anunnaki
- Thread starter nik
- Start date
Trojan,
Why couldn't there be life on a 12th
planet? I doubt that axhead was for a 5'4" 140lb man do you? A 12 foot giant
would have no problem using it. If you believe in dinosaurs why not giants that
ax head is a good start in believing
they existed don't you think.
Alien
Why couldn't there be life on a 12th
planet? I doubt that axhead was for a 5'4" 140lb man do you? A 12 foot giant
would have no problem using it. If you believe in dinosaurs why not giants that
ax head is a good start in believing
they existed don't you think.
Alien
OK, I'll admit it. Y'all have me confused over a couple of issues.
But a few things that caught my attention:
Nik .... maybe you don't need a 12-14 foot doorway, but what insight can you (or Sitchin, or anyone) give us into the nuances of premodern architecture? Is there no conceivable structural reason for making a fourteen foot doorway? Is there no religious symbolism that can be independent of the planet Nibiru? I would also wonder whether or not you've ever been in combat with an axe? I can't say I have, but I think a sixteen pound bowling ball is excessive, and people use those. When the stake is your life, wouldn't you want thirty-six pounds of axehead to crush your opponent's skull? Or could it be a ceremonial axe? In that sense, I'm wondering how tall the Catholics were in the past: have you seen the size of their crucifixes? Maybe it was aliens wearing twelve-foot crosses around their necks. (Crucifix, horseshoe .... axehead? Maybe a superstitious trend?)
Have you read Douglas Adams' "Hitchhiker's Trilogy"? I only want to draw one concept from that right now: Rogue mice wanting to extract Arthur Dent's brain because he was the last functioning remnant of the computer program which the Earth was built to run; ergo, the "answer" to the equation was lodged somewhere in his makeup--it was a matter of decoding it all.
When Sitchin tries to draw common aspects of various cultures and theories together, he is doing nothing new. Could it be that the "connected" stuff (zodiac, myths, &c) that makes up the various religions have something to do with life patterns ingrained into our being? I point to the Ten Commandments: sure, God says "don't kill", but I don't need a divine threat to keep me from murder. It seems like a good idea to me; I don't kill anyone, and society in turn doesn't try to kill me for killing that person. Is it possible that numerical correspondences to philosophy, scientific patterns reflecting religion, and so forth, are all inherent things that we learned as living organisms struggling up the Darwinian ladder?
Furthermore, from the "sun as planet" part: You wrote "Ya, I know it's a star, don't ask me for their reasoning." OK. Let me get this straight: You espouse a theory that involves the mingling of many hitherto separate concepts, but haven't studied the component concepts? The word "planet" is derived from Greek, for "wanderer", because these objects wandered throughout the predictable passing of the firmament. So to talk about the twelfth "planet" in itself assumes that Sumerians and Greeks used the same words for the same celestial bodies. Stars and planets similar? You can start with, "They're in the sky and they shine". What comes next is up to you. For instance, I would suggest that anyone wishing to research the "why" of Hitler's Reich would be better off pitching the critical examinations of the last fifty years and reading material contemporary to Hitler's Europe. Likewise, if you're going to connect the Sumerian, Hebrew, Greek, and other texts together, I would suggest spending some time with each of the cultures involved. That way, simple contextual oversights might not leave you admitting that, aside from Sitchin, you haven't much need for Sumeria in your search for discovery.
Sitchin's work has scientific merit. However, his supporters often operate much like a religious campaign, casting aside testable theses and demanding that NASA send units beyond Pluto when we're having some trouble getting to Mars. Sure, why don't we skip Jupiter and Saturn, and cruise straight out of the solar system before we know that humans are capable of getting there safely. How about a crew of 1000 lost to an explosion near Uranus, simply because nobody had good enough projections on drive power regulation? I would love to rush out there myself, but I know we have to learn to swim before we dive into the ocean. We'll find the answers someday, but we have to prove to ourselves that the operating theories to get where we need to go are correct. Take a theory, ask yourself if it is proven as well as it can. If not, where's the fault? Somebody might want to try to fix the theory. If the theory's good enough for general acceptance, what can you achieve from there, if you incorporate it into your new starting assumptions?
But these are elusive theories, tough to prove. And nobody I've ever met who reads Sitchin heavily has ever continued his work in any respect. They simply read the books and spouted the wisdom and played Dungeons and Dragons well into their twenties. Do not let me suggest, though, that these were typical Sitchin believers. I obviously have only met a small handful. But I'm wondering who's continuing what work, and whether they are finding new answers, or trumping up the old theories.
thx,
Tiassa
------------------
"Let us not launch the boat until the ground is wet." (Khaavren of Castlerock)
[This message has been edited by tiassa (edited October 01, 1999).]
But a few things that caught my attention:
Nik .... maybe you don't need a 12-14 foot doorway, but what insight can you (or Sitchin, or anyone) give us into the nuances of premodern architecture? Is there no conceivable structural reason for making a fourteen foot doorway? Is there no religious symbolism that can be independent of the planet Nibiru? I would also wonder whether or not you've ever been in combat with an axe? I can't say I have, but I think a sixteen pound bowling ball is excessive, and people use those. When the stake is your life, wouldn't you want thirty-six pounds of axehead to crush your opponent's skull? Or could it be a ceremonial axe? In that sense, I'm wondering how tall the Catholics were in the past: have you seen the size of their crucifixes? Maybe it was aliens wearing twelve-foot crosses around their necks. (Crucifix, horseshoe .... axehead? Maybe a superstitious trend?)
Have you read Douglas Adams' "Hitchhiker's Trilogy"? I only want to draw one concept from that right now: Rogue mice wanting to extract Arthur Dent's brain because he was the last functioning remnant of the computer program which the Earth was built to run; ergo, the "answer" to the equation was lodged somewhere in his makeup--it was a matter of decoding it all.
When Sitchin tries to draw common aspects of various cultures and theories together, he is doing nothing new. Could it be that the "connected" stuff (zodiac, myths, &c) that makes up the various religions have something to do with life patterns ingrained into our being? I point to the Ten Commandments: sure, God says "don't kill", but I don't need a divine threat to keep me from murder. It seems like a good idea to me; I don't kill anyone, and society in turn doesn't try to kill me for killing that person. Is it possible that numerical correspondences to philosophy, scientific patterns reflecting religion, and so forth, are all inherent things that we learned as living organisms struggling up the Darwinian ladder?
Furthermore, from the "sun as planet" part: You wrote "Ya, I know it's a star, don't ask me for their reasoning." OK. Let me get this straight: You espouse a theory that involves the mingling of many hitherto separate concepts, but haven't studied the component concepts? The word "planet" is derived from Greek, for "wanderer", because these objects wandered throughout the predictable passing of the firmament. So to talk about the twelfth "planet" in itself assumes that Sumerians and Greeks used the same words for the same celestial bodies. Stars and planets similar? You can start with, "They're in the sky and they shine". What comes next is up to you. For instance, I would suggest that anyone wishing to research the "why" of Hitler's Reich would be better off pitching the critical examinations of the last fifty years and reading material contemporary to Hitler's Europe. Likewise, if you're going to connect the Sumerian, Hebrew, Greek, and other texts together, I would suggest spending some time with each of the cultures involved. That way, simple contextual oversights might not leave you admitting that, aside from Sitchin, you haven't much need for Sumeria in your search for discovery.
Sitchin's work has scientific merit. However, his supporters often operate much like a religious campaign, casting aside testable theses and demanding that NASA send units beyond Pluto when we're having some trouble getting to Mars. Sure, why don't we skip Jupiter and Saturn, and cruise straight out of the solar system before we know that humans are capable of getting there safely. How about a crew of 1000 lost to an explosion near Uranus, simply because nobody had good enough projections on drive power regulation? I would love to rush out there myself, but I know we have to learn to swim before we dive into the ocean. We'll find the answers someday, but we have to prove to ourselves that the operating theories to get where we need to go are correct. Take a theory, ask yourself if it is proven as well as it can. If not, where's the fault? Somebody might want to try to fix the theory. If the theory's good enough for general acceptance, what can you achieve from there, if you incorporate it into your new starting assumptions?
But these are elusive theories, tough to prove. And nobody I've ever met who reads Sitchin heavily has ever continued his work in any respect. They simply read the books and spouted the wisdom and played Dungeons and Dragons well into their twenties. Do not let me suggest, though, that these were typical Sitchin believers. I obviously have only met a small handful. But I'm wondering who's continuing what work, and whether they are finding new answers, or trumping up the old theories.
thx,
Tiassa
------------------
"Let us not launch the boat until the ground is wet." (Khaavren of Castlerock)
[This message has been edited by tiassa (edited October 01, 1999).]
nik,
Ok, you are not a liar. You are just misinformed.
1) I would not consider a 20 year old New York Times issue an authoritative source of science information.
2) It may come as a surprise, but neither NASA nor the Naval Observatory are leading authorities in astronomy. They merely provide equipment for use, or lease, by research groups at various universities. And, most of astronomy is actually not done through either agency.
3) In another thread on this site, I have already demonstrated that even a Jupiter-sized planet coming as close to Earth as closest approach of Mars would create a gravitational stress merely comparable to that of the Moon.
4) Stop mixing archaeology with astronomy, unless you are willing to throw in some common sense as well. Do you seriously propose that the anscient Sumerians knew about Pluto, which is <u>extremely</u> hard to detect, but they did not know about the Galilean moons of Jupiter, <u>which are visible even through the simplest telescopes</u>? In which case, why would they count our Moon as the planet, but not, say, Titan, a moon of Saturn, which is twice the weight of Earth's Moon?
5) Your assumption of my ignorance or inanity is amusing, in view of the fact that you get your information from sensationalist pseudo-scientific literature on par with books that prove that Earth is flat after all.
Here's an excerpt from a <A HREF="http://starchild.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/StarChild/questions/question4.html">NASA website</A> that is <u>a little more recent</u> than 1982:
<hr>
Do some thinking and research on your own every now and then, rather than regurgitating nonsense you absorbed from other "authoritative" sources. Finally, if I had a choice of whom to trust, between NASA and Sitchin, Hoagland, Greer, etc., I would definitely choose NASA. Somehow, I find rigorous, <u>current</u>, and peer-reviewed science a bit more authoritative.
------------------
I am; therefore I think.
[This message has been edited by Boris (edited October 01, 1999).]
Ok, you are not a liar. You are just misinformed.
1) I would not consider a 20 year old New York Times issue an authoritative source of science information.
2) It may come as a surprise, but neither NASA nor the Naval Observatory are leading authorities in astronomy. They merely provide equipment for use, or lease, by research groups at various universities. And, most of astronomy is actually not done through either agency.
3) In another thread on this site, I have already demonstrated that even a Jupiter-sized planet coming as close to Earth as closest approach of Mars would create a gravitational stress merely comparable to that of the Moon.
4) Stop mixing archaeology with astronomy, unless you are willing to throw in some common sense as well. Do you seriously propose that the anscient Sumerians knew about Pluto, which is <u>extremely</u> hard to detect, but they did not know about the Galilean moons of Jupiter, <u>which are visible even through the simplest telescopes</u>? In which case, why would they count our Moon as the planet, but not, say, Titan, a moon of Saturn, which is twice the weight of Earth's Moon?
5) Your assumption of my ignorance or inanity is amusing, in view of the fact that you get your information from sensationalist pseudo-scientific literature on par with books that prove that Earth is flat after all.
Here's an excerpt from a <A HREF="http://starchild.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/StarChild/questions/question4.html">NASA website</A> that is <u>a little more recent</u> than 1982:
<hr>
Do some thinking and research on your own every now and then, rather than regurgitating nonsense you absorbed from other "authoritative" sources. Finally, if I had a choice of whom to trust, between NASA and Sitchin, Hoagland, Greer, etc., I would definitely choose NASA. Somehow, I find rigorous, <u>current</u>, and peer-reviewed science a bit more authoritative.
------------------
I am; therefore I think.
[This message has been edited by Boris (edited October 01, 1999).]
boris,
i will admit that after looking all day i was disappointed to find no further evidence concerning the 10th or whatever planet.i e-mailed a person at cal tech who creates a web page for the IRAS, and she told me that some of the prior claims by nasa, the usno and the iras were found to be other causes or still undetermined.the site said that iras has catologed 250,000 point sources,and 100,000 faint sources but that MOST of them "have not been followed up to date."
they say that MOST of them (the sources) are "outside the galactic plane and did not move between the epoch optical observations and the iras observations,and therefore were not a solar system body".(like a cross correlation i guess?)"however,there is an optical obscuration in the plane" and one of these sources "could indeed be such a body".
at first i thought ,well who said this planet has to appear as a solar system body anyway?how far out is considered not a solar body? from what ive read, this planet could be up to 4 times further away than pluto.is that outside the galactic plain? i have no clue.also i know that they have found those 8 gas giants,similar too jupiter, some with moons,and some in 2 star systems,couldnt one of these be it? or is that too far? i dont know, but again, i dont have detailed experience in astronomy etc. thats the thing.i read lots and research lots about different things so i cant get as technical and detailed as you on the astronomy stuff.i guess thats what i get for spreading out into so many subjects.
you know whats in sitchins favor here though?discreditors need to prove that every source could not be a possible planet x and he only needs one, the right source, for his theory to work.so its a waiting game.maybe someone will tell us if they find it,mabe they wont.maybe we'll be alive when it comes by,maybe we won't..and,maybe it won't come by because it doesnt exist.(maybe the grey aliens blew it up,found the map to get here and are messing with us now,aren't all these options wonderful?)
its also funny that i hear all the time about how theres not enough man power or telescopes to watch for meteors and comets for possible collisions with earth but theres enough to look for and discredit a planet that few believe in.
do you know what area of the skies to look at in a search for this planet if it existed?probably not,because you wont read the book....you still wont answer me on that,have you read just one of sitchins books?thats the part about all this crap that bugs me most...not being proven inaccurate in astronomy,but that you wont look at the book or the other factors.
im kind of bored with going around in circles (or orbits)on just one part of the whole big picture(granted,it is an important part of the topic).
other points i like too look at besides just physical proof for the darn planet are:
-the similar architecture and the relevant drawings and symbols of the sumerians, myans, and egyptians.pictures of giants with smaller people,gods with wings,drawings of space vehicles,statues,carvings etc.their writings and what they say and mean.
-the geological views on how man and the earth have had serious changes every 3600 years.(mostly sitchin stuff,but thats my next detailed investigation)
-the calenders and dates-late 2012 for the mayans,-2013 for the sumerians for some reason.
-the explainations in the bible of giants and destruction to earth whenever the "gods from above come down from the heavens" etc,etc.
-the giant artifacts that have been found and that are in museums.beds that are 6 cubits long,36 pound ax heads,large chairs,large door ways,high ceilings etc.
-the fact that this could explain the missing link.
-how the sumerians,myans and egyptians new so much about the stars and planets.
-evidence that earth has been mined in the past using advanced methods....
anyway,you win the astronomy war partner,
take care..............nik
i will admit that after looking all day i was disappointed to find no further evidence concerning the 10th or whatever planet.i e-mailed a person at cal tech who creates a web page for the IRAS, and she told me that some of the prior claims by nasa, the usno and the iras were found to be other causes or still undetermined.the site said that iras has catologed 250,000 point sources,and 100,000 faint sources but that MOST of them "have not been followed up to date."
they say that MOST of them (the sources) are "outside the galactic plane and did not move between the epoch optical observations and the iras observations,and therefore were not a solar system body".(like a cross correlation i guess?)"however,there is an optical obscuration in the plane" and one of these sources "could indeed be such a body".
at first i thought ,well who said this planet has to appear as a solar system body anyway?how far out is considered not a solar body? from what ive read, this planet could be up to 4 times further away than pluto.is that outside the galactic plain? i have no clue.also i know that they have found those 8 gas giants,similar too jupiter, some with moons,and some in 2 star systems,couldnt one of these be it? or is that too far? i dont know, but again, i dont have detailed experience in astronomy etc. thats the thing.i read lots and research lots about different things so i cant get as technical and detailed as you on the astronomy stuff.i guess thats what i get for spreading out into so many subjects.
you know whats in sitchins favor here though?discreditors need to prove that every source could not be a possible planet x and he only needs one, the right source, for his theory to work.so its a waiting game.maybe someone will tell us if they find it,mabe they wont.maybe we'll be alive when it comes by,maybe we won't..and,maybe it won't come by because it doesnt exist.(maybe the grey aliens blew it up,found the map to get here and are messing with us now,aren't all these options wonderful?)
its also funny that i hear all the time about how theres not enough man power or telescopes to watch for meteors and comets for possible collisions with earth but theres enough to look for and discredit a planet that few believe in.
do you know what area of the skies to look at in a search for this planet if it existed?probably not,because you wont read the book....you still wont answer me on that,have you read just one of sitchins books?thats the part about all this crap that bugs me most...not being proven inaccurate in astronomy,but that you wont look at the book or the other factors.
im kind of bored with going around in circles (or orbits)on just one part of the whole big picture(granted,it is an important part of the topic).
other points i like too look at besides just physical proof for the darn planet are:
-the similar architecture and the relevant drawings and symbols of the sumerians, myans, and egyptians.pictures of giants with smaller people,gods with wings,drawings of space vehicles,statues,carvings etc.their writings and what they say and mean.
-the geological views on how man and the earth have had serious changes every 3600 years.(mostly sitchin stuff,but thats my next detailed investigation)
-the calenders and dates-late 2012 for the mayans,-2013 for the sumerians for some reason.
-the explainations in the bible of giants and destruction to earth whenever the "gods from above come down from the heavens" etc,etc.
-the giant artifacts that have been found and that are in museums.beds that are 6 cubits long,36 pound ax heads,large chairs,large door ways,high ceilings etc.
-the fact that this could explain the missing link.
-how the sumerians,myans and egyptians new so much about the stars and planets.
-evidence that earth has been mined in the past using advanced methods....
anyway,you win the astronomy war partner,
take care..............nik
No, I have not read Sitchin. I have, however, read similar junk a few years back (unfortunately, it was in Russian, and I don't remember the author.) What I know about Sitchin is mostly from hearsay (including the web) and from one of the shows he did on Art Bell (back when I actually listened to Art Bell for a few months.)
The problem with all such "investigations" and "meta-theories" -- is that they draw such wide arrays of "evidence". They selectively pick the evidence that suits them from all over the place, and do not bother to mention the abundance of evidence that contradicts them. Moreover, these "theories" often contain logical inconsistencies, or even downright obvious physical impossibilities (ala the 12th planet) -- but the 'researchers' in question choose not to notice such problems (problems which should be obvious to <u>anyone</u> with a Ph.D.)
One of the hallmarks of pseudoscience is that it not only selectively chooses its "evidence" -- but it also overanalyzes the evidence. It is a well-known fact that 'strange' patterns can be uncovered in absolutely anything -- even in the next turd you leave in the toilet. Thus, if you keep searching for patterns, eventually you will find them. That is how come Hoagland sees crystal towers on the moon and pyramid cities with sacred geometry on Mars. That is how come Sitchin draws paralleles between Sumerians and Indians. The problem with all such pseudoscience is that if you look hard enough for <u>anything</u>, you will eventually find it.
Granted, the depth of the "research" sometimes is formidable -- however, if you did not know most of what you learn from these books, you can usually be very certain that there is a lot more you don't know which these books will neglect to mention. Such suspicions are invariably confirmed whenever real experts have a look at the "findings". The problem is, such revelations are never publicized to the lay audience, and the charlatans just change territory or go into hiding for a while, and then just go on selling their crap to yet more gullible victims. They also get convenient protection from assault by unfriendly professionals by claiming everything from conspiracy to institutional persecution.
However, their motives are clear enough when you consider the fact that they choose to never publish their research in scientific circles, have it cross-examined and critiqued by other scientists, or engage in debates on the merits of their theories with other academics. Why such "shyness", especially amidst such self-proclaimed masters of science? The only plausible explanation is that they actually <u>know</u> that their drivel is full of holes. Their prime interest is not a quest for knowledge or understending, not a desire for the betterment of mankind, nor a need to solve some technological hurdle -- they want to sell their books, hold seminars, distribute pamphlets and push newsletters. They are out for money -- just as sharlatans have always been, for centuries and millennia. They used to sell you fake "magic potion cures" -- now they sell you fake "new age science". The goods may have changed, but the methods, the goals and the people have not.
The key in scientific objectivity is to consider all sides, all evidence, all counterarguments -- not just the convenient parts. Once you have adequately educated yourself in actual empirical findings, the history of science, and the prevailing scientific theories as well as their experimental support and the process through which they have emerged -- you begin to see pseudoscientific fraud almost instantaneously, precisely for what it is. It just jumps out at you, like a flat note in a solo performance.
------------------
I am; therefore I think.
[This message has been edited by Boris (edited October 02, 1999).]
The problem with all such "investigations" and "meta-theories" -- is that they draw such wide arrays of "evidence". They selectively pick the evidence that suits them from all over the place, and do not bother to mention the abundance of evidence that contradicts them. Moreover, these "theories" often contain logical inconsistencies, or even downright obvious physical impossibilities (ala the 12th planet) -- but the 'researchers' in question choose not to notice such problems (problems which should be obvious to <u>anyone</u> with a Ph.D.)
One of the hallmarks of pseudoscience is that it not only selectively chooses its "evidence" -- but it also overanalyzes the evidence. It is a well-known fact that 'strange' patterns can be uncovered in absolutely anything -- even in the next turd you leave in the toilet. Thus, if you keep searching for patterns, eventually you will find them. That is how come Hoagland sees crystal towers on the moon and pyramid cities with sacred geometry on Mars. That is how come Sitchin draws paralleles between Sumerians and Indians. The problem with all such pseudoscience is that if you look hard enough for <u>anything</u>, you will eventually find it.
Granted, the depth of the "research" sometimes is formidable -- however, if you did not know most of what you learn from these books, you can usually be very certain that there is a lot more you don't know which these books will neglect to mention. Such suspicions are invariably confirmed whenever real experts have a look at the "findings". The problem is, such revelations are never publicized to the lay audience, and the charlatans just change territory or go into hiding for a while, and then just go on selling their crap to yet more gullible victims. They also get convenient protection from assault by unfriendly professionals by claiming everything from conspiracy to institutional persecution.
However, their motives are clear enough when you consider the fact that they choose to never publish their research in scientific circles, have it cross-examined and critiqued by other scientists, or engage in debates on the merits of their theories with other academics. Why such "shyness", especially amidst such self-proclaimed masters of science? The only plausible explanation is that they actually <u>know</u> that their drivel is full of holes. Their prime interest is not a quest for knowledge or understending, not a desire for the betterment of mankind, nor a need to solve some technological hurdle -- they want to sell their books, hold seminars, distribute pamphlets and push newsletters. They are out for money -- just as sharlatans have always been, for centuries and millennia. They used to sell you fake "magic potion cures" -- now they sell you fake "new age science". The goods may have changed, but the methods, the goals and the people have not.
The key in scientific objectivity is to consider all sides, all evidence, all counterarguments -- not just the convenient parts. Once you have adequately educated yourself in actual empirical findings, the history of science, and the prevailing scientific theories as well as their experimental support and the process through which they have emerged -- you begin to see pseudoscientific fraud almost instantaneously, precisely for what it is. It just jumps out at you, like a flat note in a solo performance.
------------------
I am; therefore I think.
[This message has been edited by Boris (edited October 02, 1999).]
Boris,
You're being a little hypocritical aren't you? You haven't considered all counterarguments to your position. You blatently pass every single one of a zillion of them as stupidity. You haven't done your research, so quit telling everyone else about how they haven't done theirs. Until you get down on your knees and pray, you have no right.
------------------
God loves you and so do I!
You're being a little hypocritical aren't you? You haven't considered all counterarguments to your position. You blatently pass every single one of a zillion of them as stupidity. You haven't done your research, so quit telling everyone else about how they haven't done theirs. Until you get down on your knees and pray, you have no right.
------------------
God loves you and so do I!
boris,
i was willing to back down a bit but now youre just being ignorant and cotradicting your self.
-you must be the smartest person in the world- or universe, to be telling us what is physically impossible.thats pretty neat.maybe you are actually GOD.ive always gone by the notion that ANYTHING is possible.
i guess your mind cannot expand enough.its ok,your only human.
-thats funny how you say that anyone with a phd would recognize the inconsistencies.
did you know that alot of these "pseudoscientists" have phds ?some in more than one field?when sitchin couldnt make sense of something,he went and got a degree in that field so that he could understand it(unlike you,who gives up) man,i cant believe your attitude.why dont you tell us all which people with what phds we are ALLOWED to believe? please help us, we're lost without your guidance.
-have you ever thought that the reason they don't "CHOOSE" to publish theyre material in "scientific circles" is because the close minded, old school bastard scientists(just like the old days) wont let them? im sure sitchin would jump at the chance to be published anywhere ,anytime,and not for the money.the guy has devoted his life to the cause,and if you think its all about money ,you dont know shit about economics.writing books does not nessecarily make you rich.hes no steven king,but the guy has got to make a living too.the poor guy has probably never been laid he works on this stuff so much.
-back in the day,you were probably one of those scared,religious scientists that would not accept that the world was round.now youve been reborn , youre here, but youre still scared. you now know the world is round ,you accept it ,but now you think the universe is flat.......
-and about this "scientific objectivity"? comming from a guy that hasnt read sitchins books? are you objective? -no way!!!! youre not even worth talking to on this subject because you just classify all the "pseudoscieces" together without looking at the differances.in science or anythiing you need to take the time to weed through it all to make a decision or give an opinion.your just crying out like a baby saying that its all the same whether you read it or not...very immature.it reminds me of my 4 year old son,...and my 7 year old is more objectivre than you.
if you want to keep disscussing this issue here ,than you should go read something that has to do with this particular subject.(besides astronomy,weve done that to death-and it seems like thats all you know)
so please go read a book or something,even if its anti sitchin,which according to you shoulnt be hard to find,and get back to us....thanx...nik
i was willing to back down a bit but now youre just being ignorant and cotradicting your self.
-you must be the smartest person in the world- or universe, to be telling us what is physically impossible.thats pretty neat.maybe you are actually GOD.ive always gone by the notion that ANYTHING is possible.
i guess your mind cannot expand enough.its ok,your only human.
-thats funny how you say that anyone with a phd would recognize the inconsistencies.
did you know that alot of these "pseudoscientists" have phds ?some in more than one field?when sitchin couldnt make sense of something,he went and got a degree in that field so that he could understand it(unlike you,who gives up) man,i cant believe your attitude.why dont you tell us all which people with what phds we are ALLOWED to believe? please help us, we're lost without your guidance.
-have you ever thought that the reason they don't "CHOOSE" to publish theyre material in "scientific circles" is because the close minded, old school bastard scientists(just like the old days) wont let them? im sure sitchin would jump at the chance to be published anywhere ,anytime,and not for the money.the guy has devoted his life to the cause,and if you think its all about money ,you dont know shit about economics.writing books does not nessecarily make you rich.hes no steven king,but the guy has got to make a living too.the poor guy has probably never been laid he works on this stuff so much.
-back in the day,you were probably one of those scared,religious scientists that would not accept that the world was round.now youve been reborn , youre here, but youre still scared. you now know the world is round ,you accept it ,but now you think the universe is flat.......
-and about this "scientific objectivity"? comming from a guy that hasnt read sitchins books? are you objective? -no way!!!! youre not even worth talking to on this subject because you just classify all the "pseudoscieces" together without looking at the differances.in science or anythiing you need to take the time to weed through it all to make a decision or give an opinion.your just crying out like a baby saying that its all the same whether you read it or not...very immature.it reminds me of my 4 year old son,...and my 7 year old is more objectivre than you.
if you want to keep disscussing this issue here ,than you should go read something that has to do with this particular subject.(besides astronomy,weve done that to death-and it seems like thats all you know)
so please go read a book or something,even if its anti sitchin,which according to you shoulnt be hard to find,and get back to us....thanx...nik
TROJAN,
sorry,i got caught up in a scrap with boris,like usual,and didnt get to respond.
the connections im refering to are how the sumerians,myans and egyptians all had earlier knowledge of the planets.also they used calenders that were similar that went by the stars.
another thing is that the sumerians predicted certain events that supposedly came true and their writings apparently say that the planet will be comming around in 2013. the maya have a well known calender,(many books have been written-not by sitchin) that supposedly has had predictions come true(one of these was a solar eclipse seen from mexico city,that was accurate to the day-in 1991,strangely enough,this is exactly when mexico city started having major ufo sightings)the wierd thing it that the mayans disappeared without a trace(cant remember exact date) and their calender ends in mid december,2012.(close to 2013).
the other thing that is similar is the archetecture.ive been to these places and have seen these similarities.its unreal.in peru,some of the rocks are 5-25 tons and you can go see where they where moved from, a place 2-3 miles away.its a mystery how they moved them.but anyway,there are similarities(and differences of course)they used sun dials,had temples or a place to worship,the mayans and egyptians both had pyramids (although the mayan's are smaller and flat on top) and there is new evidence-new to me(that i just found out)that there are pyramid type structures and temples somewhere in the jungles of asia or the orient-i cant remember where,but i saw it on tv and they looked closer to the maya style to me.i plan to find out more asap(maybe someone reading this can help me out)i want to go there.
-in sitchins book he says that all the giants had their own cities on earth,all similar but still unique to each gods(giants)character and style.id have to go back and read his books again to give good details,all i know is that when i read them and went travelling i was freaked out.its kind of a thing you have to see for your self.and im not saying that i believe everything sitchin says,theres some pretty wacko stuff,but i feel he guesses at some stuff to fill in the blanks.
i was also at the nazca lines in southern peru and couldnt believe the large pictographs that you can only see from the air.there were pictures of animals, circles,and the man they call"astronaughto"he looks like he has a helmet on and hes waving.these drawings have been there for hundreds of years,before anyone could fly.we had to go up in a crappy little plane to see tham.
anyway,igot off a little,but i have to go for now........thanx for the interset.....nik
sorry,i got caught up in a scrap with boris,like usual,and didnt get to respond.
the connections im refering to are how the sumerians,myans and egyptians all had earlier knowledge of the planets.also they used calenders that were similar that went by the stars.
another thing is that the sumerians predicted certain events that supposedly came true and their writings apparently say that the planet will be comming around in 2013. the maya have a well known calender,(many books have been written-not by sitchin) that supposedly has had predictions come true(one of these was a solar eclipse seen from mexico city,that was accurate to the day-in 1991,strangely enough,this is exactly when mexico city started having major ufo sightings)the wierd thing it that the mayans disappeared without a trace(cant remember exact date) and their calender ends in mid december,2012.(close to 2013).
the other thing that is similar is the archetecture.ive been to these places and have seen these similarities.its unreal.in peru,some of the rocks are 5-25 tons and you can go see where they where moved from, a place 2-3 miles away.its a mystery how they moved them.but anyway,there are similarities(and differences of course)they used sun dials,had temples or a place to worship,the mayans and egyptians both had pyramids (although the mayan's are smaller and flat on top) and there is new evidence-new to me(that i just found out)that there are pyramid type structures and temples somewhere in the jungles of asia or the orient-i cant remember where,but i saw it on tv and they looked closer to the maya style to me.i plan to find out more asap(maybe someone reading this can help me out)i want to go there.
-in sitchins book he says that all the giants had their own cities on earth,all similar but still unique to each gods(giants)character and style.id have to go back and read his books again to give good details,all i know is that when i read them and went travelling i was freaked out.its kind of a thing you have to see for your self.and im not saying that i believe everything sitchin says,theres some pretty wacko stuff,but i feel he guesses at some stuff to fill in the blanks.
i was also at the nazca lines in southern peru and couldnt believe the large pictographs that you can only see from the air.there were pictures of animals, circles,and the man they call"astronaughto"he looks like he has a helmet on and hes waving.these drawings have been there for hundreds of years,before anyone could fly.we had to go up in a crappy little plane to see tham.
anyway,igot off a little,but i have to go for now........thanx for the interset.....nik
Boris,
Sitchin is not a pseudoscientist.
When he was very young studying both the scripture and ancient writings he was
criticized for taking the text literaly.
If you say the key to scientific objectivity is to study all sides then we
have failed. Sitchin research is nothing
short of extraordinary and has opened the eyes of scientists. He is a recognized
scholar not a fruitcake. He regrets not publishing in scientific journals of which he could of easily done I geuss
this genius underestimated people who think as you do. If its not in a scientific journal its not a fact right?
This type of thinking has kept mankind
blind for thousands of years. The truth
is our scientists are not objective at least not in public.
Alien
Sitchin is not a pseudoscientist.
When he was very young studying both the scripture and ancient writings he was
criticized for taking the text literaly.
If you say the key to scientific objectivity is to study all sides then we
have failed. Sitchin research is nothing
short of extraordinary and has opened the eyes of scientists. He is a recognized
scholar not a fruitcake. He regrets not publishing in scientific journals of which he could of easily done I geuss
this genius underestimated people who think as you do. If its not in a scientific journal its not a fact right?
This type of thinking has kept mankind
blind for thousands of years. The truth
is our scientists are not objective at least not in public.
Alien
Sitchin may be wrong about the twelfth planet
in Sumeria. The orbit he says was in the Bible and the constellations it passes through fit the orbit of Halley's comet. The 1986 NASA handbook shows it's orbit and the constellations are the same. He may have come across an earlier sighting of the comet and it was not the planet. I would like to see actual photographs of the carvings which he claims to show a rocket in flight and one on the ground. The planet still could be very real and does fit what the ancients say will happen when they return to earth. The gravity of the larger planet will cause great disturbances on the earth. The Mayans are still in South America as their descendents live there now. They think a drought may have caused then to move to more fertile ground for farming. Have any of you seen the show about the sphinx and the pyramids? There is some solid science behind the weathering on the sphinx and its true age and on the pyramids being laid out like the stars in Orion.
in Sumeria. The orbit he says was in the Bible and the constellations it passes through fit the orbit of Halley's comet. The 1986 NASA handbook shows it's orbit and the constellations are the same. He may have come across an earlier sighting of the comet and it was not the planet. I would like to see actual photographs of the carvings which he claims to show a rocket in flight and one on the ground. The planet still could be very real and does fit what the ancients say will happen when they return to earth. The gravity of the larger planet will cause great disturbances on the earth. The Mayans are still in South America as their descendents live there now. They think a drought may have caused then to move to more fertile ground for farming. Have any of you seen the show about the sphinx and the pyramids? There is some solid science behind the weathering on the sphinx and its true age and on the pyramids being laid out like the stars in Orion.
Cats,
Yes I saw a documentary on the pyramids and it was very fascinating. There was a
lot of drawings etc that were left out of even the bible because we did not understand it including drawings of rockets on ground and in flight,Even text
describing their flight. A lot of this
stuff was hidden because it did not fit
our model of the bible and who we are.
There is a lot of recent finds in the basement of the Smithsonian. You may ask why it is there.Well lets just say it would cause some problems with what we believe.
Alien
Yes I saw a documentary on the pyramids and it was very fascinating. There was a
lot of drawings etc that were left out of even the bible because we did not understand it including drawings of rockets on ground and in flight,Even text
describing their flight. A lot of this
stuff was hidden because it did not fit
our model of the bible and who we are.
There is a lot of recent finds in the basement of the Smithsonian. You may ask why it is there.Well lets just say it would cause some problems with what we believe.
Alien
alien,
i think you are right.same with trojan.look,this planet,especially our country,is all about money.and our country is all about keeping the peace all over this planet.nobody that has power wants any disruptions in the "system". think about if you were a powerful figure in government,and you and other top figures had this info of aliens,or ancient planets on there way for a visit.would you want to blurt it out to 6 billion people? no. we've always been spoon fed info the way they want.ive even heard that the government has funded certain alien movies in the early 80s-like close encounters,and E T.what better way to butter us up.the inside operation of the government is pretty smart and manipulative.there are theories about how the government "knows things" that we dont and they like it that way. dont forget , knowledge is power.
there are those who think that governments are trying to form a "one world government"
but why?to enslave all of us?i dont really know why people think that.the break up of russia,europes joint efforts and their new "eurodollar"freak alot of poeple.iv even read that u.s. soldiers are complaining about and refuse to wear the blue un barets when on missions around the world.they say theyre americans,not the worlds army.
then,since we're kind of on a government topic,theres the waco incident that i have been investigating lately for a class im in.
i was shocked to find all the secrets that are "kind of " comming out.i say kind of because theyre there ,but you have to look for them.i used to be a cop ,and i cant believe that these fbi,atf,and delta force guys that caused this mass murder are not in jail.they broke so many criminal laws, police rules of engagement, and civil rights laws, its not even funny.it makes all these school shootings lately look like a picnic.the thing is they probably wont ever be charged.if the government can hide or attempt to hide ruby ridge,waco,and jfk info and other "local" events, then im sure they would and could hide major information.i dont want to get too anti government here,i love this country,but they are probably monitoring us right now.just kidding.one thing though,with a government this sneaky you never want to give up your right to bare arms...trust me.but thats another topic..............nik
i think you are right.same with trojan.look,this planet,especially our country,is all about money.and our country is all about keeping the peace all over this planet.nobody that has power wants any disruptions in the "system". think about if you were a powerful figure in government,and you and other top figures had this info of aliens,or ancient planets on there way for a visit.would you want to blurt it out to 6 billion people? no. we've always been spoon fed info the way they want.ive even heard that the government has funded certain alien movies in the early 80s-like close encounters,and E T.what better way to butter us up.the inside operation of the government is pretty smart and manipulative.there are theories about how the government "knows things" that we dont and they like it that way. dont forget , knowledge is power.
there are those who think that governments are trying to form a "one world government"
but why?to enslave all of us?i dont really know why people think that.the break up of russia,europes joint efforts and their new "eurodollar"freak alot of poeple.iv even read that u.s. soldiers are complaining about and refuse to wear the blue un barets when on missions around the world.they say theyre americans,not the worlds army.
then,since we're kind of on a government topic,theres the waco incident that i have been investigating lately for a class im in.
i was shocked to find all the secrets that are "kind of " comming out.i say kind of because theyre there ,but you have to look for them.i used to be a cop ,and i cant believe that these fbi,atf,and delta force guys that caused this mass murder are not in jail.they broke so many criminal laws, police rules of engagement, and civil rights laws, its not even funny.it makes all these school shootings lately look like a picnic.the thing is they probably wont ever be charged.if the government can hide or attempt to hide ruby ridge,waco,and jfk info and other "local" events, then im sure they would and could hide major information.i dont want to get too anti government here,i love this country,but they are probably monitoring us right now.just kidding.one thing though,with a government this sneaky you never want to give up your right to bare arms...trust me.but thats another topic..............nik
Nik,
Being a cop has undoubtedly made you
aware of how things really are at the state level which a lot of people do not
realize. I know a few officers who worked where I live and boy some of the stuff they tell me about local politics and what goes on. After Waco, on national television (I believe it was the director of FBI said ) "We don't care what the american people think we think we did the right thing" I was just shaking my head
while watching.A lot of new evidence came to light recently and the whole Waco incident will go to court again it should be a real eye opener from what I've heard. People I hope realize that a lot of very bright people work for the government directly or indirectly. They have been quite successful but I believe
it wont last for long people can only take so much of the lies.Just ask as many people as you want on a given day about
whether or not the government hides things most will have more than enough to say. I've had the pleasure to talk to those who have had high clearances and they see things no differently.They had to go along or suffer the consequences.
I better be careful on what I post a
guy took pictures of contrails and posted them on his website.You wouldn't believe how many government agency hits it recieved. I agree with everything in your post nik we are spoonfed on what to believe don't let anyone convince you otherwise.Take care.
Time reveals all
Alien
Being a cop has undoubtedly made you
aware of how things really are at the state level which a lot of people do not
realize. I know a few officers who worked where I live and boy some of the stuff they tell me about local politics and what goes on. After Waco, on national television (I believe it was the director of FBI said ) "We don't care what the american people think we think we did the right thing" I was just shaking my head
while watching.A lot of new evidence came to light recently and the whole Waco incident will go to court again it should be a real eye opener from what I've heard. People I hope realize that a lot of very bright people work for the government directly or indirectly. They have been quite successful but I believe
it wont last for long people can only take so much of the lies.Just ask as many people as you want on a given day about
whether or not the government hides things most will have more than enough to say. I've had the pleasure to talk to those who have had high clearances and they see things no differently.They had to go along or suffer the consequences.
I better be careful on what I post a
guy took pictures of contrails and posted them on his website.You wouldn't believe how many government agency hits it recieved. I agree with everything in your post nik we are spoonfed on what to believe don't let anyone convince you otherwise.Take care.
Time reveals all
Alien
I think some of the problems are from beaucrats trying to justify their jobs and the knowledge they can do want they want and congress, as usual, will say they will do something about it and that is all. The lust for power and they think they know what is best. I have seen UFOs back in Clinton, Iowa, when I was in jr. college there. My late wife saw one here a few years ago. It was going from East to West.
Nik - I am really curious about what you have discovered in your research about the 12th Planet and the larger picture of it all.
Here is a site You should read..
www.prophetic.simplenet.org
Don't know if you allready know about it, but i hope you tell can me/us some more about your findings and beliefs
Here is a site You should read..
www.prophetic.simplenet.org
Don't know if you allready know about it, but i hope you tell can me/us some more about your findings and beliefs
Hey nik,
Don't let the anti-social personalities of this board get you down. There are only a couple of them who post on this board, however they are very vocal. They claim to be the "know it alls", however their field of so-called knowledge comes across as very narrow and rigid. They MIGHT have above average classical intelligence IQ's (they might even be idiot savants), however their emotional IQ's and broad base of knowledge are severely lacking. My advice to you... Don't do their homework for them. No matter what "proof" you offer, they will not accept it unless they have been "told" that it is so and sanctioned by the "mainstream" of their severely limited community.
Bygones!
------------------
Have a great day!
Don't let the anti-social personalities of this board get you down. There are only a couple of them who post on this board, however they are very vocal. They claim to be the "know it alls", however their field of so-called knowledge comes across as very narrow and rigid. They MIGHT have above average classical intelligence IQ's (they might even be idiot savants), however their emotional IQ's and broad base of knowledge are severely lacking. My advice to you... Don't do their homework for them. No matter what "proof" you offer, they will not accept it unless they have been "told" that it is so and sanctioned by the "mainstream" of their severely limited community.
Bygones!
------------------
Have a great day!