According to Jacobovici, other evidence found by Freund includes the unearthed emblem of Atlantis, and the biblical angle that has been largely overlooked.“Atlantis was hiding in the Tanach,” said Jacobovici.The Atlantis endeavor is not without its detractors, however, including Aren Maeir, a professor of archeology at Bar-Ilan University and director of the Tell es-Safi/Gath Archeological Project.An expert on Bronze and Iron Age archeology, Maeir said Thursday that “a lot of people have made many crazy claims about Atlantis – it’s one of those classic places where you have a lunatic fringe looking for all types of things. And Richard Freund is known as someone who makes ‘sensational’ finds. I would say that I am exceptionally skeptical about the thing, but I wouldn’t discount it 100% until I see the details, which haven’t been published as far as I know.”Maeir added that the likelihood of a historical basis for Atlantis depended on the scope of the legend.“In other words, if it was supposedly a small seaside village that was buried by a tsunami, there is some possibility that it may have happened.On the other hand, if it was supposedly a major civilization, then the lack of archeological evidence is very telling,” he said.“Almost all written sources that relate to stories from way back, when they weren’t written as history as we know it, were embellished over the ages, so you get a different picture when you look and trace the historical link behind biblical stories,” he went on.Maeir said that for Freund, “it’s all part of the same thing. He’s been involved in various projects where he made very big PR declarations in the press that were somewhat skeptically received by professionals. Also, he’s not really an archeologist, more a historian who has been involved in many archeological projects. But he is great at raising funds, largely because he makes these great pronouncements.”According to Maeir, “every few years we hear something like this from him... And the fact that it’s on National Geographic doesn’t mean much. Unfortunately, over the past years they’ve had many questionable programs. That the film appears there does not still mean it’s scientifically based. They do support some extraordinary research, but some of their recent films dealing with early biblical archaeology haven’t been so rigorously done.”Still, he said, “You know what? They should prove me wrong.”
The deepest Jewish encampment?
A US professor says he’s found Atlantis, and his Israeli producer claims the lost city is one and the same as the biblical Tarshish.
According to Jacobovici, other evidence found by Freund includes the unearthed emblem of Atlantis, and the biblical angle that has been largely overlooked.“Atlantis was hiding in the Tanach,” said Jacobovici.The Atlantis endeavor is not without its detractors, however, including Aren Maeir, a professor of archeology at Bar-Ilan University and director of the Tell es-Safi/Gath Archeological Project.An expert on Bronze and Iron Age archeology, Maeir said Thursday that “a lot of people have made many crazy claims about Atlantis – it’s one of those classic places where you have a lunatic fringe looking for all types of things. And Richard Freund is known as someone who makes ‘sensational’ finds. I would say that I am exceptionally skeptical about the thing, but I wouldn’t discount it 100% until I see the details, which haven’t been published as far as I know.”Maeir added that the likelihood of a historical basis for Atlantis depended on the scope of the legend.“In other words, if it was supposedly a small seaside village that was buried by a tsunami, there is some possibility that it may have happened.On the other hand, if it was supposedly a major civilization, then the lack of archeological evidence is very telling,” he said.“Almost all written sources that relate to stories from way back, when they weren’t written as history as we know it, were embellished over the ages, so you get a different picture when you look and trace the historical link behind biblical stories,” he went on.Maeir said that for Freund, “it’s all part of the same thing. He’s been involved in various projects where he made very big PR declarations in the press that were somewhat skeptically received by professionals. Also, he’s not really an archeologist, more a historian who has been involved in many archeological projects. But he is great at raising funds, largely because he makes these great pronouncements.”According to Maeir, “every few years we hear something like this from him... And the fact that it’s on National Geographic doesn’t mean much. Unfortunately, over the past years they’ve had many questionable programs. That the film appears there does not still mean it’s scientifically based. They do support some extraordinary research, but some of their recent films dealing with early biblical archaeology haven’t been so rigorously done.”Still, he said, “You know what? They should prove me wrong.”