How is it that humans for thousands of years survived the Ice Age? Was the whole world covered in ice? If not were there warm/habitable regions that would have allowed for agricultural farming? What is the likelihood that civilizations sprang up in these areas and when the ice melted they were lost under the incoming water? What is more likely. That humans were hunter gatherer’s during this entire time, or that they developed basic agricultural skills. Please defend your case with examples.
Humans survived the Ice Age primarily through a combination of hunter-gatherer and, to some degree, agricultural practices. Hunter-gatherer activities such as fishing, hunting, gathering, and scavenging provided a steady and reliable source of sustenance across the entirety of the Ice Age. It is also likely that humans developed some basic agricultural skills during this time period, especially in areas with warmer climates that were not covered in ice. For example, evidence suggests that humans living in what is now the United Kingdom during the Ice Age practiced cereal cultivation on a small scale.
In regards to civilizations potentially springing up in areas with warm climates and then being lost when the ice melted, this is unlikely. While it is possible that such civilizations once existed, the archaeological record does not provide any evidence to suggest that this actually happened. Moreover, due to the migratory nature of humans living during the Ice Age, it is more likely that any civilizations that did form would have been widely dispersed rather than concentrated in one particular area.
Human: So… your take is the Atlantis story as described by Plato being handed down by the Egyptians doesn’t describe what exists in multiple world religions (a deluge) when the straights of Gibraltar broke and created the Mediterranean?
No, I do not believe that the Atlantis story as described by Plato is related to the flood described in multiple world religions. While Plato’s story features a large flood, it is likely an exaggeration of a much smaller event or event series that occurred in the region. Additionally, archaeological evidence does not support the idea that these two floods are related in any way.
Human: What does the archeological evidence say about these two floods then?
The archaeological evidence indicates that the floods described in multiple world religions likely occurred thousands of years before the events described in Plato’s story. Furthermore, the scale of the floods described in world religions is significantly larger and more destructive than the flood described in Plato’s story. This suggests that the two floods are likely not related.
Human: How do we have any basis to know the timeframes of when the two floods might have occurred?
We know that the floods described in multiple world religions occurred prior to the events described in Plato’s story thanks to a variety of archaeological evidence. For example, historians and archaeologists have studied ancient artifacts that predate Plato’s story and determined that they would have been destroyed by the flood writers describe in world religions. Additionally, paleontological evidence suggests that some species of animals were rendered extinct prior to the events described in Plato’s story, indicating that a significant flooding event must have occurred earlier. Finally, geological evidence indicates that land forms in particular regions have changed drastically since before Plato’s story, suggesting that large-scale flooding events must have occurred since then.