hardly be invoked as “hard” proof of the former existence of Atlantis

They established a hemispheric grid network of crystalline and electromagnetic energy dividing the areas of Atlantis, America, Africa, Mediterranean Europe and South America into different demographic centers-for powering population centers, and to modulate weather patterns and tides.

To prove the existence of Atlantis and restore the lost city to its former glory (succeeded)
Photo provided by Flickr

We tell you that the Beings you refer to as Sasquatch, are remnants of Human-gorilla genetic engineered mutants, created for heavy labor, by the Aryans.

Atlantis: The Lost Empire | Disney Wiki | FANDOM …

It is the Metatronic divine template that sources all creation manifestation, and forms the very matrixial composition of every plane of existence.
Photo provided by Flickr

In The , we may read that the destruction of Atlantis and its islands was gradual and took place over an immense period of time. As we mentioned earlier, we think that the main continent broke up 850,000 years ago, followed by the sinking of the large islands of Ruta and Daitya some 200,000 years ago, and later still, Plato's island of Poseidonis, sank in about 9,500 B.C. We believe that parts of Atlantis still existed much later than this, and Ignatius Donnelly provides considerable evidence in his books that parts of the British Isles and Ireland are remnants of the northern parts of Atlantis. We see no reason to doubt this honest researcher, particularly as The Oera Linda Book, discussed earlier, describes the destruction of the northern part of Atlantis as occurring in 2193 B.C., which cannot therefore have been Plato's island. In it we may read:

Corroborating evidence on the reality of Atlantis

Then also there is Dennett’s tendency to confuse questions about natural capacities for questions about their contents, as when he repeatedly mistakes the issue of intrinsic, subjective, qualitative consciousness for the issue of the extrinsic, objective verifiability of the objects of consciousness; or as when he fails to distinguish between the mystery of rational thought as such and the simple etiological question of how sophisticated practices of reasoning might have evolved. And then there is what one might call his “Narcissan fallacy”: to wit, the tendency to mistake the reflection of human intentional agency in mindless objects, such as computers, for something analogous to a separate instance of mental agency. And then, also, there is his frequent failure to discern the difference between the literal and the metaphorical.... But I am getting ahead of myself.

Corroborating evidence on the reality of Atlantis ..

Perhaps it is possible to think of intentional consciousness as having arisen from an improbable combination of purely physical ingredients — even if, as yet, the story of that seemingly miraculous metabolism of mechanism into meaning cannot be imagined. But it seems altogether bizarre to think of intentionality as the product of forces that would themselves be, if they existed at all, nothing but acts of intentionality. What could memes be other than mental conventions, meanings subsisting in semiotic practices? As such, their intricate interweaving would not be the source, but rather the product, of the mental faculties they inhabit; they could possess only such complexity as the already present intentional powers of the mind could impose upon them. And it is a fairly inflexible law of logic that no reality can be the emergent result of its own contingent effects.