This is an introduction to this section, which reviews some of the most popular Atlantis theories

Everything has been said about Atlantis. Among thousands of articles, documentaries, books, interviews and much more stuff they speak about a possible civlization which came from space up to a common stone age civilization prospered in some small islands of the Atlantic passando attraverso ubicazioni quali Indonesia, Creta, Mare del Nord, Cuba, Azzorre e persino l’Antartide. Since the problem of Atlantis must have perforce just one solution (which we can be aware of or not) it's obvious commenting that in some of these interpretations, which are so different, disinformation greatly ruled.

In this section we're going to see the sources and arguments of the theories which gathered the more success, compare them to Plato's dialogues and scientific data. Among the main theories we'll have a look at Crete, Cuba, Atlantic island and Antarctica, which are the favurite of people keen on Atlantis. We'll even give space, less deeply, to the recent theory of Indonesia and some other like Tartessos, North Sea and Sahara.

 Before all we must clear an important point of discussion: the way which we use to evaluate a single theory. Since we wish to find an exact geographical position for Atlantis in accordance to the time it prospered we can't ignore Plato's dialogues and some scientific considerations (like we did for South America). Researches made on the base of mythology are less exact. Lot of people study and compare different mythologies just concluding with free considerations because myths have so many faces that can be interpreted in different ways. So this can't be an instrument to reveal the location of Atlantis. People basing their ideas on myths (often not related to Atlantis itself) don't say something that can be “necessary and sufficient” but just “likely”, which is something still undemonstarted (and maybe undemonstrable) and that lays in the multiform sphere of “possibile” realities. since the solution to the mystery of Atlantis must be just one it's obvious we must not look at "likely" conclusions since they can be deceitful. Another approachment we shouldn't use is the one which involves considerations over some ancient buildings like Gizeh, Stonehenge, Tiahuanaco or Angkor Khan in Cambogia. These ancient places are placed all around the world without any logic order and no one knows their builder. Plato never said Atlantis buikt such a kind of architectures around the world and so they are still not useful in our research. They can be just a clue of the existence of ancient civilizations, but not about the exact location of Atlantis. 

 The Bible and other mythological sources spoke always about general events that can be hardly referred to Atlantis and above all never matche Plato's dialogues. The usual tale of the flooded fatherland belongs to all ancient populations of Earth but its true shape is always hidden by fog  because its never exact and just gives confused details.

 So let's go and see some interpretations on Atlantis given by scholars and compare them to Plato's dialogues and some scientific data.