When the Sky Fell: In Search of Atlantis

The authors' hypothesis, that the remains of Atlantis may be found beneath the ice of lesser Antarctica, is amazing but believable. They build on Charles H. Hapgood's work on earth crustal displacement and his study of ancient sea maps (which show the (ice-free) Antarctic coast long before its discovery in the eighteenth century); the amazing similarities in mythological accounts of floods and other disasters from around the world; the astonishing "outbreak" of agriculture in elevated areas; the account of Atlantis in Plato's Timaeus; and more. This book is an important accompaniment to the studies of Bauval, West et al on pre-pharoanic Egyptology, and those of Tompkins and Coe on the pre-Mayan civilisations. It is not a "new-age" or pseudo X-files book but a serious investigation of certain events and accounts. If you find a copy, buy it.

You've probably heard them all by now--Atlantis was really located in Africa, or in South America, or was actually the island of Thera . . . or some even more outlandish theory. Modern geological theories (assuming them to be correct, of course, which isn't necessarily the case) tells us that no large-sized land mass could ever have existed in the Atlantic Ocean. So where could a continent the size of Atlantis that was described as lying situated in the middle of the "world ocean" have gone? According to the authors, nowhere. It's still there, in plain sight. Atlantis is Antarctica!

If this is the first time that you've heard of this theory, you may be sceptical at first. But if you give this book a chance and approach it with an open mind, you'll quickly begin to see the logic behind the authors' theories--especially in the identity of such landmarks as the Pillars of Hercules and the World Ocean. Does an ancient, advanced civilization lie frozen beneath the Antarctic ice cap? We may never know (unless the current, bogus claims for global warming incredibly prove true and the ice cap melts, revealing what lies beneath it). But in the meantime, this book is fascinating reading and reflects true "thinking outside the box" about a topic that's been hashed and rehashed even since Ignatius Donnelly's book about Atlantis fist appeared in 1882.

If you have any interest at all in the topic of Atlantis, whether as history or merely a myth, you should read this book.

I believe that Flem-Ath has presented a convincing argument and has shown adequate proof for the possible location for the Lost City of Atlantis. He has shown how Plato's account fits perfectly and the author does not try to twist Plato's words as other authors have done to prove their theories. And you do have to take into consideration the ancients maps like the ones in Hapgoods book Maps of Ancient Sea Kings which show Atlantis. I have read other Atlantis stories and none fits like this one is presented. I have recommended it to my friends who have found Flem-Ath theories very believable over others like the theory of Santorini(near Crete). Santorini has too many holes as author Robert Sullivan admits to in his book Atlantis rising but still tries to prove it's Santorini. In Sullivan's book Plato's words are twisted to have Santorini fit. I truley believe Antarctica to be an excellent possibility. To Rose and Rand Flem-Ath excellent book! Now the question is when is the expedition for the excuvation going to take place. Remember Troy was once a myth due to the determination and research of the believers it was found and became a reality. Atlantis may be a myth today but to the beleivers it has already been found it's just a matter of time before tomorrow comes when it becomes a reality. We await for tomorrow to come.

I received an e-mail from Rand and Rose Flem-Ath informing me that they had written a book about the search for Atlantis and wondering why we didn't have it in The Radical Academy Bookstore. They pointed out that Graham Hancock, whose books we do feature, based some of his work on their book, "When the Sky Fell: In Search of Atlantis."

Truth to tell, I was unfamiliar with the Flem Ath's book. So I ordered a copy (from Amazon, of course) and two days later sat down in the morning to begin reading it. Well, that day's usual work was shot! I could not put the book down and finished it in late afternoon. What a book! Not very long, but definitely interesting.

I realize that many scientists and historians will take them to task, claiming the book is unscientific and unhistorical, just another "pop" book on a topic already settled. I should think they would know better, of course. As the saying goes: "Deal with the evidence, stupid!"

The Flem-Aths do a heck of a job with the evidence. Rather than merely dismissing the book out of hand, I would like to see the scientists and the historians "deal with the evidence." I am not saying that what the Flem-Aths propose is the final say on the subject. But they have done a compelling job of presenting the evidence for their case. And that's what the professionals should deal with.

The Flem-Aths claim to have uncovered the real cause of the ice ages. They analyze the identical myths told among primitive peoples who could have had no contact with one another. They deal with the fascinating issue of the Piri Re'is map, a map that seems to show the continent of Antartica in its original state before the modern world even "discovered" that land of ice. The authors also deal with some other mysteries that have intrigued us, such as how to explain the simultaneous rise of agriculture around the world and the strange history of the Sphinx in Egypt.

I highly recommend this book. (And it's not very expensive, either.) Jonathan Dolhenty, Ph.D., Executive Director, The Center for Applied Philosophy

When William Ryan and Walter Pitman first presented their theory of the Black Sea as a fresh water lake invaded by the salt water of the Mediterranean in a cataclismic event 7,600 years ago, they were laughed at by the scientific establishment to which they belong as marine geologists. Today, their theory is accepted as the most probable scenario that explains the peculiarities of the Black Sea and might also explain the insistence of so many peoples on the legend of a Flood. Less than twenty years ago it was taught in schools that Cro-Magnon had killed Neanderthal in a racist war for control of the planet, but today we are told, with the same certainty and by the same people, that both groups coexisted for millenia and that the causes behind Neanderthal's disappearance are unclear. Recently, the Clovis mind-set of anthropologists and archaeologists in the Americas was shattered by discoveries in Chile of human habitation 12,000 years ago, long before Clovis in New Mexico. So, everything about dates in the Americas, dates set in stone for the die hard crowd of scientists, had to be revised, although most books still carry the Clovis date because the shattering information is quite recent. Now this book "When the Sky Fell" about a new idea regarding Ice Ages and the possibility that another legend may be based in truth is so poisonously criticized by some reviewers, that I can't help remembering all those times when the so much vaunted "real" science was wrong. The Java Man comes to mind, and Troy, and the fact that Mayans didn't know the wheel (wrong: they did). Examples are many. Science is good and necessary. But scientists are fallible, too. The Flem-Ath's book proposes an elegant, novel idea that deserves a hearing, not a summary dismissal. It is quite disturbing to read reviews such as one where the reader states that everything regarding earth crust displacement is garbage and has been proven to be so, and then consult a geology textbook for college and find the candid assertion that we really don't know "exactly" the composition of the planet beyond the crust. Science can defend itself with the facts and doesn't need self-appointed champions to foolishly charge against anybody who dares have a different opinion or propose a new theory. Besides, the Flem-Aths are not attacking anyone. They are saying "this is what our investigation has led us to believe." They may be wrong, in which case they are in good company with all those scientists who gave us perfect dates for the peopling of the Americas; certainty regarding the Mayan ignorance about the wheel; certainty about the Flood being nothing but the overflowing of the Tigris-Euphrates basin; certainty about Neanderthal; certainty about the poles never shifting; certainty about catastrophes not playing a significant role in evolution... So many certainties that must be changed later on.