Dear Shash, I read your wonderfully researched and presented article,
I am really a novice to this, but very interested.
One curious observation, based on the Youtube time lapse video. There was one point when the Indian subcontinent,the African and Antartic continents appear together, and it slowly separates and drifts up and crushes into the mainland forming the Himalayas and the Indian peninsula. Has the angle that the Antartic continent might have been Lemuria, explored as a possible Idea?
Thank you Ganapathy, someone needs to take up a study of pseudo-scientific theories and present them to thegreater indianpublic in the interests of sciece and rationality
I had the good luck of reading some of your work and I have to sayIreally enjoyed them.This one too was a really good article. I have readvery little about this topic(not as much as you did) and will do an extensive research once I finish my present book,since this is the core subject for my next book . I am not trying to contradict you here but thisis justmy 2 cents with my personal opinion.
The concept of Lemuria which started as a theory is now merely a piece of badly written fiction, thanks to people like Blavatsky.
I think(?) for a piece of information to live for ages, it has to have atleast an iota of truth to it. Legends and myths of folklore are not always that -'myths',butthey remain sountil the time their true meaning is discovered.
I disagree with the kumari kandam legend just as you do, butto an extent that the map is a fabricated fiction. Atthe same time it could havehada little truth to it. The land mass need not be submerged to have vanished from the present location. It simply could have been broken off andmoved. It may not have been as big a landmass that wasrich in everything and inhabited the highest civilisation but it could have been a small chunk of land where there were people(tamil?)who were doing just what they were doing.
The excerpts we get from the tamil literature may not be 100% true but need not be 100% flase either.
As for Lemuria and the fact that lemurs are found on these threeplaces..well the coastal migration can answer that, but then again do they really?
Plate tectonics theory totally ruled out the possiblity of submerged continent(not land)beneath kumari. Yes, that's right, but did it also rule out the possiblity of a chunk of land getting detached and moving out of it's position? just like it happened from pangea...? Does it really rule out the possibility of a landmass(let us not exagerrate and take it as big as that one in the kumarikandam map) tearing off from it's position and moving down and fixing itself to the antartic shelfs which would now be buried deep.
In our current ice age, thelast interglacialhappened 17000-10000 yrs ago.the meltinglasted foralmost seven thousand years. It was a gradual movement of icesheets as it engulfed land masses. The animated sequence showed the simulated movement. But that was taking into account only the glacial movement. What about volcanic tsunamis and more seriously earthquake stimulated tsunamis, which has all the possibility of movement of land mass.
The author of 'UnderWorld -the mysterious origins of civilisation'(which I am yet to finish)Graham Hancock-who hadaccepted that we had an atleast 11,000 yrs or oldman made structure outside of present puhar coast and a very old human settlement south of mamallapuram- had estimated thatthe Indian coast to have extended to few kilometers from present coast. Even Milne's map and Reinal's map show that the Indianmainland had extended out into the water than it presently is and also a small island that was south of kumari and west to srilanka which evidently is not present this day. So we all know that the present coast of Indian subcontinent is not what or where it used to be. But do we know for sure that there is no evidence of civilisation beneath the southern coast? Have we done an extent research to prove there is no proof of any land movement happened?
There is no hard rock evidence that proves that there was oncea continent beneath Indian subcontinent which got submerged, and there is no rock hard evidence that says there was not a land mass with human settlement which got chunked off just like that.
So I think, there must have been a land mass that was either 1.small and had a human settlement,got submerged 2.big and had a settlement , got chunked off.
The present story of Lemuria is a mockery...which in all probabilitycould havemasked atruth.
What we thinknow as fact is a fact we know'as ofnow'. It may change in future.
Science is still evolving, and history is still hidden.
With heartful of warm thoughts Malarvizhi Baskaran
Being a full-time mother is one of the highest salaried jobs in any field, since the payment is pure love.
That was a very informative and interestingly presented article.
" the captivation of the supernatural, the pull of the idea that you know more than your fellow man is strong. The desire to elevate your race and culture above all others is deep, and hard to resist. We indulge in falsehoods to make ourselves feel special!".
I am a newbie and as stated This is just my personal opinion.After posting version 0.1of my reply, I read it again and found it rather silly.(even for my standards:-D)
You might have noticed me deleting that reply and posting version 0.2, a more sane one.
I am still learning you see, trying to catch up. But alas I only have an eye of a novelist, which limits my brains (grin...)