Theos-Talk Archives (July 1996 Message tl00550)

According to Paul M.M. Kieniewicz:
> 
> If the Masters had anything to do with writing the Mahatma letters, why is
> it that the science discussed in these letters reflects 19th century ideas,
> and is so at odds with present day observations?

Because they were written in the 19th century.

 Were the Mahatmas just bad 
> scientists or (more probably) were the letters authored by someone else who
> was just echoing the ideas of the day.

In some areas they foreshadow subsequent scientific
developments, but in others they echo unreliable sources, e.g.:

> 
> 1. Atlantis? A very popular 19th century idea. It just doesn't exist. I
> challenge anyone to take the latest satellite pictures of the Earth's oceans
> and find me Atlantis or where it was in the Eocene or Miocene. One of the
> latest ideas is that Atlantis is actually Antartica. That's quite a long way
> off - and it didn't submerge in the Miocene.

No continent could have been in the Atlantic, but what about a
lost civilization in the Azores, Canaries, Madeiras that would
account for Plato's legend?

snip
> 
> And so on. I don't know if what is written in those pages on non-scientific
> issues makes any sense. But the scientific passages are painful to read.
> 
> Paul 

IMO the non-scientific material is superior, and sometimes
gives a very interesting angle on British Indian history and
issues.