It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Finding Nimrod

page: 3
9
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 29 2016 @ 11:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Byrd
Turns out it is spelled "Nemrod", Here's an excerpt from Joseph Farrell's book Babylon Banksters, The Alchemy of Deep Physics, High Finance and Ancient Religion (p.274, THE MYTH OF THE ROTHSCHILD DESCENT FROM NIMROD: A SECOND LOOK)




The famous register of nobility in Britain, Burkes’ Peerage, records numerous instances of members of the European Rothschild clan marrying each other. For example,it records that Evelina de Rothschild, daughter of Lionel Nathan Baron de Rothschild and Charlotte de Rothschild, married Ferdinand James Anselm Rothschild, who was the son of Anselm Salomon Rothschild and Charlotte Rothschild.485 Salomon Albert Anselm Rothschild was son of Anselm Salomon and Charlotte Rothschild, and married Bettina Caroline de Rothschild, daughter of Mayer Alphonse de Rothschild and Leonora de Rothschild.486

But interestingly enough, in the midst of this consanguineous interbreeding warren, Alphonse Mayer Rothschild and Clarice Sebag-Montefiore had a son, born in 1922, to whom they gave the peculiarly Jewish-Christian-“Babylonian” name of Albert Anselm Salomon Nimrod Rothschild.487 The child died only 16 years later, in 1938.

Of course, one male heir in all of the proliferating Rothschild warren is hardly conclusive, but it is suggestive that the name had some significance for the clan known only to itself. But there is something else that suggests that the allegation must be taken seriously. Among the banking clan’s vast financial network, there is one financial group that raises the eyebrows, and this is the “Rothschild Nemrod Diversified Holdings”group.488 The name “Nemrod” is of course yet another phoneticization of the name “Nimrod,” since the biblical character’s name, in ancient Hebrew, was written without vowels as simply NMRD. It can thus be phoneticized as Nimrod, Nimrud, Nemrod, Nemrud, and so on. The use of the biblical conqueror’s name for a mutual fund investment group thus connotes aggressiveness, risk-taking, and an intention to dominate and conquer (by financial means, of course).

By why the evident obsession of such families— witness the Rothschild dynasty — with marrying distant relatives and members of their own clans and classes? The answer to that question requires a closer look at human DNA, at its own remarkable connections to sacred geometries and the alchemical physics of the medium, and at the family tree of Nimrod himself.740/967


Here's a link to a brief review of Farrell's book henrymakow.com
edit on 09 11 2015 by MaxTamesSiva because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 09:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: MaxTamesSiva
a reply to: Byrd
Turns out it is spelled "Nemrod", Here's an excerpt from Joseph Farrell's book Babylon Banksters, The Alchemy of Deep Physics, High Finance and Ancient Religion (p.274, THE MYTH OF THE ROTHSCHILD DESCENT FROM NIMROD: A SECOND LOOK)


...
Of course, one male heir in all of the proliferating Rothschild warren is hardly conclusive...


Indeed. And given that the MOST common name in the family appears to be "James" (28 times) it's just darn odd that he focuses on the one with "Nimrod" - who does exactly nothing and who dies at age 16.

There's also 23 Meyers, 23 Nathans, 22 Louis-es, 8 Salomons - and that's without going into the women.



Among the banking clan’s vast financial network, there is one financial group that raises the eyebrows, and this is the “Rothschild Nemrod Diversified Holdings”group.488 The name “Nemrod” is of course yet another phoneticization of the name “Nimrod,” since the biblical character’s name, in ancient Hebrew, was written without vowels as simply NMRD. It can thus be phoneticized as Nimrod, Nimrud, Nemrod, Nemrud, and so on. The use of the biblical conqueror’s name for a mutual fund investment group thus connotes aggressiveness, risk-taking, and an intention to dominate and conquer (by financial means, of course).


...and if that's what it was, it was a pretty sad failure.

It started around 2012 (no 5 year history), and it's part of the Blackpoint funds (www.rothschild.com...). The Blackpoint Funds have only been around since 1993 (so ... 23 years.)

You can check it out on the London Stock Market (Blackpoint Nemrod Diversified Funds) and neither it nor any of their other funds can hold a candle to the T. Rowe Price and Oppenheimer Funds, just two of many that have hugely outperformed them.

If you look at the financials on Nemrod, you will see that it was started around 2011 and is one portfolio of a fund that's only been around for 23 years (1993) - and why would they name it after a boy (1922) who was born 71 years before the 1993 Blackrock funds (90 years before the "Nemrod venture") who died at age 16 - or bother to tie such a minor portfolio item to some sort of legendary king?

If "nimrod" had such a meaning to the family, why wasn't it used as estate names, personal names, fund names, trust names, charity names for the past 280 years?

And why does a fund that has only a "middling" performance raise eyebrows while the superstar funds don't rate a twitch? (other than he can't make a case of "Nimrod-by-association" with these)?

I think he's imagining a connection here.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 09:29 PM
link   
a reply to: MaxTamesSiva

Thank you for the info! I didn't know any of that about the world's most secretive and powerful family(s). To be honest, I think you are very much on to something here. Though proof will likely never serface. Being related to Hitler isn't really something you'd want people to know either...

Thank you to all who took this subject seriously... I know we're a part of the minority in the world. Challenging the "professionals" regarding history or having an open mind and imagination won't get you far when people will hear nothing of it...

The truth is out there.



posted on Mar, 31 2016 @ 03:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Byrd
You are right, Farrell pointed out just 2 minor facts regarding the myth that the Rothschilds are descendants of Nimrod and made a speculation that there might be something more to it. He didn't even mention the source of that myth, so it still doesn't have a leg to stand on. Yeah, awesome questions that I would also want to know the answers.

What I like about Farrell is he's always open to be proven wrong and he's not afraid to speculate no matter how bizarre it sounds. What more can I say? I'm a woo monger that's why I love it here.

And speaking of woo, what if The Nimrod Group turns out to be also legit- set up on a free website, working out of a post office box (not a real office) ... registered by an Australian domain name server... Not to mention the efficacious billionaire's website has two glaring spelling errors on their home page, as you and SargonThrall pointed out? What could be a better low profile front for the Rothschilds high roller deals? I look at it as an ultra rich insider's humor.

Maybe most of you already knew this but I'll just throw it out out here:
The Statue of Liberty Holds the Torch of Nimrod?





The statue, a gift to the United States from the people of France, is of a robed female figure representing Libertas, the Roman goddess of freedom. Who is "Libertas"? She is Semiramis - Babylonian Ishtar (Easter) = Ashtaroth = Whore of Babylon = Aphrodite = Libertas = the Statue of Liberty! Semiramis became known as "Ishtar" which is pronounced "Easter", and her moon egg became known as "Ishtar's" egg."




Statue of Liberty" represents Semiramis, wife of Nimrod and Queen of Babylon, which would be quite a revelation in Christian America and indeed to Christians all round the world because the "Statue of Liberty" is an international symbol and it is not widely known that it has pagan meaning.


Was Nimrod's wife Semiramis also Nimrod's mother? The men behind the Statute of Liberty are also intriguing to say the least. Can we also trace a Rothschild connection?
Sources:
spreadthetruthblog.com
grahamhancock.com
mystery-babylon.org
biblepaedia.wordpress.com

a reply to: kef33890
Don't mention it, well, I guess I already reached my woo quota for the day. By the way, is it true that Nimrod's birthday is December 25?

Are you calling off the search party?


edit on 09 11 2015 by MaxTamesSiva because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 31 2016 @ 03:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: MaxTamesSiva
a reply to: Byrd
You are right, Farrell pointed out just 2 minor facts regarding the myth that the Rothschilds are descendants of Nimrod


You might doublecheck Farrell here... which sources talk about Nimrod having children?

None of the historical candidates ever established a lineage.


And speaking of woo, what if The Nimrod Group turns out to be also legit- set up on a free website, working out of a post office box (not a real office) ... registered by an Australian domain name server... Not to mention the efficacious billionaire's website has two glaring spelling errors on their home page, as you and SargonThrall pointed out? What could be a better low profile front for the Rothschilds high roller deals? I look at it as an ultra rich insider's humor.


The old "I'm going to have some yahoo set up a fake website and then abandon it" gambit?

You'd think the Rothschilds with all their money and advisors and contacts could do something a little less lame like... a "I'm staying low profile so I'm not on the Internet and not in the phonebook" gambit. Or the "I have a DBA (doing business as license that allows you to use a different name) and I'm setting up deals there as Hornswatter Mumpletop or something? Or the standard, "don't talk to me.. talk to my lawyer/business manager?"

edit on 31-3-2016 by Byrd because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 31 2016 @ 03:43 PM
link   
a reply to: MaxTamesSiva

(it cut off the second half of my post. Bah)



Maybe most of you already knew this but I'll just throw it out out here:
The Statue of Liberty Holds the Torch of Nimrod?


The statue, a gift to the United States from the people of France, is of a robed female figure representing Libertas, the Roman goddess of freedom. Who is "Libertas"? She is Semiramis - Babylonian Ishtar (Easter) = Ashtaroth = Whore of Babylon = Aphrodite = Libertas = the Statue of Liberty! Semiramis became known as "Ishtar" which is pronounced "Easter", and her moon egg became known as "Ishtar's" egg."



Better backtrack that "chain of evidence." Libertas was not a goddess before the 2nd Punic wars, Ishtar and Inanna were the same/similar and were goddesses of sex and war (but not freedom.) She didn't have a "moon egg." "Ishtar" is not pronounced "Easter". Easter comes from the Hebrew word for Passover. The idea that it means a (unknown) Celtic goddess comes from the Venerable Bede (725 AD)

Semiramis was never worshipped as a goddess.


Was Nimrod's wife Semiramis also Nimrod's mother? The men behind the Statute of Liberty are also intriguing to say the least. Can we also trace a Rothschild connection?
Sources:
spreadthetruthblog.com
grahamhancock.com
mystery-babylon.org
biblepaedia.wordpress.com


So you're saying that a legendary (unattested) king from 3000 BC...who conquered an area of territory about the same size that Alexander did ... then
* marries the (probable) wife of Ninius in 2300 BC
* but who's actually his... 700-800 year old mother
* and they both somehow forgot that she's his mother
* and even at age 700-800 she was still a hottie?
* And a thousand years after that she's so devilishly attractive that she re-marries Ninius who is Nimrod (serial mother marriage? Man, there's amnesia for you)
* She calls herself Sammuramat
* now she is the "whore of Babylon" - a city that she and her husband don't even rule
* And then 400 years after that, Nimrod (probably still recovering from his serial "mother of all amnesias" events) runs off and teaches the Persians to worship fire?
* And gives them a torch for a symbol?


...and people buy books full of this stuff. I think we need a better class of woo.
edit on 31-3-2016 by Byrd because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 31 2016 @ 04:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Byrd


You might doublecheck Farrell here... which sources talk about Nimrod having children? None of the historical candidates ever established a lineage.

As I have said, Farrell didn't mention the source of the myth that the Rothschilds are descendants of Nimrod or as you pointed out, if Nimrod had any children at all. This time I'll steer clear from what could be questionable sources. This is going to be a long read and I''ll get back to you if I find something worth posting. I'll limit my reading to this 2 sources:
oi.uchicago.edu
etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk...



The old "I'm going to have some yahoo set up a fake website and then abandon it" gambit?
You'd think the Rothschilds with all their money and advisors and contacts could do something a little less lame like... a "I'm staying low profile so I'm not on the Internet and not in the phonebook" gambit. Or the "I have a DBA (doing business as license that allows you to use a different name) and I'm setting up deals there as Hornswatter Mumpletop or something? Or the standard, "don't talk to me.. talk to my lawyer/business manager?"

My apologies for a poor attempt at humor and my hodge podge research. I will try to rectify it and maybe tone down on woo a bit.


...and people buy books full of this stuff. I think we need a better class of woo.

That hurts a bit, but I appreciate your candor.




edit on 09 11 2015 by MaxTamesSiva because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 31 2016 @ 06:05 PM
link   
a reply to: MaxTamesSiva

To be fair, you are asking honestly about some interesting things and although I'm pretty sure I know them to be incorrect, some of the "OMG! Wrong!" is just knee-jerk on my part. I have learned from years here that the minute my "gut" tells me I'm wrong, that I need to stop and start backtracking to find out what came from where and then what the researchers know.

There's been more than once that I started to answer someone on these boards with "Hopping Fantods! You're WRONG"... only to check MY sources and find out that (whoops!) I was wrong. When people like you engage me in discourse like this, I end up learning a lot.

And I haven't seen the details of these claims (which you are presenting to me in nicely abbreviated form, saving me (yay!) from hours of watching videos (boo!) or picking up a book that I'd be throwing at the wall inside five minutes instead of actually reading it.) No, I don't mind, and no, I don't think poorly of you.

So, thank you for the interesting dialogue.



posted on Apr, 1 2016 @ 01:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Byrd

Well I can easily understand the confusion, but let me try to clear it up. The Semeramis of 700 bc was actually named after the real Simeramis of around 2200 bc. An adjusted time frame also places Enmerkar/Kulla/Balih around that same time (2200 b.c.) The King Ninus in Greek/Assyrian history is the same as said king (in my opinion).

To sum it up. There's no reason why historic queen Sammuramat couldn't of been named after a much older queen? I think if people understood the proposed adjusted timeline and chronology of things, the story wouldn't sound so crazy and we wouldn't have 700 year old Queens marrying their sons and such.


Also I don't think Semeramis was Nimrods mother...



posted on Apr, 1 2016 @ 12:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Byrd
The devil is in the details. Maybe half the times I get excited by an idea and reply without much thinking. I like the symmetry in this dialogue ending, for now- me derailing this thread and injecting the Rosthchilds in a discussion of Ancient & Lost Civilization (which I just realized a couple of days ago) and trapping myself in a corner to have a hard look on what the OP's topic is really about. How's that for a full circle?

I appreciate the lesson.

a reply to: kef33890
Thank you, I was really having trouble imagining a 700 year old hottie.



posted on Apr, 2 2016 @ 09:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: kef33890
a reply to: Byrd

Well I can easily understand the confusion, but let me try to clear it up. The Semeramis of 700 bc was actually named after the real Simeramis of around 2200 bc. An adjusted time frame also places Enmerkar/Kulla/Balih around that same time (2200 b.c.) The King Ninus in Greek/Assyrian history is the same as said king (in my opinion).

To sum it up. There's no reason why historic queen Sammuramat couldn't of been named after a much older queen? I think if people understood the proposed adjusted timeline and chronology of things, the story wouldn't sound so crazy and we wouldn't have 700 year old Queens marrying their sons and such.


Also I don't think Semeramis was Nimrods mother...


Yes, I was being wicked and I did consider the "naming after." There is a problem, though (at least this is what I know from the Egyptian practices of taking ancestral names) - that the name has to be significant to the culture. So they take the names of very famous ancestors (or predecessor kings) to "bind" themselves to that image.

The "revered ancestor" will be well-known, though... so there's statues and monuments and so forth.

And the problem is that the evidence for Semiramis comes NOT from Babylonian sources that are Really Ancient (3,000 BC or so) but from 900 BC and thereafter. Robin Lane Fox (see note at the end of the Wikipedia page on Semiramis) indicates that she's a Greek invention en.wikipedia.org...

So you could make the case if you found ancient Babylonian texts and statues with her name on them (not 'goddesses with no name written on them' -- goddess figures clearly inscribed to her.)

But yeah, I did consider that.



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 04:33 AM
link   
a reply to: Byrd
I found Nimrud, the location not the king. I just like to share this interesting bits of information that I think has a direct bearing on the OP's topic (and Kantzveldt's interesting thread). I have warn you that it's from another Farrell interview, so take it with a grain of salt but it's still worth investigating even if Farrell didn't get his facts right.

Here are the facts:
1. Farrell estimates that only 5 to 10% of all the ancient Sumerian texts that were translated are available to academic researchers and to some extent, the general public.

2. The Germans has an extensive catalogue of all if not most of the Sumerian artifacts collected, particularly the ancient Sumerian texts and for some reason, it's not available to researchers and the general public. Here's a site that I found

3. The French has a considerable collection of the ancient Sumerian texts that they only keep for themselves.

4. This has a bit of woo factor in it, but here goes- There could be tens of thousands of ancient Sumerian artifacts looted at the Baghdad Museum when the US invaded Iraq, where is it now, particularly the ancient texts at Baghdad's collection?

Please note that, this is how I remembered it, I've been searching for the particular interview the past few days to quote Farrell in his own words, but I still can't find it. I will post it here if happen to find it.

So what are the implications of what Farrell pointed out even if we disregard the accuracy of it? Have all the ancient Sumerian tablets been translated? Are they all available to academic researchers or not all? How much of it is available to the general public on-line? And the questions goes on and on. The same questions can be asked regarding the ancient Egyptians texts, Hindu, Chinese, Hebrew, Greek, Roman etc. and where only talking about the ancient texts. How about books say for the past 500 years. How many of it were translated to English? Will we get far with English-centric research?





edit on 09 11 2015 by MaxTamesSiva because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 05:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: MaxTamesSiva
a reply to: Byrd
I found Nimrud, the location not the king.


Its name was "Kalhu" (as the first paragraph explains) ... the name "Nimrud" was assigned it sometime after 1800 by explorers. Not sure how that ties into anything, but...



1. Farrell estimates that only 5 to 10% of all the ancient Sumerian texts that were translated are available to academic researchers and to some extent, the general public.

Not true. The fact that they were translated means they were published and that means scholars had access to them and they were commented on and discussed by other scholars. Farrell might not have access (it's hard to figure out where to go) but Assyriologists have access to them.



2. The Germans has an extensive catalogue of all if not most of the Sumerian artifacts collected, particularly the ancient Sumerian texts and for some reason, it's not available to researchers and the general public. Here's a site that I found

Au contraire, it IS available to researchers. You just have to know how to get access to it. The same situation exists with Egyptian hieroglyphs and I assure you that even though I struggle, my professors can find anything they need. To make sure they can access newly published things, they are on a mailing list (students are on it as well) that's worldwide and when someone starts a research project they will often put out a call on the list to see if something has turned up. If a resource is not available to them, they will send out a call to see who has it.


3. The French has a considerable collection of the ancient Sumerian texts that they only keep for themselves.

yes to the first, no to the second
(same is true of hieroglyphs)


4. This has a bit of woo factor in it, but here goes- There could be tens of thousands of ancient Sumerian artifacts looted at the Baghdad Museum when the US invaded Iraq, where is it now, particularly the ancient texts at Baghdad's collection?

Much of the material has been recovered. And if it was in the museum, then it also exists elsewhere as drawings and as photographs and research papers.


So what are the implications of what Farrell pointed out even if we disregard the accuracy of it? Have all the ancient Sumerian tablets been translated?

Most has, yes. Every student who wants a good conference paper will pick something obscure from the museum stores that was acquired in the 1800's or so and is unpublished and will translate and publish.


Are they all available to academic researchers or not all?

Yup. Most in non-English, which is why Assyriologists study French or German (ditto Egyptologists)


How much of it is available to the general public on-line?

A modest amount. Museums and universities are working to get it online, but when you've got a million or more items and your intent is accuracy in photographs (including matching the color correctly), you can't put it up at the rate of 10 items a minute. I can tell you from experience that it can take many hours to properly photograph one object, set up the photographs into the database, properly tag it, write a small paragraph about it, archive it, and make it available to the public.



Will we get far with English-centric research?


Nope. You can make some progress but eventually you'll need access to older material and that means German or French (occasionally Italian and Spanish) ... an increasing number of papers are in Arabic but mercifully most of them have English translations.

I'm still working on translating the German dissertation.


(edited to add: this is the benefit of taking courses at universities in these subjects -- you learn who has what and where to go if you need reliable information. I had a whole universe of information open up to me in Egyptology when I started taking classes and learned how to find things.)
edit on 9-4-2016 by Byrd because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 09:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Byrd
Thank you very much, that put a lot of things in perspective. I leave you now to work on your dissertation. Good luck.



posted on May, 24 2016 @ 10:59 AM
link   
I hate to resurrect my old, dead thread. But I have done more research and made a graphic to hopefully illustrate what I'm saying. Even historians will agree with me, that the Sumerian King List was composed as a compilation of numerous lists from different eras and cities. My sources (which I will give) attest that many of the so called dynasty's consist of the same people. Specifically all of Kish One can be split in half as two lists of some of the same rulers, and Uruk One is the same. They are not necessarily in chronological order exactly, and some listed rulers are actually Governors instead of King. For instance, Lugalbanda/Emenuna/Menones was a general under Bel Calah. Both Menones and Calah co-ruled for some time, with Menones being Calah's Governor of Assyria, as stated by Diodorus in his histories. Calah Bel Ninus rule commenced in 2189 BC, after conquiring the Land of Ashur, Bactriana, Armenia, etc.

I am providing an excel worksheet so you can hopefully look at it to understand a little easier. I based my editting on the Histories of Diodorus Siculus Book II (1-34), Ancient History: A Revised Chronology by Anthony Lyle, and Wikipedia (don't hate). There are numerous sources here and there, that I can't remember. I'm a fairly bad researcher when it comes to documentation. So any of my work wouldn't fly in professional academic circles. But it is perfectly fine for entertaining my fellow ATS'ers and giving you all something to wonder about.

I think Ctesias and Diodorus's histories are far more accurate than scholars want to give them credit for. In my mind, I have comfirmed many, many things regarding King Ninus, Babylonia/Assyrian History, and the original Semiramis using Ctesias and Diodorus's work. Now did they make simple mistakes? Hell yeah they did... Diodorus frequently says Babylonia where he meant Assyria, and seems to confuse the cities of Nineveh and Kalhu. No offense to all the Diodorus haters out here, but I trust the ancients knowledge far more than you preppy modern scholars who think they have all ancient history figured out. Who should I trust? Someone who lived around 400 B.C. or some guy from 2016 who thinks he knows it all. All the way from Ninus down to Sardanapalus, I have found enough research FOR ME to believe Diodorus.

s33.postimg.org...


This is my revised list. I based this mainly on Anthony Lyle's revised chronology, Waddell's Chronology, and of course my pal Diodorus Siculus.

Also I would like to throw in this research paper on revisions to the Assyrian King List.


www.starways.net...


The last descendant of Ninyas was Sardanapalus. According to Diodorus, Sardanapalus was the last king of Assyria who was a descendant of Semiramis. Sardanapalus piled all his treasures and wealth onto a wooden pyre, and burned himself to death when a wall in Nineveh collapsed from rain during a siege of the Medes, Bactrians, and Babylonians. He was called Pul in the Bible. And he was the unnamed king who repented at Jonah's condemnation of Nineveh. This academic paper leads to the full realization of Sardanapalus's identity. To sum it all up, Sardanapalus was deposed by his own General named Arbaces - Tiglath-Pileser III overthrew Pul and stricken him from existence on the king list, for he made himself king and destroyed records of his predecessors. Giving a literal meaning to the saying that history is written by the winners. This paper shows that in detail and corrects problems with the Assyrian King List. Interestingly enough, there is a small remnant of the rulers before Tiglath-Pileser III, including "Sardanapalus", but they were hidden by the scribe towards the top of the list.

One thing to note, is that this was a whole century+ before Nineveh was destroyed for the final time, in 612 B.C. But after Arbaces/Tiglath-Pileser III destroyed Nineveh, his own dynasty lasted until Sargon II overthrew it. Note that Sennecrieb and Essarhaddon mention building or re-building Nineveh. Then Nineveh lasted more generations until it was completely flattened and obliterated by Cyaxeres the Mede, probably in retribution that Sargon II overthrew Arbaces dynasty (who in turn deposed Semiramis's dynasty).


I have more if anyone is interested. But check out my sources before you call me an idiot. I just have a hard time discrediting history recorded closer to the time in question... Plus, Diodorus, Ctesias, and many others had nothing to gain from lying, completely unlike todays scholars. People like to look like they know what they're talking about... Not to mention the ego's of "scholars" these days. Not to name anyone here lol.



posted on May, 24 2016 @ 02:23 PM
link   
I don't think anyone is really interested here, you are looking for a Biblical character in an ancient history forum
You should have just posted this in a religion forum



posted on May, 24 2016 @ 04:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Marduk
I don't think anyone is really interested here, you are looking for a Biblical character in an ancient history forum
You should have just posted this in a religion forum


That actually does make sense! I might just make a whole new thread and merge all my stuff from this one. Not to mention there's really nothing mysterious or "lost" about the Sumerians, Assyrians, and Babylonians who are very well documented in history.
edit on 24-5-2016 by kef33890 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 24 2016 @ 10:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: kef33890
... Plus, Diodorus, Ctesias, and many others had nothing to gain from lying, completely unlike todays scholars. People like to look like they know what they're talking about... Not to mention the ego's of "scholars" these days. Not to name anyone here lol.


I think that if you took the time to get a degree in history, you might revise that statement considerably.

Yes, Diodorus et al did have agendas. There's not much ego in being a scholar (no respect these days and very little money. There's more money and respect in being a lightly-informed alternatives researcher with a Youtube channel.)

You've gotten a reasonable start on this, but you can't just ignore other dates and declare Lyle's dates to be accurate. A good scholar considers all evidence.



posted on May, 25 2016 @ 05:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Byrd

Thank you, Byrd! I guess I was a little too harsh. But you are one of the more reasonable well-educated users here. At least you are willing to read my 'fringe ideas' (I'm assuming you at least skimmed through it), unlike some people who automatically discard it as being a waste of time, thus making a joke of the ordeal.

But you are correct. I studied the wrong subject in college. My general business degree has done nothing for me! One of my pipe dreams is to someday be digging around in the sands of Mesopotamia. I don't think adequate field research has been done in the sands. Iraq has been so unstable for the past 80 years unlike, say, Egypt which has been scoured for the past two centuries.

I would love to dig up old Nineveh, and Kalhu. Also Uruk and Ashur! I can tell you each day, Mesopotamian history is being obliterated by those scumbags. Those animals aren't worthy of being named, but they bulldozed ancient Kalhu (what has been excavated anyway). It almost needs to stay buried till the region stabilizes



posted on May, 26 2016 @ 09:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: kef33890
a reply to: Byrd

Thank you, Byrd! I guess I was a little too harsh. But you are one of the more reasonable well-educated users here. At least you are willing to read my 'fringe ideas' (I'm assuming you at least skimmed through it), unlike some people who automatically discard it as being a waste of time, thus making a joke of the ordeal.


If I respond to something, I do take the time to read (though I don't watch videos as a rule.)


But you are correct. I studied the wrong subject in college. My general business degree has done nothing for me!


It taught you to think strategically and to evaluate financial and advertising information and to research markets. Those are useful skills though you may not be using them.

Each discipline has a different way of approaching things (as I've learned so late in life) - so an anthropologist doesn't think like a psychologist and neither of those approach things like a paleontologist does and none of that lot thinks like a computer scientist... etc, etc. One of the harder things I've had to learn as I am getting my degree in Egyptology is to think like a historian and NOT like an information scientist. It's surprisingly difficult.


One of my pipe dreams is to someday be digging around in the sands of Mesopotamia. I don't think adequate field research has been done in the sands. Iraq has been so unstable for the past 80 years unlike, say, Egypt which has been scoured for the past two centuries.

I would love to dig up old Nineveh, and Kalhu. Also Uruk and Ashur! I can tell you each day, Mesopotamian history is being obliterated by those scumbags. Those animals aren't worthy of being named, but they bulldozed ancient Kalhu (what has been excavated anyway). It almost needs to stay buried till the region stabilizes


Get involved with a local antiquities society! Here in Texas, we have the Texas Archaeological Society that has a field school every year and everyone (no restrictions) can go and dig and learn and talk to people who make their living doing archaeology. Don't let the dream die... start working on it now!







 
9
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join