leap to connect the two sets of islands if he did not have an additional reason for believing the southern continent to be extremely large and connected to South America.

What I am trying to suggest is that maybe these ancient source maps really did show South America connected to Antarctica! I realise that sounds ridiculous but we are already having to accept that these ancient map makers were able to map the correct coastline of Antarctica as it appears under massive ice sheets! If the accuracy of these maps is accepted then we must not be shy about questioning the geological theories that are the reason for making these conclusions seem far-fetched.
It is only our preconceived geological views that cause skeptics to scoff at the implications of the ancient Antarctica maps. What makes our task particularly difficult is that geological theory is virtually untouchable since it also props up evolutionary theory.

The contents of your future book includes the geological implications of your findings which inevitably is going to be revolutionary for geology as you have suggested. This is the logical progression of events if we are accepting the ancient source maps theory.
So if we are prepared to rewrite substantial parts of geological theory I think it best to 'put on hold' all geological preconceptions when considering the matter of accurate ancient maps of the globe (in the tradition of Hapgood).

I hope this post wasn't too tedious to follow. I have revealed a little of my own bias but I think the matter of South America connected to Antarctica should not be dismissed so quickly.
 
 
Paradigm shift happens.
Administrator
*****
Offline Offline
Location: On the cusp of change.
Join Date: Feb 14, 2009
Posts: 151

WWW

« Reply #6 on: December 03, 2010, 01:15:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Magellan and others thought that a continent connected onto South America...If it was Magellan's comment and Ptolemy's idea alone that triggered Schöner to make his map of Antarctica abutting South America and his map in turn influenced both Mercator and Fineus, how do we explain the Lopo Homem Map and the Piri Reis Map?


First of all, Ptolemy's concept of an enclosed southern sea influenced Piri Reis and Ghisolfi (Lopo Homem Map), but I am not sure how Ptolemy influenced Schöner's designs of a separate detached continent.

As for Magellan, we have no recorded comment on the size of Tierra del Fuego that I am aware of as he died before completing the trip, but I know what you mean. Yet Pigafetta and others that documented the voyage never suggested there was a large continent south of South America. I read where someone even argued that Pigafetta perceived the southern shore was not part of a large landmass, but based on his map it is really hard to tell what he considered it to be as the map crops away much of the landmass.



Pigafetta's Map of Magellan's Strait

Quote
Seeing how Schöner had to really 'stretch' the data to make Carney and Siple Islands fit his interpretation of Magellan's Unfortunate Islands it seems to me there was more to his decision than you have assumed. I feel that Schoner would not have made such a leap to connect the two sets of islands if he did not have an additional reason for believing the southern continent to be extremely large and connected to South America.


Schöner's 1515 and 1520 maps which WERE based on reports of a large landmass likely would have been enough to establish a bias for his 1524 map, but we can also throw in another motivator, the Greek concept of the Antipodes. The idea of a large antipodal continent was still being debated in Schöner's day.



Macrobian World Map

Quote
What I am trying to suggest is that maybe these ancient source maps really did show South America connected to Antarctica!


None of Schöner's maps depict an actual connection though. All were the product of reported straits, one false and one real. And Schöner responded by creating straits, placing continent sized landforms a short distance from the tip of South America.

Piri Reis, however was unaware of any reported straits as there are none depicted on his South American continent, which is why we see such an extreme difference between Schöner's maps and the Piri Reis and Lopo Homem maps which cling to older knowledge and concepts.

Besides, if we posit that Piri's design was based on an ancient map depicting the South American continent connecting with Antarctica then we would also be inclined to accept Ptolemy's design was also based on an ancient map depicting the African continent connected with Antarctica. It seems more reasonable to accept that both were simply false concepts, with Piri merely adapting Ptolemy's false concept to the world of his time.

Consider Anaximander's concept of the world. There is no reason to believe that his map was based on an actual ring of land fully encircling Africa and Eurasia. False geographical concepts were the norm in the classical period and continued on into the 16th century with an enclosed sea and a separate antipodal continent.

Quote
What about the U.S. Airforce cartographer's conclusion that the Piri Reis map does indeed show part of Antarctica


The problem is there is absolutely no resemblance except that part of the map appears to extend into the Antarctic region. And for every cartographer that believes it depicts Antarctica, there are thousands that would tell you otherwise.

Anyway, I have seen similar arguments like yours made in the past, but such theories, even if they are correct, require a tremendously huge leap of faith and I'm not quite ready to make that leap. I will admit to entertaining similar concepts early on in my research. It was more to test various ideas, but I knew there was no way I was going to place anything out in public unless it was very well anchored down.

-Doug


* Pigafetta.jpg (29.75 KB, 500x419 - viewed 7893 times.)
« Last Edit: January 04, 2011, 05:51:58 PM by Doug Fisher »

Newbie
*
Offline Offline
Join Date: Nov 23, 2010
Posts: 12


« Reply #7 on: December 03, 2010, 11:27:56 AM »
ReplyReply


 Seeing your argument reminds me that my view is obviously sheer speculation at this point. There is definately more evidence in favour of the early explorers merely believing in a hypothetical Antipodes. My main argument I suppose is that we must keep our minds open (even more than usual) at this stage of the game because with your new insights that support the Antarctica maps being genuine, one way or another there is going to have to be some major revision of our view of history.
 Geological theory states that at one time South America was connected to Antarctica and so was Africa. The crazy suggestion is that maybe that is what these maps are depicting.

I wont go into that idea any more atleast for now, but I will say that I did probably jump ahead a bit. The basic argument is that perhaps the errors we find on the ancient maps are not errors at all but simply the shape of the coastline as it was in the day the ancients mapped it. When Hapgood would say there were errors here or there, a lot of the time it was because he assumed that the coastline must have been the same in the past as it is now, despite being prepared to believe that Antarctica was mapped before it had an icecap! This shows how pervasive gradualistic geological theory is (little change over millions of years).
Now, my explanation for the omission of the Antarctic Peninsula from the Fineus, Mercator and Schoner maps is based on this idea. I will explain it in the appropriate topic tomorrow but I am sure you get what I think the solution is.
Paradigm shift happens.
Administrator
*****
Offline Offline
Location: On the cusp of change.
Join Date: Feb 14, 2009
Posts: 151

WWW

« Reply #8 on: December 04, 2010, 01:58:31 PM »
ReplyReply

Hello Geo,

Quote
Seeing your argument reminds me that my view is obviously sheer speculation at this point.

Ahem... Have you read my articles.  Grin

You know I used to be a 'normal' person until I came across Hapgood's work about 8 years ago. I knew little about Antarctica and all I knew about Atlantis at the time was acquired from a 70s TV series starring Patrick Duffy. Things have changed significantly since then, but it has taken some time and I am still the reluctant researcher, approaching things with a good measure of skepticism. Outside of the Agrippa Map, I still harbor doubts about the remaining finds. The only thing that made me feel comfortable presenting them is that there was a level of tangible evidence that could be presented in making a strong argument in their favor.

Even with my evidence that Antarctica was charted when it was ice free, there are still questions of who produced the maps and how one of these maps ended up in Schöner's hands. That's a huge gap, but there is sufficient evidence to make the possibility worthy of consideration.

So based on that:
Quote
Geological theory states that at one time South America was connected to Antarctica and so was Africa. The crazy suggestion is that maybe that is what these maps are depicting.

This statement is not so crazy, but as you state it is speculation and extreme speculation at that. It's not that such an idea is necessarily impossible, but you will need to produce a very clear link between ancient depictions and past crustal movement. I am sure you have heard it before, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, but engaging in strong speculation never hurt anyone and besides it's usually a required step in finding extraordinary evidence.

Quote
When Hapgood would say there were errors here or there, a lot of the time it was because he assumed that the coastline must have been the same in the past as it is now, despite being prepared to believe that Antarctica was mapped before it had an icecap!

Excellent point.

Quote
There is definately more evidence in favour of the early explorers merely believing in a hypothetical Antipodes

Exactly, never throw out the most obvious possibility.

Quote
My main argument I suppose is that we must keep our minds open (even more than usual) at this stage of the game because with your new insights that support the Antarctica maps being genuine, one way or another there is going to have to be some major revision of our view of history.

As I stated earlier, even with my evidence there are still some very large obstacles to clear before we can declare the maps genuine, but people should probably keep an open mind toward the remote possibility. I don't want to put too much out here yet, but the upcoming chapters will be a game changer. If I am right, and I am 100% certain I am, the scientific community will be heavily shaken and scientific and historical consensus will never again be viewed in the same near-infallible light.

Quote
Now, my explanation for the omission of the Antarctic Peninsula from the Fineus, Mercator and Schoner maps is based on this idea. I will explain it in the appropriate topic tomorrow but I am sure you get what I think the solution is.

I have an idea, but I am still very much looking forward to your post.

-Doug

Pages: [1]   Go Up
Print
Jump to: