Atlantis-Bakhu FAQ

What led WRL to consider the Atlantis-Bakhu project?

Generally speaking, our research is focused on exploring scientific and historic anomalies in an effort to expose the source of their inherent inconsistencies which can subsequently expand human understanding. Studying historical myth and the role of deities in relation to known and theoretical geologic phenomena may help us comprehend what could have occurred naturally in our past thus positioning humanity for potentially greater advancements in the future by revealing truth behind misconception. Toward that end, we make every attempt to maintain an open mind to ensure WRL is considering a broad spectrum of possibilities.  Our initial focus in this geomythology project was on Plato’s Atlantis; we later identified a reasonable Egyptian connection between Bakhu and Atlantis.  Quite frankly, we were actually rather surprised that we identified a specific location on Earth that not only visibly matched Plato’s 10 detailed macroscopic geographic descriptions, but also had the apparent geologic means to match his 10 special features as well.  These natural consistencies with Plato’s work compelled us to look further into the predynastic Egyptian lore where we made several correlations with events such as the First Rebellion of Man.

Why hasn’t WRL already conducted a field survey on the Algerian Saharan-Atlas Steppe at the proposed site for Atlantis-Bakhu?

Consistent with most international academic research, Algerian protocol requires researchers to have university affiliation, but WRL is a small independent research lab not directly associated with a university. Therefore, we have been precluded from conducting scientific research at this location on our own. After presentation of our research hypothesis at a geology-based conference focused on Atlantis held in Athens, Greece, in November of 2008, however, a research professor at the University of Patras has offered his expertise and academic sponsorship of a WRL funded field survey. We are currently raising funds for this field survey and, given the broad scope of our comprehensive hypothesis, we are actively working to expand the multidisciplinary project by inviting specialists interested in our research to join us in the field, applying their advanced testing skills, helping to expand human knowledge.

If WRL’s hypothesis is accurate, why has Atlantis-Bakhu not been found by others?

Most, if not all, Atlantis researchers have focused on subsidence epeirogenesis, a sunken land mass.  This often sent them searching deep under the sea rather than looking for a location above current sea level. And, over the millennia, our remote site on the edge of the Algerian Saharan Atlas steppe has been buried under tens of meters of sand and soil rendering it virtually invisible until the recent development of thematic mapping satellites.

Why has WRL argued that the inhabitants of Plato’s Atlantic Island were not a civilized society as sophisticated and advanced as previously presumed?

According to Plato’s timeline the Atlantean tribes were dominant at least 12,000 years before the present. Many people are under the popular impression that the Atlanteans were a technologically superior civilization simply because Plato describes amazing feats apparently attributable to a corps of engineers with advances in urban development, agriculture, irrigation and metallurgy.  Anthropologists, however, indicate that no evidence has been found to support the argument humans were advanced to that level of sophistication at such a distant point in time, so they contend the Atlanteans are either fictional or the dating is erroneous. We maintain that the dating is correct and then combine the two lines of thought to present a reasonable point of view based on measurable natural geography and geology on the Saharan-Atlas Steppe region to explain the rationale. We show that the majority of these alleged advances in human endeavor were likely naturally occurring phenomena that were present before the Ibero-Maurusian tribes (who were thought to inhabit this region at the time) were ruled by the naval Atlantean kings. For example, the rings of Atlantis appear to be formed  by three aligned meteorite craters; the two annual garden harvests may have been natural given the blocking effect of the high and massive Atlas Mountains that protected the large plain of the southerly exposed steppe fostering a warm climate and long growing season; and constant irrigation of the garden steppe region by streams and rivers flowing down onto the garden steppe from the Atlas Mountains drained into natural canals visibly stretching across the plains which resemble the signature of remnants from a powerful L-wave earthquake that would have preceded Atlantean occupation of the site. Even the formation of the metal alloy known as orichalcum has a possibly natural origin resulting from the heat and pressure associated with the meteorite impacts in combination with the copper and zinc that are present in this area. The resultant fall-out from the meteorite impact ejecta could have left the naturally formed metal buried just under the surface. So, based on these observations, we at WRL pose the argument that other than an advanced naval militarization of the local population of Ibero-Maurusians, the Atlantean kings were simply stewards of a natural cornucopian garden.

The majority of academics believe Plato’s Timaeus and Critias dialogues are simply allegory and that Atlantis is only a myth. Why does WRL think they are wrong?

First, it is not a matter of who is wrong or who is right; it is, however, a matter of interpreting evidence observed in the field, collected and measured in the laboratory.  Most academics, including anthropologists and geologists, will readily admit that the absence of physical evidence is their main basis for positing Plato’s Atlantis is only a myth, and if hard evidence became available they would potentially reconsider.  At WRL, we were intrigued and motivated by Plato’s repeated pleas in his dialogues to be taken seriously with regard to the Atlantean story. These pleas, coupled with numerous instances in recent decades where we’ve seen how natural catastrophe is quite effective at burying and hiding evidence of human activity, compelled us to dig deeper. We’re highly optimistic that with the excavation of our site on the edge of the Saharan-Atlas steppe of Algeria, datable artifacts will finally provide the missing evidence capable of modifying the interpretation of history held by many researchers. Yet, surely, even then, we will continue to debate this controversial subject for decades to come.

Are there other examples where Greek myth has been shown to have physical basis in real history?

Yes, one of the more notable examples is Heinrich Schliemann’s discovery of ruins consistent with Troy which gave credibility to the historicity of Homer’s Trojan War in the Iliad. Another example is Robert Bittlestone’s arguments for the location of Ithaca described in Homer’s Odyssey which led to subsequent corroboration from geologists for a landslide in that area of western Greece. Yet another example is regarding the Oracle at Delphi, Greece. Here several geophysicists (Luigi Piccardi et al) have shown tangible physical evidence of natural gases previously seeping up through a fault in the Earth’s crust at this location.  These gases could be a plausible explanation for the visions (hallucinations) the Oracle was purported to experience.

Isn’t it contradictory to say you haven’t altered anything Plato said, but then go on to present arguments that Atlantis rose in an accelerated form of uplift epeirogenesis instead of sinking as Plato described?

While this may seem contradictory, it is actually quite easy to explain. According to Plato, witnesses who sailed toward Atlantis after the catastrophe thought the mud shoals that filled the seaway and blocked their path were the disintegrated and pulverized sedimentary remains of the entire island.  They reasoned Atlantis must have sunk due to the violent earthquakes, so they reported what they believed they saw.  Our hypothesis shows how Atlantis could have appeared to have sunk due to an optical illusion, which led to a false understanding later chronicled by Plato. The witnesses would have had no way of knowing that the mud shoals were actually the seafloor of the formerly navigable shallow sea left exposed after the tectonic uplift of the African Plate caused the fresh seawater to drain down into the Mediterranean basin from the top of the continent. Therefore, it is easy to understand how the movement of a large body of water exposing a seafloor could have confounded those who witnessed the aftermath.

Textbook epeirogenesis has been determined to be a very slow process requiring millions of years for land masses to rise and fall. What makes WRL believe an accelerated form is possible? Isn’t it unlikely?

All hypothetical arguments must be rationally supported with evidence, reason and logic. It has been incumbent upon us in our attempt to gain perspective with this comprehensive geomythology study to reach into many disciplines while searching for a more complete understanding of Mediterranean myths. As a result, we followed Plato’s detailed words like an ancient road map and it led us to a location that appeared to uniquely match all of Plato’s very specific geographic descriptions and dimensions, with the notable exception of “sinking”.  In fact, for this location to be accurate, we had to ponder the apparent contradiction. It wasn’t enough that Atlantis didn’t appear to have sunk in the sudden catastrophe, but it seemed to have risen instead. How could this quick action take place? We could have simply discounted everything and said the textbooks don’t provide for an accelerated form of epeirogenesis, so end of story. Or, we could do as we did and say, all the circumstantial evidence points here…what if it is correct, how could it happen and what might we learn? So, we set about developing a model of accelerated epeirogenesis. Admittedly, at first blush it seems unlikely; but, not impossible, particularly if you add a catalyst.  But what catalyst would be capable?  It would have to be huge and from an unknown source.  Further investigation suggested the possibility of a sustained concentrated stellar-sourced high-energy discharging impact with the surface of the Earth at the Al Jafr depression in Jordan.  Once more, you could say a high-energy impact is unlikely, but then again, it also provides the means to address several seemingly unrelated geologic anomalies, so when you consider the process we used to get to this point, in our view, it suggests this hypothesis warrants serious consideration. Remember, Da Vinci, Copernicus, Galileo, Wegner, and Shoemaker, to name a few, were also told their insights were unlikely, but we know differently today.

Some research suggests arid conditions prevailed in NW Africa throughout the Younger-Dryas, so doesn’t that mean WRL’s theory of a shallow Saharan-Atlantic sea is inconsistent with the data?

No, some samples collected for those studies where from the area where our hypothesis argues there were significant outflows from the shallow sea as it drained into the Mediterranean basin as a result of the plate movement that was propagated by the natural disaster that destroyed Atlantis.  This rapid draining caused a scouring effect of the sedimentary seafloor deposits in this area.  Therefore, compensation would have to be made for this scouring effect when analyzing the samples.

If there was a shallow sea over the NW Sahara as WRL’s hypothesis suggests one would expect salt deposits. Why has there been no evidence found of wide spread salt deposition in this area?

This question makes the assumption that WRL’s proposed Saharan-Atlantic sea, which stretched over the extreme NW Sahara, was saline. Our argument suggests the water was actually fresh even though at greater depths in the Mediterranean basin itself, the water was saline. This condition is known as meromictic, where saline and fresh water stratification occurs. The denser saline water sinks to lower depths and the lower density fresh water floats on top. In our argument, the European glacial melt waters combined with drainage from the Atlas Mountain range gradually filled the Mediterranean basin exceeding its banks and the lower density fresh water ultimately covered the extreme northwestern Sahara creating the shallow sea detailed in our hypothesis.

Your model requires larger volumes of fresh water than current models allow, so how do you account for the increased volume?

Current hydrological models make assumptions about the volume of glacial melt water flowing off the Eurasian continent into the Mediterranean Basin based on adjusted glacial burdens, or isostasy, and the direction of water flowing off the African continent. However, according to our model, the NW aspects of the African continent and the SW aspects of the Eurasian continent would have been tilted deeper into the Earth’s mantel prior to the natural catastrophe that destroyed Atlantis. In other words, a much greater volume of fresh water would have been flowing into the Mediterranean basin from both the Eurasian and African continents than previously thought, contributing to WRL’s proposed Saharan-Atlantic sea.

Why would the discovery of this lost civilization be important? What can we learn from it?

From an anthropological point of view, confirmation of an organized tribe capable of seafaring at such a distant point in time radically changes current assumptions about human development. While we question the use of the term “civilization”, the implied organizational structure of this ancient tribe—a tribe that predates all current expectations of such organization—illuminates natural catastrophic events as the building blocks of human mythological and religious conceptions.

From a geological point of view, if this hypothesis is correct, it provides recognition of the potential for significant tectonic plate movements under the influence of concentrated stellar-sourced impact, which reveals a previously unknown threat to all life forms on Earth and to its fragile ecosystem.  WRL’s arguments also have the ability to provide causal mechanisms to address several current geologic anomalies, which in turn advances human understanding of natural processes.

What if you are unable to prove that this site is Atlantis, does your research still add value?

Definitely.  First, you must keep in mind this is a site that was identified by closely following Plato’s detailed descriptions, which itself suggests the site has some significance. Of course, unless we are fortunate to find some form of discernable glyph in the ruins, it is in fact unlikely that we will be able to definitively prove this site is Atlantis. However, we would be able to prove a seafaring society once thrived here in a location that is now high on the Saharan-Atlas Steppe. This will increase the statistical probability that this site has merit, lending credibility to our tectonic plate model of the African plate movement and ultimately broadening our understanding of tectonophysics. In addition, the research has identified three apparent meteorite craters, which after testing and confirmation would be the first known triple meteorite impact site on Earth.

How do you respond to individuals who say your hypothesis is unlikely because it matches Plato’s descriptions too exactly making it an unrealistic, too perfect, “silver bullet” theory?

When the dislocated pieces of a puzzle are found and reassembled, one would expect to find the resultant cohesive image revealed by the interlocking pieces of the puzzle, not a series of pieces that have to be forced into place to yield only a disjointed image. Therefore, it is not unreasonable for all of the parts of a comprehensive analysis to come together if a hypothesis is correct.

Why does WRL call this geomythology study “Atlantis-Bakhu” instead of Atlantis?

Bakhu is the pre-dynastic Egyptian city occupied by the gods that was supposedly abandoned after humanity was punished with destruction by the angry and jealous god, Ra.  It has significant parallels with the Atlantis story where the angry and jealous god, Zeus, was implicated in the destruction.  In addition, we’ve found several natural formations around the site that appear to match Greco-Egyptian iconography, so we’ve connected Atlantis with Bakhu as one in the same. This association is important since it matches Plato’s assertions that the Egyptians were the source of his writings and they had a different name for Atlantis. WRL’s observation identifies the previously unrealized connection clearly advocated in Plato’s writings.