1019 Atlantis in Africa
1019 Atlantis in Africa
POF 19th October, 2022
Connor: Hello again, Michael!
Here is what you said when I asked you why traces of Atlantis’s West Sahara location had not been found:
“MEntity: They have been found. The evidence has been ignored as it does not fit the limited thinking of those assessing. However, many have collected the evidence that suggests clearly that land in that region was not only affected by a tsunami, but that a great civilization once stood there, including the concentric rings of design that Atlantis used. It is likely that some fragments have presented this data in some way. We will work with Troy to help him locate it in your time. But it is only a matter of searching. It is important to note here regarding your search that much of what is proposed is sloppy speculation, at best, and easily rejected. However, the validity of the speculation is there at the core and can be noted with "a grain of salt," if you will.”
Nestled at the foot of a mountain range in Mauritania, there is a set of Atlantis-style concentric rings of rock called the “Richat Structure,” otherwise known as the “Eye of the Sahara.” Scientists claim it is an eroded volcanic dome. I sent Troy a picture of it not too long ago.
I already knew about the Richat Structure, and I had actually dismissed it because it is hundreds of miles inland and shielded from the ocean by mountains to its north and west. A tsunami would need to be unimaginably powerful (far more powerful than the Great Flood mega-tsunami) to penetrate so far inland, and even if it did, it wouldn’t crash into the Richat Structure; it would crash into the mountain range protecting the Richat Structure. Something doesn’t add up.
Is the Richat Structure what you were describing as the remains of Atlantis’s city in the western Sahara? I have a strong feeling you will say YES, and when you do, can you explain how the everlasting fuck a tsunami could possibly reach so far inland and destroy a city on the other side of a mountain range?
MEntity:
The structure you describe is part of a network of structures that were once interconnected. The devastation to those closer to the shores cascaded in impact across the network. The structure you describe was likely one that was least-affected but the devastation to the rest of the network would leave this location isolated and spiraling into collapse as a civilization. At the time of the tsunami, channels were in place that linked these various locations as a network and the water that rushed these channels were funneled much farther inland than would otherwise have been without the channels. Though the channels helped the water to reach further than it would have reached, most of the destruction came from the cascading effects of such a blow to a network that relied upon each other.
The structure you describe is part of what will likely one day be recognized as evidence of a civilization.
Does this address your question?
Connor: It does.
Are there more "Richat Structures" buried under the sand closer to the coastline?
MEntity: We cannot see if they are as defined, but there would likely be the indications of similar structures, yes.
Connor: Can you describe more about Atlantis's west Sahara location and its origins? What was it like to live there?
MEntity: This location began developing due to scouting for locations that might be considered less isolated and having great potential for spreading. The idea was to create a network of concentric cities that were linked by flowing water that could be used for travel and desalination of water. The idea was ambitious and worked quite well, drawing Atlanteans to the region for establishing this experimental network. Not everyone was on board with spreading into greater regions so there was some conflict and controversy that led to the West Sahara region developing more liberally, if you will, and the Atlantis proper moving into greater isolationist and conservative direction.
Connor: Did those Atlanteans have a good relationship with the people already living in that part of Africa? I suppose by "good" I mean mutually beneficial and not exploitative.
MEntity:
Living in the Western Sahara region vs Atlantis proper could be compared to living under the influences of Barack Obama vs Elon Musk.
Yes, the relationship was mutually beneficial with great resources shared.
The references we chose are not arbitrary.
We will conclude here for today. Good day to each of you. Goodbye, for now.
************
Well, this is not what I expected. I thought maybe I was failing to take sea level into account, or the existence of an artificially created body of water which was negatively affected by the tsunami. Turns out, like everyone who has ever looked at the Richat Structure and thought it was Atlantis proper, I wasn't thinking on a big enough scale. Multiple cities connected by waterways instead of one single city. And if you look at the Richat Structure in google maps satellite view, observe closely between the rings and you will find what appear to be dried-up riverbeds, which may have been the waterways Michael described.
I looked back at my original session where Michael referenced the tsunami, and you know what I found? They never actually said the Atlantean location was destroyed by a tsunami. All they said was that the tsunami killed the evacuating Atlanteans who had arrived on the shores of Africa. I assumed the rest. So the Richat Structure was never struck by a tsunami, but other parts of West Sahara Atlantis closer to the coastline were. This makes so much more sense than a tsunami somehow being more powerful than the megatsunami which caused the "Great Flood."
It would appear civilization did not last very long in the surviving locations. Perhaps the Late Bronze Age Collapse might lend some insight as to why the network of cities did not last. The tsunami destroyed part of the network, and complex systems collapse took care of the rest.