It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
That is, of course, assuming that this was an eclipse event. The descriptions clearly show that this was not simply an eclipse yet the OP article cherry picks the bits out of it to support an eclipse.
originally posted by: punkinworks10
a reply to: the2ofusr1
No, the folk stories in the americas are not related to that eclipse and are not about the same event.
During a solar eclipse the Moon does not shine nor does it shine before and after because we are looking at its dark side.
a plausible alternative meaning is that the Sun and Moon stopped doing what they normally do: they stopped shining.
Give or take a couple hundred years I guess.
Was there an annular solar eclipse in the right time frame for Joshua? There was, calculate the writers: on October 30, 1207 B.C.E., which is within the possible dates of Joshua's incursion into Canaan.
Nothing of the sort has been established. What day is being referred to here? Any one of over a 200 year period? It is rather a sloppy guess at best.
Having established that there was an annular eclipse on that day,
And the sun stopped in the middle of the sky and did not hasten to go down for about a whole day.…
originally posted by: the2ofusr1
a reply to: Blackmarketeer
Just throwing this into the mix only because its about the same event as described in the bible but told in legends from different cultures at different places on the globe . Not sure it was a eclipse though .
originally posted by: rickymouse
I think that this idea of what was going on may be correct . People wrote things non-scientifically back those days. This means someone knew there was going to be an eclipse that day, it means they knew the cycles. There is a machine that was used to determine solar events found on a ship that predates this event. Maybe they had one of those tools or they knew someone who had that technology or knowledge.
Saros Cycle is approximately 6585.3211 days, or 18 years, 11 days, 8 hours in length. One saros period after an eclipse, the Sun, Earth, and Moon return to approximately the same relative geometry, a near straight line, and a nearly identical eclipse will occur. The Moon will have the same phase and be at the same node and the same distance from the Earth. In addition, because the saros is close to 18 years in length (about 11 days longer), Earth will be nearly the same distance from the sun, and tilted to it in nearly the same orientation (same season). Given the date of an eclipse, one saros later a nearly identical eclipse can be predicted. Each total solar eclipse track looks similar to the previous one, but is shifted by 120 degrees westward.
originally posted by: Blue Shift
...No, the almighty God of the universe is perfectly willing to bring the entire Earth and Moon to a stop to help a Hebrew warlord win a relatively minor victory at Jericho.
originally posted by: LABTECH767
a reply to: Blackmarketeer
They are simply wrong and are grasping at straws, the bible say the sun stood still, it did not move not that the moon covered it or that the sky turned black as in an eclipse.
Do these people think the people of the ancient world had never seen or heard of an eclipse, even the cave men spent an inordinate amount of time watching the sky so I am afraid they are simply wrong.
"But going back to the original Hebrew text, we determined that an alternative meaning could be that the Sun and Moon just stopped doing what they normally do: they stopped shining. This interpretation is supported by the fact that the Hebrew word translated 'stand still' has the same root as a Babylonian word used in ancient astronomical texts to describe eclipses."
Attracted by the apparent “historicity” of the Egyptian inscriptions, much
scholarly energy has been devoted to the identity of the Land and Sea Peoples. The
names of the various groups or tribes recorded by the inscriptions include: Sherden
(or Shardana), Shekelesh, Teresh, Denyen, Peleset, Tjeker, Lukka. These names are
tantalisingly reminiscent of names more familiar from Classical Greek and Roman
myth and history: Sardinians, Sicilians, Etruscans, Danaans (Greeks), Philistines,
Teucrians (Minoan Cretans), Lycians. Scholars have had much fun creating scenarios
whereby these names, and the events associated with them, can be used to explain the
foundation and origin myths of later peoples.
Within all these narratives, which emphasise the Eastern Mediterranean focus
of events, there has been little satisfactory explanation for just WHY it all happened.
Localised sociopolitical stresses and regional economic or environmental factors all
clearly contributed to the flow of events. They allow scholars to play with hypotheses
that move in and out of fashion – hypotheses based on the Greeks, the Trojans, on
Italic peoples, on Anatolian or Greek droughts and famines. But such factors are
unlikely, by themselves, to have provided sufficient impetus for the causal processes
that characterise the period. They should not be viewed in such an individualist
fashion but seen as part of a larger picture, as the trees rather the wood itself. Part of
the problem in understanding these processes has been the very spectacular nature of
the Eastern Mediterrranean events. They attract the bulk of the attention. What has
been relatively neglected by scholars of the Bronze Age Mediterranean is that there is
evidence of similar disruptions elsewhere, particularly in central and northern Europe.
Another factor which allows explanations to transcend the previous regional
isolation of scholarship, has been the increasing sophistication of scientific methods,
including dendrochronology and ice-core sampling, which examine the global
climates of the past, just as archaeology examines the human cultures. The synthesis
of these disciplines has often been controversial, but although our modern world still
struggles to come to terms with this point, it is clear that human cultures cannot be
isolated from climate and climate change.
The agenda of this, the 1200 BC conference is thus quite explicit. From the
Atlantic coast of North-west Europe to the shores of the South-east Mediterranean,
from Ireland and Scandinavia to Egypt, archaeologists increasingly recognise that the
1200 BC period is one of dramatic cultural disruption giving way to profound cultural
transformation. Even though there are regional differences in relation to the
archaeological manifestations of this process of disruption and transformation, it is
important for us to establish and explore the commonalities as well as the differences.
We need to ask questions about the scale of these events. Are they linked? Are we
witnessing a cascade of migrations of people throughout Europe? Is violence and
warfare a common factor in these events? Does the multiple evidence for
environmental factors point to global climate change? Are violence and migration the
only solutions we witness to the crises?