049) VIEW TO THE CAMP AND GOLDEN CALF ALTAR FROM THE CAVE OF ELIJAH
Did Nothing Create Everything?
- Thread starter SetiAlpha6
- Start date
049) VIEW TO THE CAMP AND GOLDEN CALF ALTAR FROM THE CAVE OF ELIJAH
050) BLACKENED ARC ON THE HORIZON - VIEW BACK TOWARDS THE CAVE
051) ANCIENT PETROGLYPH OF THE MENORA - DR SUNG HAK KIM
052) ROTATED - HAS SEVEN ROUNDED BRANCHES AND A TWO LAYERED BASE
The Menorah was made of gold at Mt Sinai, at the command of God.
This Menorah Petroglyph is found in Saudi Arabia, near the Mountain of God, and matches the proportions and even the two leveled base design, of the last known depiction of the Menorah on the Arch of Titus, when it disappeared into the pages of history. For the Menorah Petroglyph to be that accurate, would have likely required an eye witness. Over 1000 years later eyewitnesses of the Menorah at that time would likely have assisted with the sculpture on the Arch of Titus. Making the Romans a witness to the very same artifact that was made at the Mountain of God.
You shall make a menorah of pure beaten gold—its shaft and branches—with its cups and knobs and petals springing directly from it. Six branches are to extend from its sides, three branches on one side, and three on the other. On one branch there are to be three cups, shaped like almond blossoms, each with its knob and petals; on the opposite branch there are to be three cups, shaped like almond blossoms, each with its knob and petals; and so for the six branches that extend from the menorah. On the menorah there are to be four cups, shaped like almond blossoms, with their knobs and petals. The six branches that go out from the menorah are to have a knob under each pair. Their knobs and branches shall so spring from it that the whole will form a single piece of pure beaten gold. You shall then make seven lamps for it and so set up the lamps that they give their light on the space in front of the menorah. These, as well as the trimming shears and trays,ust be of pure gold. Use a talentof pure gold for the menorah and all these utensils. See that you make them according to the pattern shown you on the mountain. Exodus 32:25-28
053) ARCH OF TITUS ON THE VIA SACRA - BUILT IN 81 AD - TO COMMEMORATE THE VICTORIES OF TITUS
054) ONE OF THE BOUNDARY MARKERS IN FRONT OF THE MOUNTAIN TO PROTECT THE LIVES OF THE PEOPLE
055) BOUNDARY WARNINGS OF DEATH BY ARROWS FOR TOUCHING THE MOUNTAIN OF GOD
056) BOUNDARY WARNINGS OF DEATH BY ARROWS FOR TOUCHING THE MOUNTAIN OF GOD
057) ADDITIONAL ARTIFACTS FOUND AT THE SITE - DR KIM
058) THE SPLIT ROCK THAT GOD USED TO PROVIDE WATER - JOEL RICHARDSON
(PLEASE SEE THE INFORMATION ON THE SPLIT ROCK PROVIDED EARLIER IN THIS THREAD IF YOU WISH)
GOOGLE EARTH COORDINATES >
SPLIT ROCK AT REPHIDIM
(WATER FROM THE ROCK)
28°43'36.92"N 35°14'10.07"E
SPLIT ROCK AT REPHIDIM MOSAIC ALTAR LOCATION
(ADONI NISSI, ADONI IS MY BANNER)
28°43'32.63"N 35°14'8.28"E
SPLIT ROCK AT REPHIDIM WATER EROSION AREA STILL VISIBLE
28°43'41.95"N 35°14'4.92"E
Moon On The Mosses!
You aren't interested in being saved?
Yeah your right anyway, this is now simply spamming and needs to be reported.
You are sounding like some Savior trying to save the masses Seti.
I havn't said much with regards to your nonsense, but what you need to realize is that at this time, God or any other deity is nothing more then a superfluous myth, not needed, at least back to t=10-43 seconds.
And on the other matter re your claims of the supposed reality of certain biblical artifacts and regions....
We also [according to some] have seen this face on Mars...realistic erh?
Here's a close up....
Thanks for posting those!
They are Great Fun!
And evidence as to how some gullible fools can be lead to believe anything they wish!
Moderator note: SetiAlpha6 has been warned for spamming sciforums with many photos cut-and-pasted from another site without commentary or analysis.
While it is conceivable that these images could be relevant to an argument SetiAlpha6 is making, it would be far better to post the argument and link to the site containing the relevant images. All of these photographs appear to come from the same source, which does not need to be duplicated on sciforums.
While it is conceivable that these images could be relevant to an argument SetiAlpha6 is making, it would be far better to post the argument and link to the site containing the relevant images. All of these photographs appear to come from the same source, which does not need to be duplicated on sciforums.
I appreciate your warning!
James this is the only way I can even begin to make an argument for the Mountain of God.
Which you all have basically asked me to do.
These photographs are from many different sources, which I tried to communicate in the first post along with my Hypothesis. Please see the Hypothesis post on Thread Page 59.
All of the files exist on my own computer and in some cases only on my own computer. In some cases I am the primary source for the image, in other cases I am not.
Sorry, it was the only way I had to take people there so they could see the evidence at the Site.
So people can see the evidence and decide for themselves.
I know you believe in the spirit of discovery and in freewill!
Thank you all for your gracious tolerance of me!
Last edited:
Thanks for posting the other articles, which I'd like to point out are papers (not books that have to be purchased) outlining the many faults and flaws of the alleged evidence. It would certainly appear the papers are scientific while the alleged evidence is not. One point, as an example of the many presented, is the blackening of the mountains, which is explained in the papers from a scientific geological analysis while the alleged evidence simply asserts it's from fire and makes absolutely no effort to explain. It would seem the alleged evidence is NOT backed up by science but instead is merely another attempt by theists to baffle us with bs.
SetiAlpha6:
It looks to me like you've spent a lot of time reading up on the Mountain of God thing. What I wonder is how much attention you have paid to the literature that you must have come across that throws doubt on the idea that this was the site of events in Exodus.
If you spend all your time looking for evidence that tends to confirm what you'd like to believe, and little to no time looking at the other side of the argument, then you can easily give yourself the impression that all or most of the evidence supports your theory. It's called confirmation bias and it's a very easy trap to fall into.
You posted a lot of photographs of a desert/mountain area above, all nicely labelled with things like "altar of Moses" and "Site of the Golden Calf" and so on. The problem with holding up that kind of thing as evidence is that I could take any similar set of photographs of an archeological site and stick similar labels on them, thereby claiming that I'd discovered the One True Site of whatever biblical or other mythological story I wanted.
A similar example that comes to mind are the various "discoveries" of the supposed resting place of Noah's Ark. A number of people have suggested various different sites that they say contain clear evidence of the Ark. One problem is that there's no consensus on which one of the suggested sites is the "real" one, if any of them are. But the kind of evidence provided is the same kind you're offering here: nicely labelled photographs, usually of rock formations in the case of Noah's Ark claims. A pointy-looking rock becomes the "bow" of the Ark. A flattish area becomes the "deck" and so on and so forth. The thing is, if you go into this kind of investigation with a prior belief in mind then after a while you start to see only what you want to see. You can end up going out of your way to try to jam every piece of evidence into your preferred narrative, completely losing sight of all the other possible explanations (the "bow" and "deck" are just natural rock formations, explainable with reference to the ordinary geology of the area, for instance).
That's interesting. If you have direct on-the-ground observations, I'd be interested to hear about them. Are you an expert in any of the fields that are relevant to studying archeological sites?
It looks to me like you've spent a lot of time reading up on the Mountain of God thing. What I wonder is how much attention you have paid to the literature that you must have come across that throws doubt on the idea that this was the site of events in Exodus.
If you spend all your time looking for evidence that tends to confirm what you'd like to believe, and little to no time looking at the other side of the argument, then you can easily give yourself the impression that all or most of the evidence supports your theory. It's called confirmation bias and it's a very easy trap to fall into.
You posted a lot of photographs of a desert/mountain area above, all nicely labelled with things like "altar of Moses" and "Site of the Golden Calf" and so on. The problem with holding up that kind of thing as evidence is that I could take any similar set of photographs of an archeological site and stick similar labels on them, thereby claiming that I'd discovered the One True Site of whatever biblical or other mythological story I wanted.
A similar example that comes to mind are the various "discoveries" of the supposed resting place of Noah's Ark. A number of people have suggested various different sites that they say contain clear evidence of the Ark. One problem is that there's no consensus on which one of the suggested sites is the "real" one, if any of them are. But the kind of evidence provided is the same kind you're offering here: nicely labelled photographs, usually of rock formations in the case of Noah's Ark claims. A pointy-looking rock becomes the "bow" of the Ark. A flattish area becomes the "deck" and so on and so forth. The thing is, if you go into this kind of investigation with a prior belief in mind then after a while you start to see only what you want to see. You can end up going out of your way to try to jam every piece of evidence into your preferred narrative, completely losing sight of all the other possible explanations (the "bow" and "deck" are just natural rock formations, explainable with reference to the ordinary geology of the area, for instance).
Are you saying you have travelled to the place yourself and taken your own photographs?
That's interesting. If you have direct on-the-ground observations, I'd be interested to hear about them. Are you an expert in any of the fields that are relevant to studying archeological sites?
Thanks for your questions James.
In the Hypothesis post on Thread Page 59 I provided two sources that are VERY opposed to the Hypothesis, so everyone could review them as they wish to.
Those are the best and most comprehensive statements against the Hypothesis I have seen, so far.
They are provided once more below for your convenience...
Against the Hypothesis -
http://www.ldolphin.org/franz-ellawz.html
https://againstjebelallawz.wordpress.com/jebel-al-lawz/
I have reviewed them both myself and personally find them to be unpersuasive.
But, I also do not want anyone to take my word for it.
I have a Christian bias, so I have to attempt to overcome that.
Both of the "Against" authors also seem to have their own biases.
The bottom line for me is that everyone has to decide for themselves.
Regarding the Photos I posted...
I have been studying the Site(s), for around 5 years now.
I am not a scientist or an expert in any of the necessary fields of study.
So I am limited, and I have to rely on the expertise of others.
I have not yet been to the Sites personally. I may in the future?
Saudi Arabia just opened their borders allowing Tourist Visas for the first time (as of September 28 2019).
Tours of these and many other Sites within the country are just beginning to take place this year (2020).
At this point, I have a library of thousands of photographs from many different photographers, documents, HD Drone Videos, Google Earth links, etc.
I get and want no credit for them.
For Sciforums...
I dug into my library of Photos, and drastically cut down and organized the number of Photos to what I presented here.
I resized, numbered and labeled them, and tried to provide a description and Google Earth Coordinates where possible.
But I also left out some things as well, because of time limitations. I was also worried about posting to much.
I tried to provide a general list of sources for the photos, but did not attempt to credit the source for each photograph individually.
In many cases that is unknown and would only be a guess.
I am a primary source for the Slides presented which are Google Earth screen shots with Labels on them.
Some of the Slides existed only on my computer, because they were Video Screen Captures used to show detail.
I also cropped some of the photos and added text to a few of them.
I created the first Title Screen Slide by taking a shot of the Mountain, and then I added the Text. (as an example)
Best Regards!
Last edited: