Gone But Not Forgotten
- Nov 18, 2001
- Reaction score
Iturralde said volcanic rocks recovered at the site strongly suggest that the undersea plain was once above water, despite its extreme depth. He said the existence of those rocks was difficult to explain, especially because there are no volcanoes in Cuba.
He also said that if the symmetrical stones are determined to be the ruins of buildings, it could have taken 50,000 years or more for tectonic shifting to carry them so deep into the ocean. The ancient Great Pyramid of Giza in Egypt is only about 5,000 years old, which means the Cuba site "wouldn't fit with what we know about human architectural evolution," he said.
Depends where you reckon the Pillars of Hercules to be.anome said:Worse still, it was exactly where Plato said it was all along.
Montezuma (Mochetazuma) was the aztec emporer at the time of the Conquest. properly known as Mchetazuma Xocoyotzin, (Mochetazuma the Younger) he ruled from 1502 - 1520. there was a previous emporer also called Mochetazuma illicimana who ruled from 1410-1469 (His grandfather) . neither have a legend of being 'White skinned' attached to them. the Mochtezuma the younger is known to have sported a beard (Contrary to popular beleif, not uncommon in mesoamerica).Goldstein said:The Aztecs believed that their ancestors had travelled to Mexico from the island of "Aztlan" - a name very similar to "Atlantis", and I believe placed in the Caribbean/Atlantic Ocean. There was also the Aztec legend of the god-king Montezuma, described as white-skinned and with a long beard, coming in a ship of a type the Aztecs were not familiar with (but described as like a sailing ship) to tell the Aztecs to travel to Mexico and saying he would return - thus Cortez was believed to be the returned Montezuma.
So could Montezuma have been a Mycenean?