Do you believe in Atlantis?
First of all the word "believe" is the wrong word when dealing with Atlantis. Either you know, or you know, that you don't know. Or you are "convinced" on the basis of sound arguments. But you should not "believe" anything in connection with Atlantis. And in no other connection, too. "To believe" is a generally misdirected category of perception.

What is so fascinating about Atlantis?
There are several reasons, why you can be fascinated about Atlantis. In my case it is the awareness, that science does not hold Atlantis for a serious topic and so science hasn't produced too much knowledge about it. Therefore it is possible for interested and educated hobby researchers to make serious contributions to Atlantis research.

Do you consider Atlantis to be an open question?
Since february 2008 I am strongly inclined to hold Altantis for real, i.e. to identify it with Sicily. The density of indications is very high. Anyway the following has to be said: A hypothesis is not an accepted scientific theory, and so the openess of the question is generally kept. That's the way science is working.

Do you hold the hypothesis, that Atlantis was Sicily?
In the meantime, yes. I started playfully to deal with Atlantis with this hypothesis in 1999. But at the beginning I clearly knew, that this is only a weak hypothesis. Therefore I didn't hold it too seriously, but held it to be a good idea only, which needs further investigation. In february 2008 the density of indications reached such a high level, that I can hold now this hypothesis with quiet conscience.

Do you want to find Atlantis?
First, I am a hobby researcher, so I have much patience. If I find Atlantis - good! If not - also good. In this case the journey is the reward.

Are you a scientist?
I have no academic degrees concerning ancient history, archeology or philology. I am just a hobby researcher in the best meaning of the word. Of course this includes, that I claim to work on a scientific level. I am a professional computer scientist, with a diploma of the German elite university of Karlsruhe KIT as academic degree. But I deal with ancient history and philosophy since my childhood. During my studies in computer science I learned the ancient Greek language and passed the Graecum exam with top mark. So I can read Plato's texts in the original language. From a excessivly competent egyptologist who offered public courses because she did not find a job, I got to know a lot about ancient Egyptian history and culture and I learned the so-called middle Egyptian language (hieroglyphs) - so it was like studying some Egyptology at university. In addition it makes scientific work much easier to know four modern languages. Considering this background of knowledge there is a fundamental difference to most of the other non-scientific Atlantis researchers, who are generally not capable to analyze Plato's Atlantis account. Even in comparison with professional philologists of the ancient Greek language I have an advantage, because they rarely have knowledge in Egyptology.

Is it possible, that Atlantis had been a small continent in the Atlantic ocean around 9500 BC, as Plato wrote?
Definitively not. Place, age and size of Atlantis are either inventions by Plato or a deformed tradition of real facts. Such a deformation may not seem to be credible for amateurs, but in fact it's very plausible if you compare the deformations of known facts by other ancient authors.

Have there been energy crystals, flight machines and reincarnation on Atlantis, and did exist two further continents: Mu and Lemuria?
No. Those are biased phantasies of later times, which have nothing to do with the original Atlantis described by Plato. Instead you can imagine Atlantis as a usual bronze age city, possibly similar to the city of Troy.

Do you know what is a Platonic Myth?
Of course I know, and I know at the same time the Atlantis account does not at all correspond to the typical construction of a Platonic Myth. You cannot declare the Atlantis account to be a Platonic Myth without any further ado, like many do.

You know, that many Atlantis researchers work in a non-scientific way?
Unfortunately it is true, that almost all Atlantis researchers do not work on a scientific level. Everybody who wants can call himself an Atlantis researcher. In present days professional science does not bother to consider differences in quality among existence hypotheses and rejects any kind of existence hypothesis as nonsense. In order to establish a sound basis for Atlantis research I wrote the Atlantis Research charter with support from some other Atlantis researchers.

Do you sympathize with Atlantis researchers?
I do not sympathize with certain Atlantis researchers, because the differences are too big, but I am clearly inclined to the opinion, that Atlantis was a real place. The current invention hypotheses dominating among professional scientists, are far too simple in many ways, and these scientists often reject criticism in a dogmatic way. Dissidents often are confronted with arrogance and - if scientists - isolated by their fellow-scientists, which strengthens sympathy for the opponents. But sympathy is no scientifc category.

Are you neutral?
I always had my own opinion and I never claimed to be neutral. Until 2008 I was neutral on the question, whether Atlantis existed or not, although I had strong sympathies for the existence of Atlantis. Meanwhile I have my own hypothesis of the existence of Atlantis. Towards the diverse existence hypotheses I never was neutral. But you can expect, that I am fair and objective. On the other hand, fairness does not mean to respect obvious nonsense.

Do you know of the abuse of Atlantis by extremist ideologies?
Of course. But the Atlantis account has been written 2400 years before the 20th century, and therefore it is nonsense to place the emphasis on this abuse when dealing with Atlantis. Somebody who is enthusiastic for Goethe also does not have to answer again and again the question, whether Goethe - ridiculous - has to be blamed for Auschwitz. I deny definitively a "nordic" Atlantis as well as a socialist Atlantis. Besides the fact, that Atlantis in Plato's account plays the role of the bad guy, so it is difficult to find a positive identification with Atlantis. But also Plato's ideal state does not correspond to my democratic convictions.