User talk:RobertMc

Your contribution was poorly written, in the wrong place and did not have a NPOV. It was clearly translated - poorly, from Spanish using a machine translator. Even your response to me included non-English words. If it is better written it should be included, but not the way it was. --Reflex Reaction (talk)• 13:51, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I already understand. --RobertMc 02:34, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

I do not like reverting your addition again, but it is still very poorly written English. I cannot make sense of your addition well enough to translate what it means so that it can be added, in particular what you mean by "ahead". It also looks like you are linking to your own website, which is generally very frowned upon. You may want to consider asking someone else who speaks better English to add this information. You also continue to improperly format the entry. Entries are listed alphabetically, so your info should go before Indonesia, not at the top. --Reflex Reaction (talk)• 07:34, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

The translation to the English is not poorer than the translation that made Manuschevich on its own theory of Israel. Nevertheless, you have accepted it without no difficulty. The person who has translated my last version is a native North American, who resides in Mexico and speaks the two languages correctly. The word 'ahead' is correct, because that is exactly the one that uses the author of the theory, Mr. Diaz-Montexano, because its theory defends exactly that Atlantis was 'ahead', that is to say, next, immediate, 'ahead' same of the Pillars of Hercules, in a very near point, to very few kilometers of the Pillars of hercules or Straits of Gibraltar, in front to Cadiz, Trafalgar Cape and Spartel Cape. I think that you are discriminating the theory of the investigator hispanic-Cuban Georgeos Diaz-Montexano (who is much more famous and well-known and scientific that other that you accept) by some personal or racial reason, but you are using arguments false and very subjective on the perfection of the translation to be able to reject my contribution on the theory of Mr. Diaz-Montexano. --RobertMc 16:42, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

A google search of "Diaz-Montexano" returns ~1000 hits most of which are forums and responses to other articles about Atlantis. It also turned up this result where I have seen that a person advocating Diaz-Montexano theories were machine translated from Spanish and people who replied were called "Facists, liars, racist, hateful, etc." Please do not bring your vitriol here nor advocate a POV. Your addition will not be accepted as it is, please see WP:NOT. Additionally there is a section on Spanish locations for Atlantis as well as one for Cape Spartel, you are simply trying to advocate your own site and interpretation (WP:BIO). As far as Jaime Manuschevich addition. I think it is a poorly researched theory and not well accepted, but he has printed a book on the topic and was a presenter at a major Atlantis conference and the entry had proper grammar and conforms to our standards. His theory has gained some acceptance within the Atlantis community. Finally, I will not stand for your implications that my edits are racist or a personal attack. Please consider before you make other edits or you may be blocked. --Reflex Reaction (talk)• 17:27, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

'...Georgeos Díaz a model for everyone who wishes to follow the long way of scientific uprightness...' (Dr. Morillas, Barcelona, University)

It turns out very strange that you make use of a Website of Esoterism and Pseudosciencie, that is, that is not scientist, to try to discredit and to destroy Mr. Diaz-Montexano.

Georgeos Diaz-Montexano also was in the initial list of participants of Milos Conference and with three conferences (Crtl+A or Crtl+E in order to see the letters of the text). But it in front of had an accident a pair of months before, when one was diving under the sea, studying archaeological rest of a city submerged Gibraltar. Diaz-Montexano already until had paid the money for the attendance to Milos Conference, and the reserves of Hotel and flights of airplane. This knows everybody to it because during long time it was published in the Official Website de Milos Conference. The theory of Georgeos Diaz-Montexano is older and popular than some that you have accepted in Wikipedia, and in addition she sustains in true proofs scientists, that is to say, archaeological findings that have been sent to UNESCO, and many institutions and archaeologists.

Experts in underwater archaeology of the University of Texas like the outstanding and recognized scientists Dr George F. Bass, Dr Cemal Pulak, and Dr. Brett Phaneuf of the committee of Marine Archaeology of the "Marine Technology Society" (Department of Oceanography/MTS Marine Archaeology. Texas A&M University College Station) has an excellent opinion on the discoveries that is making by Georgeos Diaz Montexano (to see http://www.Antiquos.com/ “skip Intro > Opiniones”).

Diaz-Montexano has been accepted like member of the prestigious scientific institution, "Spanish Geographic Society" (its number of partner or member is 544).

Great scientists have commented of very good way on the scientific rigor of the theories of Diaz-Montexano, and in fact he is the unique one who has been invited to several Universities to offer conferences on his theories before the presence of the experts. Scientists of prestige never would mention the work of Georgeos Diaz if they did not consider really serious and rigorous an investigator. The name of Georgeos Diaz-Montexano within a list of scientists and rigorous and serious students sees you who have distributed conferences in the University of Barcelona (the list is published in the Website of the philosofical and scientist society, AGON, that is attached to the own University)

In a letter of recommendation sent by the Dr Antonio Morillas (from to Barcelona University) to National Geographic, says of Georgeos Díaz who is a "authority in Plato" and an investigator example who follows the method scientific. Also the most important Website of Philosophy in Spanish (Proyecto Filosofía) mentions the work of Georgeos. Scientists of prestige never would mention the work of Georgeos Diaz if they did not consider really serious and rigorous an investigator.

'Sed Magis Amica Veritas' '... [Georgeos Díaz] a model for everyone who wishes to follow the long way of scientific uprightness...'

Antonio Morillas Esteban Ciudad Cooperativa 95 5º2ª 08830 Sant Boi [Barcelona] Spain

National Geographic April 1th, 2004

Dear Sir or Madame, The undersigned, Antonio Morillas Esteban, Bachelor of Philosophy at University of Barcelona and president of AGON. Grupo de Estudios Nietzscheanos, cultural association [File Number 23411 of the Register of the 'Justice Department' of the Generalitat of Catalunya], and recognized by the University of Barcelona [Register Number 02/07/82], guarantees:

Mr. Georgeos Díaz was invited by the Association I preside to expose publicly his theories about the location of Atlantis Island. This conference took place on February 21st, 2003, and Mr. Georgeos Díaz, for two hours, not only showed his deep archeological knowledge and authority in Greek and Plato's work, but also an investigation methodology worthy of admiration. For this reason, we are surprised to see the statements made by the French geologist Jacques Collina- Girard, who is trying to appropriate the originality of these theories, already exposed and proved by Mr. Georgeos Díaz in different publications [i.e., 'Más allá de la ciencia' [Beyond Science], April, 2000; 'El Museo' [The Museum], August, 2001], both of them, among others, prior to September, 2001, date Mr. Collina- Girard exposed his theories. Likewise, as president of an association in defense of culture and promoting it, we answer for the uprightness and scientific capacity of Mr. Georgeos Díaz, an investigator whose passion for his object of study and his methodologic seriousness constitutes a model for everyone who wishes to follow the long way of scientific uprightness, and for those who still believe in amicus Plato, sed 'magis amica veritas' as lemma for all serious investigation...

Yours faithfully,

Antonio Morillas Information and Resources: Original Source

Dear Reflex Reaction, you must pardon that I think that you are trying to discriminate against Mr. Diaz-Montexano, because it always happens the same with a few people who only guide themselves by the envious commentaries of a few and mediocre ones, which she does not have scientific degrees and that are not university scientific authorities of international prestige. It is easier to demonstrate than some scientists of the great prestige have praised and congratulated to Diaz-Montexano, nevertheless, you will only find anonymous people, that are not recognized scientists those that think bad or criticize of destructive way Mr. Diaz-Montexano. That is everything what I have seen until the moment.

Can somebody show another list of university scientists, who have published adverse opinions against Georgeos Diaz-Montexano? To date, nobody has been able to show a list of university scientists, that is to say, people qualified and titled in the scientific disciplines or specialties that Diaz-Montexano develops and studies (Greek, Latin, Egyptian Philology, Epigraphic, and Acient Philology and Mythology) where we pruned to read hard opinions, criticizing, or discrediting the scientific level, the rigor, and the intellectual honesty of Mr. Diaz-Montexano. All the negative opinions that you can find, that try to discredit and to destroy the prestige and the credibility of Mr. Georgeos the Diaz-Montexano they are emitted by pesonas anonymous, who hide behind alias and pseudónimos, and that nuncan have shown its identity.

I am a person with a great sense of social justice. And much hurts me to verify like because of opinions destructive and envious, of a few people that not they have degrees scientific, that is not recognized scientific authorities in any of the specialties that Diaz-Montexano practices and exerts, is being tried to destroy all their future like investigator and being human.

Kind Regards, --RobertMc 19:07, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

PS. You try to manipulate the reality. Everybody knows that another "Georgeos Díaz" does not exist in all the planet earth, related with Atlantis. If you write in Google "Diaz-Montexano" Atlantis, is logical that they appear few pages, because the people who write their complete last names, are very few; but if you write in Google, "Georgeos Diaz" Atlantis, then appears more than 10,000 pages. And I repeat, does not exist another Georgeos Diaz in all the planet, at least not in the network of Internet, not associate to the theories on the Platós Atlantis.

Perhaps you should read a translated version of the article, the locations you are advocating are already discussed in the article Andalucia and Near Cape Spartel. Your additions are simply POV and poorly written. I went through the first 50 results of the Google search you suggested and found that all of the items were from old mirrors of this same article or self-publication sites. Because you continue to insert this I have blocked you for 24 hours. --Reflex Reaction (talk)• 19:45, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Israel theory

Mr. RobertMc

About the acceptation of my addition in Wikpedia, I am thankful that you indicate that “he has printed a book on the topic and was a presenter at a major Atlantis conference and the entry had proper grammar and conforms to our standards. His theory has gained some acceptance within the Atlantis community.” But on the other hand, it is to me uncomfortable and incomprehensible that you say that “I think it is a poorly researched theory and not well accepted”.

As I suppose that you are a prepared person to decide about these subjects, I ask you if you have read about my theory to form so poor opinion of it. If it is not thus, I solicit to you that assumes one more neutral position about my ideas. Now, if you wish to debate about my theory, I invite you, and to all person, to participate, in English language, in Atlantis in Israel Kindly

oocupado

Disculpe que estoy occupado. He traducido mas pero no puedo mas. :(. Trato hacer mas. --Jondel 07:54, 31 July 2006 (UTC)