Monday, September 17, 2018



G’day everyone!

Another week has passed so quickly! I hope and pray all is well with you. Just a quick note…I am now writing a brief e-newsletter to keep let all you fine people what is happening with my book ministry. If you are interested in getting this email please contact us at and we’ll keep and eye out for you to put you on the list! 

Speaking of eyes…The Eye of the Sahara, otherwise known as the Richat structure, wasn’t discovered until the Gemini Mission of 1965 when it was detected from the spacecraft. On the ground, this structure is so large the ridges just look like hills. So how can this then be questioned as the lost city of Atlantis? Well it all started with Plato of Ancient Greece...

Plato investigated old writings that had been in his family for six generations. Solon his (six greats) great grandfather and a respected statesmen and lawmaker of Athens, had in his later years taken a trip to Egypt in search of knowledge. At his time Egypt had the largest gathering of ancient documents housed in the Temple of Nice in Sais. There
On the ground the Richat ridges just look like hills
Solon became fascinated with the lost city of Atlantis when the high Egyptian priest Sonchis of Sais translated the writing. Plato rekindled this fascination when he recorded the writings in 360 BC in two books;  the Critics and Timaeus Dialogues. 

Plato wrote, “There were alternate zones of sea and land,
larger and smaller, encircling one another, there were two of land, and three of water, which were turned as if with a lathe each having its circumference equidistant every way from the center.”  Plato goes on to record that the diameter of this city is 127 stadia (an ancient measurement) which is equivalent to 23.5km or 14.5 miles. The measurement of the Eye of the Sahara, located in Mauritania, West Africa, is any where from 22km to 24km.
Very close. Something else Plato mentioned was the mountains to the North having streams running down them. Now so far this remarkable land structure fits with what Plato says. Almost. I wouldn’t classify the tall but flat plateaus to the North as mountains. However over time and climate change the mountains could have been eroded. But there are some discrepancies. The opening to the sea as recorded by Plato was to the south. 
It can be clearly seen from the pictures that the Eye’s opening is to the southwest. Again explainable by time and erosion. And though the structure is 250 miles inland today, at a much earlier time mountains could easily have been there. So what happened?

Plato writes, “Atlantis is part of the Atlantic which is now no longer accessible by ship.” He continues on by writing, “Atlantis when sunk by the earthquake, became an impassible barrier of mud to voyagers sailing from hence to any part of the ocean.” It is easy to see from satellite imagery that a catastrophic event occur in this region. It could not be from the global flood because then the Richat structure would have been wiped out. However I hypothesize that at one time there was a enormous lake to the east and north. Huge inland lakes were common after the global flood and remnants can be found worldwide. If this is so, and there really was a massive earthquake, the land could easily have shifted creating an ever widening 
crevice that would have opened up the lake and drained it pushing millions of tons of sand, mud and debris with it. And it would look just like the photo! This could also explain where the mountains went, having been eroded by such an event. It also explains 250 miles of sediment creating a delta that rose above sea level. Plato writes on saying, “…in a single day and night of misfortune, the island of Atlantis disappeared in to the depths of the sea.” 

The Eye of the Sahara does have similarities with the story of the lost Atlantis. But what do the scientists say? Many geologists disagree that it was manmade stating that it was instead created by molten rock pushing upward but didn’t quite make it to the outer crust thus leaving behind a dome of rock layers. This would have caused the fault lines that circle and cross the Eye. They believe erosion then made the final shaping to what we see today. But this cannot be proven, nor is there anything else like this throughout the rest of Earth’s terrain surface (or under water crust for that matter). And there are multitudes of volcanic domes, cones etc, but nothing at all close to what this looks like. 

Whether natural or manmade or both it is an awe inspiring structure. God’s fingerprint is on it either way; one way by utilizing nature forces to create such an amazing design and the other way by creating mankind so intelligent from the beginning! Lots to think about…

God bless and take care,
Willow Dressel,

Pictures and content from;


  1. It's an ancient volcanic dome. It's not Atlantis. Also, creationism is horseshit. You believe in fairy tales invented by semi-literate goat herders in the desert. You should try not being so stupid.

    1. Good tip, John. Very thoughtful and persuasive.

    2. Who made YOU the Fountain of Knowledge? "for professing himself wise,he became a fool" You bulls-eyed that.

  2. You do know most of "sciences" greatest materially fact based discoveries were made by men who believed these goat herders and believed science proved the existence and omnipotence of their creator.