Shop now Shop now Shop now  Up to 50% Off Fashion  Shop all Amazon Fashion Cloud Drive Photos Shop now Learn More Shop now Shop now Shop Fire Shop Kindle Shop now Shop now Shop now

Customer Reviews

4.2 out of 5 stars20
4.2 out of 5 stars
Your rating(Clear)Rate this item


There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

on 29 July 2009
The book combines a comprehensive survey of ancient myth and oral tradition with down-to-earth science and remarkable cartography. The feeling one has is "of course! - why didn't that occur to us before?" Recent reappraisal of the meaning, purpose and date of various structures and artifacts (particularly in Egypt) is helping to loosen up our ideas about the evolution and history of mankind, but the continent of Atlantis - the homeland of an antediluvian society - has always been regarded as a mythical dream. This book helps to explain WHY and HOW we've missed a very important point. It's a first-rate contribution to the cool and objective debate concerning a land now lost, but not forgotten.
0Comment|4 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 28 February 2004
The Flem-Aths have taken all considerations, situations, world views - mythological and scientific - into account and come up with startling conclusions which show, for the first time perhaps, the unbiased eyes of serious scientific researchers and not pure flights of imagination.
Imagination has been brought to bear on the subject matter, however, in a surprisingly sensible way: instead of viewing the written historical 'evidence' provided by Plato with present day eyes, they have managed to conduct such comprehensive research that they are able to present 'the facts' of the writing as they would have been originally seen by the peoples of 'The World' who read it *at the time it was written*, which gives an entirely different view of the clues given to the location of Atlantis.
Atlantis was placed in the Atlantic Ocean, beyond the Pillars of Heracles. Simple enough. Except that location to us, *now* is severely limited in comparison to where it had to possibility of being at the time the evidence first came to light (in the time of the Greek, Solon, c. 638-559 B.C.) At that time the 'World was thought to be a circularish island in the midst of a vast ocean. The Pillars of Heracles, at the Western end of the Mediterranean Sea was considered to be the furthest reaches of the known world. The 'Atlantic' ocean was the entire ocean, not the part of it that is named N.Atlantic and S.Atlantic now.
This is just one point among many and in conjunction with the evidence of the vastly devastating Earth Crust Displacements, I found the research and conclusions drawn from it, compelling and thought-provoking.
Whether you believe or not, this book is definitely worth the read.
0Comment|11 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 22 July 1999
The legend of Atlantis was first recorded by the Greek philosopher Plato. He relates how his ancestor Solon, the famous Athenian law-giver, received the legend from one of the most learned of the Egyptian priests. This priest descibed Atlantis as a high altitude, mountainous island continent in the 'real ocean' which was destroyed by earthquakes and floods of extraordinary violence. This description makes perfect sense when we view the world's geography from Antarctica. Antarctica is a high altitude, mountainous, island continent in what oceanographers call the 'World Ocean.' Ancient maps depict the actual shape of parts of Antarctica that are today under ice. One of these maps, Kircher's 1665 map of Atlantis, is an amazingly accurate map of Antarctica without is ice.
The common assumption is that Antarctica has been under ice for millons of years and therefore the idea that people might have once lived on this island continent is absurd. But a little thought on the matter sheds doubt on this assumption. We know that every place on the earth's surface has a corresponding spot on the opposite side of the globe. The North Pole is on the opposite side of the globe to the South Pole. New Zealand is almost on the opposite side of the globe to the U.K. There is even an island off the south coast of New Zealand called "Antiopodes" which is very near to being opposite to London. In each case, the climate is similar - New Zealand is temperate and so is England. We don't find cases where one area is polar and the opposite side of the globe is temperate. Lesser Antarctica (the size of Western Europe) is on the opposite side of the globe to Alaska, Siberia, Canada's Yukon and the former land bridge known as 'Beringa.' Extensive scientific studies of these regions in the far north demonstrate the existence of a wide variety of animals that lived there before 9,600 B.C. These include not only the famous mammoths but also antelope, deer, saber-toothed tigers and lions. These animals lived in what today is a polar region. It follows then that people could have lived on the opposite side of the planet to this region.
To explain how the climate changed, how the ice sheets were formed, the sudden rise of agriculture, massive extinctions, and the ancient maps from the ice age, we use the theory of earth crust displacement as developed by Charles Hapgood. We corresponded with Hapgood for the last five years of his life (he died in late 1982) and we received his support for our advancements of his theory. Having read the nearly 200 pages of correspondence between Hapgood and Albert Einstein we understand why Einstein was so enthusiastic about the earth crust displacement theory.
It is impossible in a short review like this to list all the reasons why we believe that Antarctica was Atlantis before the last displacement. We have assembled numerous myths from around the world about an island paradise that was destroyed by a great flood. We believe that these lost island paradise myths are a distant echo from Atlantis.
We are perfectly serious in our desire to see our theory tested with an expedition to Antarctica to uncover what yet might remain of a once advanced civilisation that perished WHEN THE SKY FELL.
0Comment|10 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 5 November 2000
This book is part of a genre that might be termed 'alternative history/science'. It was a movement away from the general academic consensus by people who were uncomfortable - and rightly so - with historians who ignored a large amount of evidence in order to develop a a consistent view of early world history and development. The group fascinated me, and I read all sorts of books. I read a few more conventional books and realised how wrong they all seemed to be. I would just warn everybody who reads this book, or any like it, that the truth lies somewhere in between the two - did atlantis exist, or not? It is a question we cannot yet answer, but there is evidence on both sides. Both ordinary hitorians and their opposers twist the facts to support a consistent view of history. I would say we do not have enough knowledge to be consistent, and we would be better to accept we do not know than make foolish claims that have as yet no proof. Maybe one day we will find out, but I warn any readers not to be pulled in by what they say, but to just keep an open mind.
0Comment|12 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 14 June 2013
I so wanted this book to be better. It's well written but poorly structured. For example a short and evocative narrative describing an Atlantean returning to his city home features at the end of the book when it would have served as an excellent introduction to draw the reader in. The diatribe bewailing the unwillingness of modern science to entertain 'new' or 'unusual' ideas appears at the beginning, where it serves to indicate that the authors have not formed a good case for their argument, and is largely repeated at the end where it belongs.

There are some good points made, particularly those regarding the apparent suddenness of the emergence of fully formed civilisations, but the links to Atlantis are tenuous at best. Troy is held up as an example of a city deemed mythical until found at the end of the 19th C. which is a fair point but Schliemann's city (or cities given the number of rebuilds found on the site) bears little resemblance to the Homeric story. Yet the authors would have us believe that their Atlantis must be the same as that described by Solon. Nowhere do they address some of the more awkward 'facts' regarding Atlantis according to Solon's description, that it was impossible to sail there because the sea was blocked by a huge shoal of mud, that the island upon which the city stood was largely artificial or that the city sank!

Facts are produced but conclusions drawn from them are either questionable or can be disproven with a little thought. For example the sudden appearance of agriculture around the globe shortly after the cataclysm is attributed to Atlantean survivors sharing their skills with indigenous hunter-gatherers. But far more likely is that the cataclysm, and mass-extinction, forced the relatively primitive human survivors to nurture their scarce food sources rather than simply rely on nature's abundance. The authors talk of anomalous discoveries of bones, tools and preserved carcasses in Arctic conditions but fail to grasp the fact that local climates are not dictated just by their latitude. In the same fashion they completely fail to understand that oceanic evaporation is not just a function of temperature but also solar radiation. Thus an Earth several degrees colder than present would still have enough precipitation to produce the ice sheets of what we know as the 'Ice Ages'.

Charles Hapgood's ideas about Earth crust displacement certainly have some merit and the authors have done much to bring them to a wider audience. Where they fall down is their attempt to tie those ideas to a 'real' Atlantis. They may be correct and my criticisms may be utterly misplaced but I winced, rather than became convinced, too many times for my comfort as I read this book.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 17 January 2003
Conventional archeology seems to be held in a straitjacket of perceived Victorian Wisdom. This, coupled with peer pressure, creates extreme problems for anyone seeking to take knowledge further. As a result this book is regarded as a "New Age, fringe" publication and is largely rejected. The ideas presented in the book are well researched and presented but do not necessarily represent the truth, although they may take our understanding further and present ideas that should be subjected to rigerous research istead of being disregarded by academics.
The immediate rejection of new ideas does nothing to add to human knowledge. It is clear that civilisation developed sometime prior to 3000BC, what is not known is where and when.
Additionally it cannot be stated with certainty yet what changes occurred both climatically and eustatically in the period from the decline of the icesheets to the time that civilisation is conventionally accepted to have started. The recurring myth of floods would suggest that something violently changed life for humans during this period and caused worldwide catastrophe. The mechanisms exist, whether they be impacts, volcanicity or both, to cause civilisations to collapse and leave perhaps only their memory and little if nothing in the way of artifacts. A myth, by definition, has a kernel of truth. This book attempts to seek the underlying truth. How accurately only further research will tell
0Comment|5 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 9 September 2013
Just counting annual layers of ice cores, calibrated by convenient volcanic deposits, shows Antarctica was under a lot of ice long, long before ~10,000 BP. IIRC, longest ice core is 800,000 years deep. No room for Atlantis there !!
So, read the book for fun, but use due care.
0Comment|One person found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
I enjoyed reading this book and I think it's a plausible theory. It has a great introduction by Colin Wilson and is well illustrated with maps. I just found their speculations on the Aymara language a bit unscientific, since it is merely a member of the Andean family and ultimately part of the Amerind macro-family, and certainly not an "artificially constructed" language. If they are correct as to the location of Atlantis, another mystery would be the absence of ruins, monuments or any evidence of early human habitation in Tierra del Fuego, southern Chile and Patagonia as these areas would have been temperate and very near to the fabled city. Those reservations aside, it's still a book that makes one think and a valuable addition to the growing corpus of literature on the earth's unknown past.
0Comment|4 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 12 September 2015
Met een extra hoofdstuk in the Atlantis bulletins had de extra inhoud van dit boek ook gedekt kunnen zijn. Mocht je dat niet gelezen hebben, dan opent dit boek waarschijnlijk de geest voor een zeer waarschijnlijk hele andere geschiedenis van de mensheid. Overtuigend is het zeker. Alleen is het niet een strak goed lopend verhaal, eerder een poging om verschillende onderwerpen die veel verband hebben tot een verhaal te maken. Niet helemaal gelukt. Toch een aanrader vanwege de verstrekkende inhoud.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 22 May 2012
Probably everybody during their own lives, sooner or later, is going to hear something about Atlantis. This is quite a fascinating subject and I believe that Rand Flem Ath has presented one of the most convincing arguments for its location. Could scenario/hypothesis described in this book be true (that the remains of Atlantis may be found beneath the ice of lesser Antarctica)? I would like to see somebody to try to disprove it, as both authors have done quite a compelling job of presenting the evidence for their case. If you are interested in old maps or where did the maps that that show pre Ice-Age come from, this is also a good book to read. Some of the other reviews on Amazon.com, offer a better summary of the book, so there is no point of repeating that here again

Obviously something did happened on this planet, about 12000-16000 years ago, something that we as a human race have almost forgotten (or we, as humanity, just don't want to remember). All we have left are myths, and in those myths memories of those events live on. It would be simply irresponsible just to ignore them, or treat them simply only as "just" myths. I think they are more that. They are existing memories of the "lost civilization", which simply disappeared due to some catastrophic event that happened long time ago. There are many other myths across the globe (probably about few hundred of them), describing similar scenarios, but Atlantis is probably the most famous one. It's a shame that most of orthodox archaeologists and historians simply treat this whole subject as a bunch of "myths" - just because it doesn't fit their own theories. This is a highly recommended book for somebody interested in Atlantis, old maps, ice age and the time when we were obviously not just a bunch of "hunter gatherers", no matter what the orthodox archaeologists are saying (some of those myths often tell a different story, of antediluvian cities of the Sumerians or of the Atlanteans before the global disaster).

The other recommended books related to the above would be:
-obviously the works of Plato
-"The History of Atlantis" by Lewis Spence (a classic of its own, worth reading no matter what)
-"Maps of the Ancient Sea Kings" by Charles Hapgood
-"Underworld: Flooded Kingdoms of the Ice Age" by Graham Hancock
-"Lost Worlds: Scientific Secrets of the Ancient" by Robert Charroux
-"Noah's Flood: The New Scientific Discoveries About the Event That Changed History" by William Ryan and Walter Pitman
0Comment|2 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse

Sponsored Links

  (What is this?)