An A-Z Guide To The Search For Plato's Atlantis

Latest News

  • Joining The Dots

    Joining The Dots

    I have now published my new book, Joining The Dots, which offers a fresh look at the Atlantis mystery. I have addressed the critical questions of when, where and who, using Plato’s own words, tempered with some critical thinking and a modicum of common sense.Read More »

Recent Updates

Critical Thinking


Channelling is a modern term for mediumship that claims to provide contact with the spirits of the departed. It has become fashionable now for channellers to claim communication with entities from Atlantis and or Lemuria/Mu! As a means of assisting in the quest for Atlantis, channelling, in the opinion of your compiler, is about as useful as a packet of sausages. Recent articles regarding psychics and police work have only strengthened my scepticism(a)(h). Simon Singh, a well-known author, recently penned an article on the subject(c)(d).

My principal objections to the use of so-called channelled information are listed in Joining the Dots [p.63].

(1) Channelling sources have frequently been shown to be fraudulent or demonstrate manifestations of schizophrenia.

(2) Channelled ‘information’ relating to Atlantis frequently contradicts accepted scientific knowledge.

(3) Channelled ‘information’ repeatedly conflicts with commonsense.

(4) Channelled ‘information’ is not acceptable in a court of law.

(5) Channelling sources often contradict each other.

(6) No published medium, psychic or psychotic,  has ever offered a verifiable location, date, or identity for Atlantis.

We should also keep in mind that the name Atlantis was a Hellenised name concocted by Solon or Plato to identify the homeland of the Atlantean invaders, hundreds if not thousands of years after their island was submerged. So when it is claimed that messages have been received from Atlantis or past lives experienced there, how do the mediums know that Atlantis was the source of their ‘communication’, since Atlantis would have been known by a different name or names to its inhabitants and they could not have been aware of a name invented many centuries after their demise. Furthermore, how do we explain these ancient Atlanteans communicating in English or any other modern vernacular language?

Psychic Archaeology has been defined  as “the process of using psychic abilities to locate objects of centuries past.”  It gained wider public awareness in 1978 with the publication of two books, Psychic Archaeology [781] by Jeffrey Goodman and The Secret Vaults of Time [1881] by Stephan A. Schwartz. They both touch on the subject of Atlantis, but only in the context of the ‘revelations’ of Edgar Cayce. In the 21st century, Luciano Pederzoli published The Megalith Builders – Psychic archaeology and the Nuragic civilization(n). His book deals specifically with “the reconstruction of an entire life is presented – from birth to death – of an important individual who lived on the Italian island of Sardinia approximately 3,500 years ago, at the peak of what is known as the Nuragic civilization, which is now gradually attracting more attention from progressive scholars,”

>A book-length paper by Luciano Pederzoli on the website that purports to offer information about life in Sardinia during and before the Nuragic period(o). It is claimed that it was developed through the use of regression hypnosis. Pederzoli has published a number of papers about channelling and Out-of-Body Experiences(p). This is not for me.<

When law courts allow channelled information to be admitted in evidence, I will be happy to reconsider my opinion. While speaking of courts, I should point out that the evidence of witnesses is preferred where there is corroboration, partly in recognition of the fragility of memory(f) and partly because of the risk of lying. How do you corroborate that the ‘spirit source’ of a medium is real? A recent study(g) of a high profile medium Allison DuBois would do little to encourage channelling as a dependable tool.

Further psychic pscandals(l) have even led their representative organisations to call for greater controls(k).

A lengthy paper(j) by Eric Pement, soberly discusses the subject of channelling from a religious viewpoint.

David Pratt, in a paper on Pole Shift theories, has highlighted the conflicting information generated by psychics when exploring the subject(m), noting that “A number of psychics, with the help of their ‘spirit guides’, have offered dramatic and generally conflicting accounts of past and future pole shifts. All their ‘prophecies’ have so far failed to come true.”

In the meanwhile, it might be worth reading an article by Karla McKlaren, a former New Age leader, on her conversion to scepticism(e) . Also consider a 2016 large-scale study(i) which concluded that The results don’t prove that relatively poor analytical thinking skills cause people to become believers in psychic phenomena, but they are certainly consistent with the idea that a lack of these skills may leave people more prone to developing such beliefs.”

See Also: Critical Thinking



(e) See:



(h) A Recent Investigation Into British Psychics Revealed Something Shocking – Hayley is a Ghost Geek ( *

(i) Why do so many people believe in psychic powers? – Research Digest (

(j) See:





(o) (PDF) THE MEGALITH BUILDERS – Psychic archaeology and the Nuragic civilization ( *

(p) (99+) Luciano Pederzoli | EVANLAB – *

Gullibility & Credulity

Gullibility and Credulity are two of the greatest enemies of serious Atlantology. When any attention-seeking PhD pronounces on the location of Atlantis, there is always a herd of credulous listeners willing to believe what they say. Having abandoned their critical faculties, many of these will pay good money to purchase their books or attend their lectures. After committing their cash and time to back any given idea, some, often through pride, will often be reluctant to later abandon their support or switch to any other competing theory.

The history of Atlantology has recorded a recurring pattern. It was not until the 15th century that Plato’s complete Atlantis story was made available in Europe with the Latin translation of Marsilio Ficino, which was around the same time that America was discovered. This led to a knee-jerk reaction identifying the New World with Atlantis. In due course the Mid-Atlantic Ridge was discovered leading to a variety of claims, placing  Atlantis in the Atlantic.

Then the Minoan civilisation was rediscovered at the start of the 20th century, which led to its identification as Atlantean, an idea consolidated by the unearthing of Minoan remains on Santorini following a 2nd millennium BC eruption of the volcano there. Even more exotic locations have been proposed over the last century, including Antarctica, the Andes and Indonesia.

Obviously, there were many other proposed locations, but the American, Atlantic and Minoan theories have persisted over the centuries.*As I have argued elsewhere, common sense rules out America and the Atlantic since both involve distances from Athens that conflict with the need to be within easy striking distance. With regard to the Minoans, Athens was attacked from the west not the south, apart from which, relatively speaking, Crete is ‘just down the road’, which begs the question, why Plato did not simply say that Athens were attacked by their regional neighbours, the Cretans. To me, it is clear that Plato did not know the identity of the Atlanteans.*

If Critical Thinking is properly applied to any these locations they will, in my opinion, fail as potential sites for Plato’s Atlantis.

*Apart from location, there are a number of other aspects of Plato’s Atlantis story that stretch credibility, in fact Plato himself found Solon’s dimensions for the ditch surrounding the Plain of Atlantis difficult to accept (Critias 118c) but out of deference to Solon, recorded them anyway. Then we have the timespan of 9,000 years between the Atlantean War and Solon’s visit to Egypt, which would require Atlantis to have waged war against Athens and Egypt before either existed as organised societies!*

An online article on the subject of gullibility is worth a read(a).


Critical Thinking

Critical Thinking is the only way forward in the pursuit of truth whether it is in respect of Atlantology or any other area of interest. It’s an unfortunate aspect of our nature that we humans seem to believe all too quickly what we want to believe rather than what can be demonstrated. This is particularly true in the case of religious faith as well as ‘fringe’ beliefs such as astrology, tarot cards or channelling. It also applies to more secular matters like politics or even controversial subjects including the existence and/or nature of Atlantis.

Atlantis has spawned a virtually endless collection of outlandish theories, each of which has its believers. Plato’s island has been variously claimed to have been founded by aliens, located at both poles, had flying machines, electricity and monorail transport and this is just a few of the more entertaining claims.

The application of critical thinking(a)(b) to any of the above suggestions would expose them for the falsehoods they are. However, keep in mind what Lenin said – “A lie told often enough becomes truth.” An example of this is the repetition to this day, a century later, of the fraudulent Atlantis claims of Paul Schliemann, long after they were exposed as untrue(c). As recently as 2017 Schliemann’s lies were still being quoted as facts(e)(f).

Also consider, a 2016 large-scale study(d) which concluded that “The results don’t prove that relatively poor analytical thinking skills cause people to become believers in psychic phenomena, but they are certainly consistent with the idea that a lack of these skills may leave people more prone to developing such beliefs.”




>(d) Why do so many people believe in psychic powers? – Research Digest (<



Pole Shift

Pole Shift is a term used to describe a range of theories that includes an alteration to or even the complete reversal of the magnetic poles, a change to the axis of rotation of the entire planet as well as a possible sudden movement of the outer crust of the Earth relative to its axis.

The magnetic poles are always on the move and well documented, while their complete reversal is a much slower process, previous reversals have left us with geological ‘fingerprints’. It is suggested that another reversal is imminent, while some ‘prophets of doom’ have nominated late 2013 for the event, with dire consequences for mankind(f).

The latest data shows drift of about 40 miles a year, with a recent movement of 161 miles in just six months, creating navigation problems and the re-designation of airport runways which are named after their compass orientation(i).

Jason Colavito has unearthed an early reference to some form of axial pole shift, proposed as early 1883 in a book [1595] by the somewhat eccentric Australian, John Wood Beilby (1818-1903)(q). However, according to Colavito, there was an even earlier reference to a Pole Shift by Brasseur de Bourbourg in his Historical Chronology of the Mexicans of 1873(r). He also linked this event to the destruction of Atlantis(n).

The suggestion that an ancient axial pole shift was the consequence of plate tectonics has been disputed by William Sager & Anthony Koppers of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography. Although conceding that plate tectonics may have played a part they describe the 16-21 degree change, 84 million years ago as “an odd event.”(t)

The idea of wandering (magnetic) Poles was first proposed by the German priest Damian Kreichgauer(1859-1940)(g) in 1902[513], although at the time he found little support for the concept. The late Terrence Aym was of the opinion(l) that a magnetic pole reversal was a sign that the next Ice Age was beginning! Today, NASA provides us with a more sober view of the phenomenon of magnetic pole shifts(k).

Another theory suggests that a severe reduction in sunspot activity may herald the imminent return of another ‘little ice age’ such as was experienced in the 17th century and known as the Maunder Minimum. During that period only 50 sunspots were recorded instead of the usual 40-50 thousand(w). NASA has denied that there is any such impending cooling and that the possible effect of any reduced solar activity would be more than offset by the warming caused by human activity(x).

There are a number of variations on the basic concept of an axial change and an array of suggestions for the date of the last displacement. Generally speaking, the mechanism required to cause such a catastrophe is believed to be an impact by or close encounter with a large asteroid or comet. The continuing discovery of huge impact craters around the globe reinforces this possibility. However, recent studies have identified other processes that may have led to polar changes in the past(e).

The suggestion of an Antarctic location for Atlantis, as proposed by Rose and Rand Flem-Ath[062], is totally dependent on a pole shift. The Flem-Aths have interpreted the characteristics of our present icecaps as strong evidence for a number of previous pole shifts. This idea was inspired by the work of Charles Hapgood[369], who was convinced by such evidence as the Piri Reis Map and other ancient maps that seemed to indicate the existence of an Ice Age civilisation now partly covered by the Antarctic icecap. Hapgood has noted[1494.71] that in the 1950’s Karl A. Pauly[1496 and George W. Bain[1498 also supported a form of crustal shift, the former building on the work of A. S. Eddington[1497 of some decades earlier.

Nevertheless, a more critical look at Hapgood’s theory reveals a number of flaws(s), which should be considered in the light of the fact that Hapgood was a professor of history and not a geologist and Graham Hancock, who heavily endorsed Hapgood’s ideas is neither.

‘Project Atlantis’ is the title of an assignment(p) given to first-year geology students at Malaspina University-College in British Columbia. It was set by lecturer Professor Steven Earle with intention of developing the critical thinking of his students. The objective of the task is to investigate the Crustal Displacement theory of the Flem-Aths, whose ‘Atlantis in the Antarctic’ hypothesis is totally dependent on the occurrence of a pole shift resulting from some form of earth crustal displacement. Kyle Bennett has written a book and a number of papers on the subject.

Pole Shift[0795] by John White, frequently associates the destruction of Atlantis with a pole shift and anticipates another one in the near future, but unfortunately, most of the ‘evidence’ he offers in support of this contention comes from psychic sources, which cannot be accepted as reliable. However, it seems that some years later White completely revised his opinions according to a 1996 report(m).

Although the majority opinion is that pole shifts occurred as a result of encounters with extraterrestrial bodies, Hapgood contended that only the outer crust of the earth shifted and that this was the result of a build-up of ice at the Poles causing instability. However, it has since been calculated that the polar ice constitutes such a small percentage of the mass of the crust that it could not possibly have caused the slippage proposed by Hapgood. This idea and others are discussed on the Pole Shift Forum(o).

Another researcher, S.F.Wells, was prompted by Flem-Ath’s work to examine the Avebury stone circle to see if there was any evidence of a pole shift there. To his surprise, he did discover at Avebury and at other ancient monuments in the locality clear evidence of a pole change of up to 30° in the past. In 2003, he wrote a paper outlining his observations(c).

Flavio Barbiero has written a paper proposing that an impact with an asteroid as small as half a kilometre in diameter could result in a rapid pole shift.

A number of facts are proposed to support the idea of a pole shift. One of the most popular is the extermination of the mammoth, which once again was central to a recent book by Charles Ginenthal, The Extinction of the Mammoth[0514], which dates the last pole shift to around 1500 BC. Perhaps the most impressive evidence came from Sweden in November 2009(b) when settlements dating to 9000 BC were discovered in the north of the country in a region that according to accepted theory should have been covered by ice at that time.

Wolter Smit points out that the orientation of some Mayan Temples is apparently out by around 17 degrees from what would be expected. A structural feature at the 4,000-year-old temple of Saar in Bahrain is believed to have been used to record the summer solstice is now out by 10 degrees. Similar anomalies were noted by G.F. Dodwell during his study of ancient gnomons. A further indication that our present knowledge of polar changes may be flawed is highlighted by the fact that on April 15th 136 BC we have a record of an eclipse that completely darkened Babylon that should have had its zone of totality over the Balearic Islands in the Western Mediterranean. This is a difference of nearly 50 degrees and implies that either the Earth has slowed or the polar axis has shifted.

The idea that Pole Shift(s) can be linked to the location and orientation of many ancient sites is explored by Mark Carlotto in his new book, Before Atlantis [1600].

Amy Smith also claims that the Earth ‘tilted’ around 10,000 BC(d) referring to two ancient quotations that may support the reality of this Pole Shift – one from Plato (Tim.22d) and the other from the Book of Enoch/Noah (65.1).

The Hutton Commentaries(a) contain many articles relating to an impending pole shift based on the readings of Edgar Cayce.

In October 2004, Alexander Chechelnitsky, a Russian astrophysicist claimed that Atlantis was located in the Yukon River valley in Alaska[515]. This, he believes, was the result of a pole shift although he admits that scientific evidence is lacking for this theory!

A recent overview of the Pole Shift theory was published in July 2014(h).

(a) Hutton Commentaries – Archives 




(e) See Archive 3029



(h) Antartica, Atlantis, and the Earth crustal displacement theory | CanadaNewsLibre (

(i) See {2268} 




(m) NHNE: Pole Shift Torpedoed by Author ( *



(p) See:









Piri Reis Map

The Piri Reis Map (1513)(c)  was a world map drawn on a gazelle skin of which only the left-hand side still exists. It was a composite of detail gleaned from a large collection of maps, including one>allegedly captured<from Christopher Columbus(i), that were collected by Piri Ibn Haji Mehmed (1465/70–1553), an admiral or ‘reis’ in the Ottoman navy and>noted by Rand Flem-Ath as a former pirate. Flem-Ath wrote a lengthy article for Atlantis Rising magazine #38, which I have used here(k) and which contains a lot of interesting background information<

>It was discovered in 1929 in the Topkapi Palace Library in Istanbul by Gustav Deissmann (sometimes attributed to Library director Halil Edhem).

Apart from a Conference in 1931, the general public was not made aware of the map until the following year.

Piri Reis wrote on the map “It is the only chart of its kind existing now. I, personally, drew and prepared it. In preparing the map I used about twenty old charts and eight ‘Mappa Monde’ (i.e., the charts called ‘Jaferiye’ by the Arabs, and prepared at the time of Alexander the Great, in which the whole inhabited world is shown); the charts of the West Indies; and the new maps made by four Portuguese, showing the Sind, Indian, and Chinese Seas geometrically represented. I also studied the chart that Christopher Columbus drew for the West. By reducing all these charts to a single scale, I compiled the present map.”<

In 1956 a Turkish naval officer presented the map to the U.S. Navy Hydrographic Office. From there, it was first fully investigated by Captain Arlington H. Mallery, who had spent years studying ancient maps. He is now better remembered as a controversial amateur archaeologist[666]. Mallery concluded that the map accurately depicted an ice-free Antarctica.

piri reisThis map has become one of the controversial elements in the theory of an Antarctic Atlantis so strongly promoted by Rose and Rand Flem-Ath[062]. They followed the views of Charles Hapgood[369], who, having studied a range of ancient maps, were convinced that they showed parts of Antarctica as ice-free. However, the principal argument against this idea is that the removal of the massive Antarctic ice cap would have had two effects:

(i)  The consequent isostatic rebound would have altered the coastline dramatically and unpredictably.

(ii)  The melting of the icecap would have raised sea levels, producing further changes to the coastline of the exposed continent.

However, Jason Colavito has pointed out(h) that as scholars have known for decades, the segment of the map identified by Hapgood as “Antarctica” was in fact the southern part of South America, bent to fit the shape of the skin on which it was drawn.”!

Nevertheless, the late Robert Argod[065] supported the antiquity of the original maps upon which the Piri Reis Maps and other medieval charts were based and he also supported the idea of an inhabited ice-free Antarctica.

A view contrary to the Flem-Aths can be found in a recent book by Gregory McIntosh[510].  Professor Steve Dutch of the University of Wisconsin-Green Bay offers a paper(b) debunking the value of the Piri Reis map, which should be read  to get a more balanced view of the controversy. Paul V.Heinrich has also added a highly critical paper with many references(a).

Professor Steven Earle uses an assignment entitled ‘Project Atlantis(g) for his geology students in order to hone their critical thinking, which focuses on the Flem-Ath’s preferred variant of Pole Shift Theory known as Crustal Displacement.

What the Piri Reis Map has done for Antarctica, the Nicolo Zeno Map of 1380 has done for Greenland which appears to show a deglaciated landmass. Features, hidden by ice but confirmed by modern seismic soundings, are shown. However, controversy has dogged the Nicolo Zeno Map as much as the Piri Reis chart.

Phillipe Buache the renowned French geographer also published a map of ice-free Antarctica in 1737, long before its recorded discovery and centuries before seismic surveys revealed the topography of the sub-glacial landmass. The source of the data for this map is so far unexplained.

In 2004, Jean-Pierre Lacroix & Robert Bywater presented a paper(d) to the International Piri Reis Symposium in which they made the radical claim that the western part of the Piri Reis map was a depiction of the outline of east and southeast Asia, rather than the Caribbean.

The ancient-origins website(e) has several papers relating to the Piri Reis Map.

The most recent studies(f) include a map showing the effects of just a partial retreat of the ice sheet, showing exposed coastlines, during the Pliocene era, which again indicates an outline of the landmass at variance with the Piri Reis Map.

>A 2021 study(j) of the Map urges caution when interpreting its details.









(i) Saudi Aramco World : Piri Reis and the Columbus Map ( 

(j) Pîrî Reis Map of 1513 · Dubious History 

(k) Atlantis Rising magazine  #38 *