Gori the Grey
The Poster
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2009
- Messages
- 13,397
I have three tables in my apartment. Does this mean I believe in the Trinity?
No; evidently, it means that space aliens told you there's a Trinity!
I have three tables in my apartment. Does this mean I believe in the Trinity?
No; evidently, it means that space aliens told you there's a Trinity!
Also the point that the fundamental worldviews of ancient peoples were incredibly different from each other. Cosmology was fundamentally different between cultures, in the way that they structured the nature of the universe. You can handwave this away by just being misinterpretations of the nine planets or whatever. But that's the thing - there are hundreds of myths and depictions, it's natural for some of them to coalesce around a number as low as 9 due to how numbers worth. Everything else beyond this is arbitration, the implementation of Nordic space cattle into Anasazi cave myths, the dismissal of fundamental differations in understanding of cosmic structure, the vastly different aesthetic styles being dismissed...
Why don't you count every time the number 1 of something appears in ancient depictions? I mean, it's 1, there's literally nine 1s in every system of 9. Wouldn't that be nine times the power of proof, besides all other numbers being present in these systems? Think about the number of 1s being represented in any depiction. Each instance of anything would count. But you don't, because it due to its nature as a number showcases that numbers are numbers and that it means nothing to point this out, particularly in a sea of inconsistencies.
I have three tables in my apartment. Does this mean I believe in the Trinity?
Actually, having three tables (I assume one in the kitchen and two in the living room) means space aliens told his remote, pre-discovery-of-telescopes ancestors that Alpha Centauri is a trinary star system.No; evidently, it means that space aliens told you there's a Trinity!
You misunderstand me. I'm saying that you (Berz) are hiding the information. You're playing at prophet on an internet forum instead of doing something useful. If you are able to interpret this advanced knowledge, then interpret something new out of it that conventional science doesn't know and show it exists.
Everything else you do is wasting time and is just playing to your own ego, about how you know secret truths noone else does.
But I'm not the one who sees pictures on rocks and jumps to the conclusion that aliens gave telescopes to both the ancient Babylonians and the North American natives.
So... I have to wonder what Berzerker actually gets out of these threads. He's been posting them for years, not only here but on other forums. To the best of my knowledge, he's never gained any converts to "Sitchinsism" during all this time.
What evidence do you have that ancient Egypt, during the time of the construction of the Great Pyramids, ascribed any particular significance to "Orion's Belt"?
@Berzerker There is not a single text in the entire body of Sumerian or Mesopotamian tablets in the world that says the Sumerians or Mesopotamians knew of more than five planets. Sitchin just made up that they knew of 12.
Be right back, asking a big account on Twitter for some cosmological takes.Sitchin has millions of supporters
You come across as EltonJ did, with your "I know something you don't know..."/singsong attitudeI'm hiding secret truths by posting them on the internet? The person who left us the image is the prophet and Sitchin has millions of supporters, they've even named the 9th planet researchers are looking for after his '12th planet' - Nibiru. I wouldn't have recognized the Fremont panel without having read Sitchin and various researchers of archaeoastronomy and myth, I'd think it was just a hunting scene too. Its funny you mention ego, when I was young I thought religion was BS and I knew the truth. But I've actually surrendered to tradition, I had to admit to myself I was wrong.Senethro said:You misunderstand me. I'm saying that you (Berz) are hiding the information. You're playing at prophet on an internet forum instead of doing something useful. If you are able to interpret this advanced knowledge, then interpret something new out of it that conventional science doesn't know and show it exists.
Everything else you do is wasting time and is just playing to your own ego, about how you know secret truths noone else does.
Your standard answer to my comments about giving telescopes to the Babylonians has been "How do you know they didn't?" and when I pointed out that no archaeologist had ever found any, you moved the goalpost.Berzerker said:They gave them information about the solar system, not telescopes.Valka D'Ur said:But I'm not the one who sees pictures on rocks and jumps to the conclusion that aliens gave telescopes to both the ancient Babylonians and the North American natives.
Has Sitchin ever thanked you? As for "it's for the science"... it'd be nice if you would actually use some. Numerology isn't science.Berzerker said:The only other forum I've mentioned this stuff is at Poly and that was long ago, probably more than a decade. I do this because insults and mocking are good for the ego. I do this for Sitchin, for ancient peoples who devoted their lives to keeping these traditions alive, and because the science matters.
You see a comet and envision a vast cloud of trillions of comets encircling the solar system and I see a remnant chunk of ice and rock produced by collisions long ago. You see an asteroid belt and think a planet couldn't form because of Jupiter and I see evidence of collisions long ago. I did convince 1 person Saturn's rings point to Pluto, they did the math and confirmed it.
1 When the heavens above did not exist,
2 And earth beneath had not come into being —
3 There was Apsû, the first in order, their begetter,
4 And demiurge Tia-mat, who gave birth to them all;
5 They had mingled their waters together
6 Before meadow-land had coalesced and reed-bed was to he found —
7 When not one of the gods had been formed
8 Or had come into being, when no destinies had been decreed,
Apsu (freshwater) is the primordial sun and Tiamat (saltwater) was the first planet. Interestingly enough, the Sun produces freshwater. There is however some confusion about a 3rd object. Mummu (Mercury) is described as Apsu's companion and some translations mention him in the opening lines. The reference to gods and destinies is about planets and their orbits.
9 The gods were created within them:
10 Lah(mu and Lah(amu were formed and came into being.
"Within them" has also been translated to mean between or amidst. These 2 gods were brother and sister in the Babylonian version and would eventually become Mars and Venus. Other than Tiamat and Lahamu the other planetary gods are male. This is important because it helps us locate Tiamat in the Sumerian solar system - beyond Mars.
11 While they grew and increased in stature
12 Anšar and Kišar, who excelled them, were created.
13 They prolonged their days, they multiplied their years.
14 Anu, their son, could rival his fathers.
15 Anu, the son, equalled Anšar,
16 And Anu begat Nudimmud, his own equal.
Saturn and Jupiter followed by Uranus and Neptune. Now the following verses describe what ensued as planets migrated about.
a) the relative positions of the three Giza pyramids coincide within the uncertainties of the naked eye astrometric measurements with the relative positions of the three stars of the Orion Belt
b) in the scale that would have been chosen by the pyramid builders to reproduce the Orion Belt on the ground, the linear distance between the Menkhaure pyramid and the Nile, along the straight line connecting the two extreme pyramids of Giza, practically matches the angular distance between Mintaka and the central point of the Milky Way along the straight line connecting the two extreme stars of the asterism
c) the visual magnitude of the stars of the Belt is presently correlated with the height of the corresponding pyramids evaluated with respect to a common reference level (i.e. the base level of the Khufu pyramid). Since the star evolution models suggest that the magnitudes of all the three objects of the Belt at the time of the pyramids were substantially equal to the present ones, the above found correlation was still valid at that epoch (Orofino, 2011)
Interesting. I took a skim over the article and will re-read it later. But I did note that it said the Egyptians knew about FIVE planets - Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn. Apparently Sitchin's space aliens never told them about the others.regarding Orion and the Giza pyramids
https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1109/1109.6266.pdf
Thats why the 2nd pyramid appears taller than the 1st, to match the slightly brighter middle star in Orion's Belt.
Is this author seriously suggesting that at a time in human history where light pollution was NOT a problem, that people had a hard time seeing the Milky Way?article said:Even for a trained eye and in perfect visibility conditions, the Milky Way is barely distinguishable and therefore it is difficult to detect the centre of this faint belt, also because of its inhomogeneous brightness distribution.
You will note that two beings existed that were not gods. One was a demi urge and the other a begetter. And as the text says, they were not gods. They created the gods. The text clearly says that they created 6 gods. You will also notice that there is no mention of planets; this is strictly about gods and how they came about (created by Apsu and Tiamat). Using the Enuma Elish as a source for naming the planets after the gods is incorrect.
WHEN on high the Heavens had not been named,
Firm ground below had not been called by name,
Nothing but ‘Primordial Apsu’ the Begetter, [Fresh Water]
and ‘Mummu Tiamat’, She Who Bore them All, [Salt Water]
–their waters commingling as a single body–
No reed hut had been matted, no marsh land had appeared,
Uncalled by name, their destinies undetermined–
THEN it was that the Gods were formed within Them.
Lahmu [‘mud’] and Lahamu [‘Mrs. Mud’] were brought forth,
by name they were called Before they had grown in age and stature.
Anshar [‘Upper Firmament’] and Kishar [‘Lower Firmament’] were
formed, surpassing the others. They prolonged the days, added on the years.
Anu was their heir, the rival of his fathers;
Yes, Anu, Anshar’s first-born, was his equal.
He begot in his image Nudimmud [ Ea ].
This Nudimmud was the master of his fathers;
Of broad wisdom, understanding, mighty in strength,
Mightier by far than his grandfather Anshar.
He had no rival among the gods, his brothers.
The currently observed lunar orbit can naturally be reproduced via interaction with a small quantity of mass (corresponding to 0.0075–0.015 Earth masses eventually accreted to the Earth) carried by a few bodies, consistent with the constraints and models of late accretion10,11. Although the encounter process has a stochastic element, the observed value of the lunar inclination is among the most likely outcomes for a wide range of parameters.
The excitation of the lunar orbit is most readily reproduced via collisionless encounters of planetesimals with the Earth–Moon system with strong dissipation of tidal energy on the early Earth. This mechanism obviates the need for previously proposed (but idealized) excitation mechanisms12,13, places the Moon-forming event in the context of the formation of Earth, and constrains the pristineness of the dynamical state of the Earth–Moon system.
You have skipped over the death of Apsu who was killed by Ea [Enki]. Who is Ea? Was he also a god of some sort [where is his planet?] and as we shall see, the father of Marduk. So when the gods heard the Apsu and Tiamat planned to destroy them....Mummu, btw, is not a god, but a counselor.
Only the first line mentions the gods and that line, while it doesn't mention planets directly, I'm sure you will take it that way. Now, there is no mention of how many gods other than to say the "great gods". Those would be Lah(mu), Lah(amu), Ansar, Kisar, Anu, and Nudimmud, plus maybe Marduk. So when we read the actual text, we can see that your post is incorrect on several points. The number of gods is miscounted and planets are not mentioned anywhere and the vague reference you will want ot counter with, makes no mention of how many or which gods are involved. In addition, your account makes no mention of the death of Aspu (the Sun?) which is crucial to the birth of Marduk.
Because that's how archeologists make valid arguments about the belief systems of cultures they study: by gathering all possible evidence, rather than picking up one picture that has 9 stags on it and saying "hey, those must be the nine planets; how did ancient people know there were nine planets? must be space aliens told them!"
That's why.
There's so little that survives, that even when archeologists study everything that's available to them, they often worry that their interpretations might be off base, simply by virtue of those surviving ruins being a non-representative sample. Responsible archeologists, I mean.
No; evidently, it means that space aliens told you there's a Trinity!
Your standard answer to my comments about giving telescopes to the Babylonians has been "How do you know they didn't?" and when I pointed out that no archaeologist had ever found any, you moved the goalpost.
Has Sitchin ever thanked you? As for "it's for the science"... it'd be nice if you would actually use some. Numerology isn't science.
I'm not the one who envisioned a cloud of trillions of comets. Someone else did and named it the Oort Cloud.
@Berzerker show your work
First you can demonstrate competence in the ancient Sumerian language and in interpreting Mesopotomian inscriptions. Then we can move on to orbital mechanics.
Okay, if - IF - space aliens told them about all the stuff that humans can't see with the naked eye... why would space aliens need a telescope to see it? They'd have noticed it with their instruments or by looking outside the ship (assuming the ship has windows, which is not really a practical thing to include in a spaceship).You said ancient peoples could not have known about the outer planets because the telescope was invented a few centuries ago. I said you dont know that, I didn't say they had telescopes. I did say the evidence shows an ancient knowledge of the solar system that someone with a telescope (and much more) gave to ancient peoples who couldn't see the outermost planets but still included in their religions/cosmologies. The people with the telescopes were the ones telling our ancestors about creation.
The Dutch were already using lenses for various purposes before Galileo thought of using them to look up at the Moon and planets. When he got excited by what he saw, he invited others to come and take a look... and they couldn't care less about the sky. They did like spying on the neighbors or looking out to sea to be the first to see when the merchant ships were coming in.And archaeologists have found lenses that were used by jewelers and engravers, it aint a stretch to believe somebody started playing around with them while looking at the sky. So we dont know for a fact nobody had a telescope. I say God gave people knowledge about the solar system and you keep arguing people had no telescopes. Okay. I dont need a telescope if someone else does. But I can record what you tell me about what is out there.
Neil deGrasse Tyson says we have 8 planets. It's all in the semantics of the definitions, not in the planets themselves (of whatever size), not to mention that there are scientists who decided that 8 was a good enough number because they condescendingly figure that it would be too hard to expect the public to remember the names if they also included the dwarf planets and Kuiper Belt Objects as planets.He passed away a few years back, but this isn't numerology. As of now 'the science' says our solar system has 8 planets. Is that numerology? Why does it become numerology if there are 9 planets? How about 10?
I have an image of it in my mind's eye that I saw on an astronomy website and a diagram in another online article. That's not the same as you suggesting I made the whole thing up.I didn't say you invented the Oort Cloud. Haven't you argued for the existence of this vast cloud of comets? If so, then you envision it.
No it's not. Dem's the rules. (I didn't make the rules) You're trying to assign meaning to what you see depicted in rock art. The only check against an individual interpreter assigning whatever meaning he or she wants to one particular image is to make sure that proposed meaning squares with all available images (and again, even then archaeologists make their claims most tentatively for the reason I mentioned). You badly need that check because the meanings you're trying to assign to these rock paintings are unlikely in the extreme. Again, of all the things space aliens might teach primitive human cultures, why on earth would they bother teaching them how many planets are in the solar system, a piece of information that could be of zero use to them?Thats a bizarre requirement