Science made a wrong turn in the early 1800's and the consequences are still with us. However, recent science is beginning to see the mistake and send us in the right direction. As this unfolds the result will be a major rewriting of the sciences of geology, archeology and anthropology. We have to substantially revise our understanding of the history of man and civilization. But on to that first mistake.
As geology was first becomming a science in the early 1800's, there was an evident problem - the eratics. The eratics were giant rocks, piles of gravel, and major striations (scratches) on rock surfaces that should not be there. Huge rocks are resting in the middle of fields and on mountain tops. Piles of gravel are in odd places, always on the same side of the mountain. The striations all go from Northwest to Southeast. How did they get there?
The most natural answer is that wild running water from some catastrophe was the cause. But this has two problems. The first: who wants to think water was running wild like that? Second: it is all too biblical. It is too reminicient of Noah's flood. And if you are starting a new "respectable" science you certainly want to avoid confirming such a distinct biblical event.
Happily for those who did not like wild running water in their immediate history, Charles Lyell came upon the scene and published Principles of Geology in 1830. Lyell rearranged the geological thinking of the day and introduced "uniformitarianism". He asserted that changes come about slowly by natural means. (The opposite view is "catastrophism". Catastrophism asserts that occassional catastrophies occur and contribute significantly to explaining some of the geological structures we find around us.)
Lyell adopted the views of Agassiz and explained that the eratics had been caused by slow moving glaciers. The concept of the "ice ages" has generally been accepted since then.
All of this has considerable connection to Atlantis. First the physical evidence that Lyell explained away was not explained away. It still needs an explanation. When properly examined, we conclude there was indeed a massive earth-wide catastrophe and it easily sunk the whole island, or continent, of Atlantis - despite the claims of geologists that such a thing cannot happen.
Moreover, the rise of civilization is connected to this event. Traditional science has very carefully pieced together the evidence that shows a gradual growth of civilization beginning around the end of the last ice age approximately 8,000 BC to 10,000 BC. At that time, we are told that mankind began the transition from hunter/gatherer to agriculture. Afterall, the ice had receded and conditions were then appropriate for such a change.
However, in the revised view, mankind did indeed have a civilization existing before the 10,000 BC date. An earth-wide catastrophe occurred around 10,000 BC. It sunk Atlantis. It raised the major mountain chains of today. It destroyed the civilization of the time. We are lucky some remnant of the human species survived. Records were destroyed and History forgotten. Those who survived had to begin the arduous process of rebuilding civilization while the past progress was forgotten.
Radical? Yes. But there is much evidence in the geological record. Consider first those ice ages that were supposed to have covered one third of the surface of the earth, including oceans.
Water flows downhill. So does ice. Ice never flows uphill. Ice can flow on level ground for 7 miles. Therefore, the scientists of the 1800's reasoned, there were giant mountains at the north pole that had generated the ice and from which the ice flowed southward and created the ice-age. Those polar mountains were totally taken for granted by the scientists. But in all these years those mountains have never been found! And furthermore those mountains must have gone down and then up again in order to account for the admitted gaps in between the ice-ages. But there have never been any yo-yo mountains at the north pole.
Worse yet, there are eratics where the glaciers never reached. There are eratics in the Sahara desert and elsewhere.
Yes there are glaciers. But there was not the ice age that science asserts. (Did you ever notice that the human figures on the cave wall paintings were dressed for warm weather?)
There are caves and other collections that show utter massive chaos. The piles contain prey, and predator, tree trunks and humans all piled up, obviously thrown together in a massive disaster.
Yes, the frozen mamoths that you may have heard of are also relevant. There was rapid disaster, a shift of the earth's axis was involved.
The evidence from geology exists to confirm that disaster. Myths from around the world confirm the disaster. (The bible of the mid-east says the sun stood still for three days. On the other side of the earth myth says night endured for 3 full days). And much other evidence exists as well. To get an idea of the range of evidence check Ignatius Donnelly's "Atlantis: The Antideluvial World".
Simple conclusion: the only rational evidence of the scientific evidence is that there was a major catastrophe that was earth-wide and caused the sinking of Atlantis.
Plato was right.