Stargates are real

reply to post by zorgon

Zorgon & Undo, I have an interesting proposal for you. If you wan't to check into Saddam Hussein's dedication to the ancient past, do yourself a favor and look into Google.

When you find the site that I am giving you, take a good look at the triangular formation of the 3 huge conical earthen formations. I know that he knew something. Judging from the Google address the photo may have been taken in 2005, which would explain all the US military vehicles on top of the hill at the Palace location. There is something strange about these hill top formations. It reminds me of some other "shapes" that have been used throughout history for a very long period of time, as well as some of more "recent use," within the scope of objects seen in the air.

Use Google maps, & be sure to utilize the satellite or hybrid function.
Search for any one of the following:
1. Babylon Palace
2. Ziggurat of Marduk
3. Tower of Babylon

These will be located just north of Al Hillah, Iraq. The river will be located on the western side. If you zoom out slightly, you will notice the 3 conical hills with the ruins of the Tower of Babal situated within the aforementioned hill tops.

Am I wrong or what does your conscience say? Oh, & many thanks for both your previous answers & data. I'm really loving this! Nothing like solving the mysteries of the universe one blog at a time.

Well I can't get google earth to work. It crashed on me when I was blabbing on and on about the White Pyramid of China pics, and it hasn't worked since then, even after uninstall and reinstall. Methinks it's bugged.

Anyway, unless the Tower of Babel is at Eridu, I don't think it's the Tower of Babel. The "Tower" wasn't a tower in the strictest sense of the word. It was initially a spacecraft, shaped somewhat like a cross between a classic domed saucer ufo and a ziggurat, if I understand this correctly. Later, post flood models of it, including the Tower of Babel itself, were mud brick ziggurats - attempts to duplicate the original shape. The E.Abzu (the first , pre-flood "Tower of Babel") was composed entirely of metal. Subsequent models were mud brick. It was then called the Etemenanki.

Hope that wasn't confusing

[edit on 28-9-2007 by undo]

I periodically watch Stargate..but yesterday was especially intriguing. The Stargate commander was meeting with representives from various countries and disclosing to them about the gate and coming alien war. Then Thor of Asgard(classic grey) beams in and explains how together both races have been saved on numerous occasions by their friendship.
This theme is already propagating into media. I don't know if there are aliens here or not nor if the Von Braun prophecy of need for technology to defend against alien invasion is going to come true..but it is certainly occuring in the media with this episode..Halo 3..

reply to post by zorgon

Here are the coordinates for the site in Iraq that needs your next observation:

32 32' 2.8" N
44 25' 41.5" E

Seeing is believing.

Hey guys, still loving the threads!! Loads of great research done by a few 'minds', keep it up!!

Anyway, I was watching an interview on google video on Dan Burisch, who, im sure some of you will know about, and he states that while he was working with The Majestic 12, he not only agrees that there are Stargates but that he has seen them being used and has ACTUALLY been active in pushing an ET through one. An ET that he had worked close to and with for several years, and was in desperate need TO GO HOME to see his family!!! Very Spielbergian!! LOL

He also states that there are AT LEAST 50 stargates in the world, some natural and some artificially created. It's all very interesting and adds more relevance to this thread.!! Here's the link:

video.google.com...

There are also a few other interesting things he mentions!! I let you decide!!



JP

Ancient history is a good place to start. Have you noticed how about 300 years ago or thereabouts, all our ancient history texts were basically ruled unreliable because they mentioned "supernatural" events?

No, I never noticed that. Which texts were labeled unreliable and by whom?

All religious texts, (many of which were historical texts that were simply labelled "religious"), except the hieroglyphs from ancient Egypt, were said to be falsehoods.

Such as?

Using the hieroglyphs, they attempted to set a timeline for ancient history, but ignored everything else. That was a big mistake.

They who?
Who used hieroglyphs to set what timeline?
Why was it a mistake?

I'm including these passages to get the point across, so I won't have to back track and answer questions that were answered previously in the thread, or argue about the details due to lack of information.

Few historians are aware of the real origin of their discipline. They generally take for granted as true the principles already laid down for them by preceding historians. Yet one of the basic rules of any scientific study is never to take anything for granted. Let us pull back the curtain on the study of history and view a plot that has eluded even the historians' keen eyes.

History as a scientific discipline may be said to have taken its rise with Lorenzo della Valla. He demonstrated that the "Donation of Constantine", on which the secular claims of the Roman Catholic Church were originally based, was a medieval forgery.

Forgery. That word became a touchstone. Soon non-catholic scholars everywhere became critical, negative, looking for spurious documents. The Middle Ages provided many rich finds.

During the same period a great revival in Classical Learning had been occurring, The popes had encouraged Catholic scholars of the Renaissance to revive the study of ancient Roman and Greek literature. In non-Catholic educational circles Classical Learning became associated with Catholicism. The inevitable occurred. Scholars who resented everything the word AUTHORITY stood for saw in the Greek and Roman Classics the symbolism of authority and tradition. Tradition would not be purged out, they reasoned, unless the Classics were also attacked and labeled as spurious.

The frontal assault began. At the close of the eighteenth century Friedrich August Wolf challenged the scholarly world with his "Prolegomena ad Homerum" (1795). The ancient Greek poet Homer -- famous for having composed the two great epics, the Iliad and the Odyssey -- did not compose either epic in its present form, charged Wolf. Homer, he reasoned, did not know how to write. The epics, he concluded, were pieced together about the seventh century from oral traditions, long after Homer lived. They were therefore unauthentic, Wolf concluded.

The floodgates of criticism were now opened wide. Thousands of youths, flocking to the German universities for their doctorates, were assigned the task of criticising classical literature. At the height of the epidemic, scarcely a single ancient work remained unimpugned as biased, untrue to fact, or unauthentic. Into the swirl of condemned poems, dramas, myths were heaved the sober histories of Herodotus, and Thucydides, the annals of the Greek city states, the Greek records of ancient Egypt, Assyria and Media. All ancient Greek and Roman history was condemned as spurious, unauthentic, fabulous, unhistorical -- because writing, said the critics, had not been known. How could the Greeks have preserved authentic histories reaching back 2000 years before the time of Christ, asked the critics, if the Greeks did not even know how to write till the seventh century before our era?

The historians of that day were greatly influenced by the subjective reasoning of the German Higher Critics. They accepted their verdict. Greek records prior to the seventh century disappeared from history books, or were labeled in footnotes as fabulous, or, at best, garbled.

Nearly a half century elapsed. During that period a new science arose -- archaeology. The past was being dug up. What did the excavators discover? Writing materials and documents dating more than 2000 years before the time of Christ! And in the Greek world, too!

The Greeks did know how to write after all. The critics, including Wolf, had been wrong. The imagined illiteracy of the early Greeks was a myth. The argument that they could not have preserved their history correctly was false.

But did the new evidence make any difference to the critics or to the historians? Were they willing to reconsider their conclusions? How were the historians going to explain that the basis for rejecting Greek history had been exploded?

No answers came forth. The new evidence was greeted with silence. All who brought up the problem were ridiculed as unscientific. Decades have passed, but not once has the evidence been reconsidered. The plot to suppress the truth had succeeded till now.

But the story does not end here.

Read further
www.cgca.net...

[edit on 5-10-2007 by undo]

Excellent topic as far as I've read (1st 25 pages), and I too love the tv show. Undo, I'm sorry if this was mentioned sometime after page 25, but has the topic of "the fiery furnace" from the book of Daniel, been brought up yet? 3 men go in, but 4 come out. Sounds kinda like a stargate to me.

Originally posted by Cale, Logan
Excellent topic as far as I've read (1st 25 pages), and I too love the tv show. Undo, I'm sorry if this was mentioned sometime after page 25, but has the topic of "the fiery furnace" from the book of Daniel, been brought up yet? 3 men go in, but 4 come out. Sounds kinda like a stargate to me.

William Henry believes it has something to do with a star gate. I don't know what to make of it, but it certainly is a curious thing. For example, Enlil's E.Kur had an Abzu and a river that eats men. When I did a study on the "river", the original word meanings were things like "kiln", which I assumed meant the river was a river of flowing lava or that he had a great furnace for the firing of pottery and metals, a smithy of sorts, from which a wide stream of red hot embers eminated. But after a bit more study I realized that wasn't it at all and that the river that eats men was a reference to something else. It's interesting to note that the word E.Kur eventually came to be known as "Prison" and this is precisely how the Bottomless pit is characterized.

The way people viewed certain words and places changed dramatically after the meso flood, and that creates a bit of a problem. It diverges, then after a couple centuries, intersects and the whole thing becomes a mishmash of concepts. Picking threw it all is exceedingly slow and painstaking.

[edit on 6-10-2007 by undo]

A Study of "Nun"

According to the Pyramid Texts, written on the walls of pyramids, the creator god emerged from the chaotic darkness of Nun as a mythical Bennu bird (similar to a heron or phoenix). He flew to Heliopolis, an ancient city near Cairo, where, at dawn, he alighted on the Benben, an obelisk representing a ray of the sun. After fashioning a nest of aromatic boughs and spices, he was consumed in a fire and miraculously sprang back to life. The capstone placed at the top of an obelisk or a pyramid is associated with the Bennu. Called a pyramidion or the Bennu, it is a symbol of rebirth and immortality.

www.civilization.ca...

In the Old Kingdom, Nun is also the "place" where creation started, namely when Atum self-creates and initiates the "first occurrence" (zep tepi). Because of the pre-rational mode of cognition at work in these texts, the distinction between Nun and this first time is not clearly made yet. Arguments are presented to interprete precreation in terms of Nun, the Abyss, hand in hand with Atum, the Pleroma of the deities.

www.sofiatopia.org...

Everlasting Abyss and eternal Pleroma.

Coptic scholars like Crum (1939) translate "NOYN" as "abyss of hell, depth of Earth, sea". So Nun has also been translated as "Abyss" (Faulkner, Mercer, Allen).

www.sofiatopia.org...

In the Pyramid Texts, the ascending Pharaoh enters the "zep tepi". He was born in Nun (§1), presides over its caverns (§ 4), joins those who are in Nun (§ 5), sees the gates of Nun opened to him (§ 12), kneels down in Nun (§ 17), leads those who are in Nun (§ 19), gathers them (§ 22), orders them (§ 25)

www.sofiatopia.org...

Humans were created from the Eye of Re or wedjat (eye of wholeness).

www.civilization.ca...

Another version of the creation myth states that the wedjat simply wandered off, so Re sent Thoth, the moon god, to fetch it. When it returned, the eye found that another eye had taken its place. To pacify the furious eye, Re placed it on his brow in the shape of a uraeus (a cobra goddess), where it could rule the whole world. Pharaohs wore the uraeus on their brows as a symbol of protection and to show that they were descended from the sun god.

www.civilization.ca...

When Re became old, the deities tried to take advantage of his senility. Even humans plotted against him, which led to their fall from divine grace. In reaction to the rebellion, Re sent his eye to slaughter the rebels, a deed he accomplished by transforming himself into Sekhmet, a raging powerful goddess (depicted as a lion). After punishing his foes, he changed himself into the contented goddess Hathor (depicted as a cow).

In pain, and weary of these problems, Re withdrew from the world. Taking the form of Hathor, he mounted on Nut (sky), who raised him to the heavens.

www.civilization.ca...

(Mynotes: Nun=Abzu, Bottomless Pit, Abyss, the Eye of Ra (or Re) and is further depicted as Hathor, Sekhmet, the 7 Birth Goddesses of akkadian lore, the underworld and possibly, ereshkigal, hell and hades. At the other end of the Nun were heaven, the starry firmament, paradise (eden reference perhaps) and of course, bad places as well. It appears there were at least 7 Nuns in operation in ante-diluvian times, two of which are accounted for in the Ra -based creation story. )



[edit on 6-10-2007 by undo]

Hi Undo, i have some questions. Plz answer to all of them...

Do you belive that Lord of the Rings was real? Or Conan the Cymmerian? Star Wars maybe? Or any other sf or fantasy book? Do you belive that every story, book or legend is real?

Do you understand difference between myth and history?

Do you know that those beliefs (history as you prefer to call it) were developing with time? And that we know how they developed? First egyptian myths (history as you prefer to call it) were about god that masturbated and thats how world was created... It changed later...

Do you know that these cultures had written history of rulers, wars and more things beside of mythology?

Do you know that archeologists and historians have now knowledge about Sumerians so big that they can trace from where they come and what happened to them?

When someone tells you that he is "Son of God" and you must obey him you belive him without questions? It happens often in all kinds of cults and churches, why you think that it couldnt happen there?

Is this thread some sort of viral marketing for Stargate series? (if yes, u2u me, i can give you a job when it ends, you are pretty good at that... )

And one more thing, you write much about flood, do you know that in ancient Sumer and Egypt floods were happening often? Sometimes (like in Egypt) with benefit for peoples and sometimes as disasters like in Babylon? Flood was something natural in this times and people could do nothing about them, thats why they feared them so much and connected it to gods that can be persuaded to stop it, illusion of safety...

Do you belive that Lord of the Rings was real? Or Conan the Cymmerian? Star Wars maybe? Or any other sf or fantasy book? Do you belive that every story, book or legend is real?

===========================
Some aspects of it were based on reality.
===========================

Do you understand difference between myth and history?

==========================
the word "myth" is so abused.
in fact, it was abused to the point that there's not a single
remaining historical account from ancient history that is
NOT considered a myth. think about that. what are the
odds that they all were myths? if you believe they were
all myths, i have some nice mountain property to sell you
in the florida everglades.

next problem is disassociating the myth part from the
part that is true, and realizing some parts that are said to
be myth are simply misunderstood symbols.
===========================

Do you know that those beliefs (history as you prefer to call it) were developing with time? And that we know how they developed? First egyptian myths (history as you prefer to call it) were about god that masturbated and thats how world was created... It changed later...

===========================
yep, i know that. egyptian dynasties didn't start till after the meso flood, around the time of cush and nimrod. the natives of meso and egypt's stories
were mingled together. it's still history, just couched in terms that have to be untangled from each other
============================

Do you know that these cultures had written history of rulers, wars and more things beside of mythology?

============================
yep, i sure do.
============================

Do you know that archeologists and historians have now knowledge about Sumerians so big that they can trace from where they come and what happened to them?

==============================
don't agree with them, sorry to say. these are the same guys who
thought the ancient greeks couldn't write and changed history books
forever because of it. not saying they are lying, just that they
rely on the mess history is currently in, to set their timeline and from
there, everything goes kablooey.

see, if you approach the word "holy mountain" and i approach the word
"holy mountain" (this is an example) we are both going to get completely
different things out of it. this is true, primarily because you are counting
on modern day interpretations of "holy mountain" and I am not.
modern day interpretations insist a holy mountain is just a mountain. they do this because they believe ancient history is primarily myth.
==============================

When someone tells you that he is "Son of God" and you must obey him you belive him without questions? It happens often in all kinds of cults and churches, why you think that it couldnt happen there?

=============================
i would ask the same of your belief in the current approach to history.
in fact, probably in your current approach to everything. modern does not necessarily mean truly enlightened.
=============================

Is this thread some sort of viral marketing for Stargate series? (if yes, u2u me, i can give you a job when it ends, you are pretty good at that... )

=============================
no, this is not viral marketing for Stargate. The guys who wrote the original movie screenplay were egyptologists from John Hopkins university. They were picking up on the same things. Difference is, they approached it purely from the egyptian angle, whereas I didn't see the connections at all, till I started a study on the bottomless pit in Revelation 9.
==============================



[edit on 6-10-2007 by undo]

Thx for fast reply. I was asking these questions to show you that peoples always have some myths, stories that are completly or partially false. Some are made to impress others, make them obey orders or just for fun. You cant take as proof myths, (i think most of them are even not translated correctly...) myths are myths, made by priests to explain some things to peoples... Some peoples even now are believing cult leaders in things that are absolute crap. Now when we have amount of knowledge given to us even when we are kids that is far beyond knowledge that 99% peoples had in ancient times.
In first stargate movie (i really like that one) are mistakes so big that only American archeologists could do... Some things that your "scientists" do is a criminal activity in europe... And that is place when we can agree Undo: Not everything that modern science (archeology and history) is saying is truth. Something like 90% is truth. Rest is crap or silence. Why? Because its hard to admit for some old guys that wrote tens of books that they were wrong... But from that 90% its almost, almost, clear that there was no such things like stargates, at least not in places where you see them... They had myths AND history, its not the same. There could be stargates of course, maybe evidence lays somewhere in sand waiting to be discovered, maybe it was discovered but now is in some box deep under thousands of other artifacts, waiting to be rediscovered by some student that was send to clean warehouse... But to me, myths cant be taken so seriously. In these times even lighting was connected to gods. And now we know that it is just something normal. Only thing that we can do is think where proof is, read all that we can read, learn old languages, do the so called library job. Then independent, open minded team of scientists will go there and dig. Thats the only way. Religion cant and will never be proof, at least not for fanatics. And we are not fanatics, just open minded people, are we? Archeology is science where theories and proofs are together, but even theory needs something more than religion...
I think you need to take big step back and look at it from bigger perspective, you cant belive, you must find resonable proofs.

Originally posted by shigawire
Now when we have amount of knowledge given to us even when we are kids that is far beyond knowledge that 99% peoples had in ancient times.

Only science is far beyond, and even that is debatable.

In first stargate movie (i really like that one) are mistakes so big that only American archeologists could do...

How do you know the original screenplay was written by american archaeologists? Coulda been from anywhere. John Hopkins is not
a white americans only university.

They had myths AND history, its not the same.

I disagree. Some "myths" are symbols of real things, that are just misunderstood. Some myths are not myths at all. And some myths
are purely myth. But when German Higher Criticism exploded onto the scene, all ancient history was labelled myth. Bar none. Every country on the planet, every people, have histories. They are considered lies, fables and myths at the university level, not because they have evidence they were lies, fables and myths, but because they don't believe in the subject matter. You can't dissect a text correctly if you have no respect for it. Your view and translation will always be slanted to your own paradigm. Human nature, I suppose.

In these times even lighting was connected to gods.

This is where generalization has worked against the ancient texts. For example, today it is said that the vedic god, Indra, was a storm god because he was called the "Thunder God." Problem is, he was called the thunder god not because he thundered, but because his weapons made the sound of thunder when they impacted the earth. Making the sound of thunder does not necessarily mean lightning was attached. Does this mean he was fictitious? Or hurling literal lightning bolts? Hardly. Does it mean he may have been employing bombs? Possibly. Does it mean he was human? No way to tell. Does it mean he was an alien? No way to tell. Does it mean he was a god? To the people at the time, yeah, he was. Someone assumed he was fictitious and then propagated the concept that people saw him as hurling lightning bolts and therefore he was just lightning deified. Can YOU tell the difference?

Originally posted by DREAMING MAN

Zorgon & Undo, I have an interesting proposal for you. If you wan't to check into Saddam Hussein's dedication to the ancient past, do yourself a favor and look into Google.

Sorry not to respond till now... been too busy in other threads and website. I will check into that today or tomorrow. Thanks for the heads up

I need a secretary

reply to post by Dutch_Rick

You are maybe right looks like US doesn't really care about oil at all.

You call it "German Higher Criticism" but think about those peoples that were burned or killed in other ways in name of religion taken too seriously... RELIGION! Look how many beliefs there are... Read some anthropology books that explain how these beliefs were created...

"For example, today it is said that the vedic god, Indra, was a storm god because he was called the "Thunder God." Problem is, he was called the thunder god not because he thundered, but because his weapons made the sound of thunder when they impacted the earth. Making the sound of thunder does not necessarily mean lightning was attached."

Yes, but it can mean that peoples that didnt know what thunder is explained it in this way... Not first time in history, Zeus was also using thunders as weapons. Not because of technology but because of lack of knowledge and attempts to understand what is happening by ancient peoples... Thunders are good example because almost every culture have another explanation for them. Same with floods or every other natural disaster...

Originally posted by shigawire
maybe it was discovered but now is in some box deep under thousands of other artifacts, waiting to be rediscovered by some student that was send to clean warehouse...

That would be at the Smithsonian... that big warehouse they showed in Indiana Jones

I say we gather a team and storm the warehouse These guys are getting tax dollars... so its OURS Let's go take it back



Do you know most museums never let you see the good stuff? The reasoning 'we are not qualified' so you have to be an archeologist to even get permission to view the stuff

A gentleman in Canada had a fantastic collection of rare minerals... he donated it to a museum... is it on display? No just a few pieces sometimes go on display... 90% of it never sees the light of day

This is what you come up against if you want to do research and this is after you get past the religious fanatics

This is how the Baghadad batteries where found... tucked away in a dingy basement because some archeaologist didn't want his thesis messed up and lose his funding...

Fortunately most of them cannot bring themselves to distroy it,, they just hide it...

Well at least I HOPE they aren't destroying stuff... but how would I ever know? (Its kinda like NASA gringing away fossils and driving over artifacts )

[edit on 6-10-2007 by zorgon]

Originally posted by zorgon
That would be at the Smithsonian... that big warehouse they showed in Indiana Jones

I say we gather a team and storm the warehouse

These guys are getting tax dollars... so its OURS Let's go take it back


[edit on 6-10-2007 by zorgon]

in most cases its accident not bad will... I was studying anthropology for some time, years ago, once i had difficult test and heavy hangover of course i didnt prepared for this test, like some of my friends. Person that examined us had bad sight due to old age, it was written exam, so we (my friend and some girl from other group) decided to cheat. We placed ourselves in far corner of room (filled to ceiling with old boxes and books, it isnt usually used as exam room) and started to hide books and everything needed on shelves and in those boxes... It was fast and hard job i had hangover and they were heavily stoned, we forgot where is what... So, im asking that girl to give me some notes, she starts too look for them, opens some box, and suddenly starts screaming "i found skeleton omg omg i touched skull!!!" every person in room was laughing like mad... Only we and examinator werent... Normally such thing will end with heavy problems but... We found some important evidence that was lost 20 years ago... So they closed eyes and we passed exam, with low grade but without problems...

Originally posted by shigawire
You call it "German Higher Criticism" but think about those peoples that were burned or killed in other ways in name of religion taken too seriously... RELIGION! Look how many beliefs there are... Read some anthropology books that explain how these beliefs were created...

The phenomenon of "gone too far" is not isolated to what is called religion today. it has happened since the dawn of man and hasn't stopped yet. the enlightenment didn't stop it. nothing has stopped it. in fact, the world is filled with violence and killing, much of it having nothing whatsoever to do with religion, but drug deals gone bad, jealousy, anger out of control and so on. it's done in the name of everything, including in the name of money, the name of socialism (another version of in the name of money) and of course, in the name of governments, gods, etc. No one paradigm holds the moral high ground because it's a human condition.

hitler killed the jews based on some twisted version of survival of the fittest. he saw the need for the german people to have living space which he was told by scientists, was quickly disappearing. he saw jews as the scourge of the earth, perhaps the evolutionary descendants of pigs. he saw caucasian scandanavians as superior physically. his ideology was the brain child of
darwin.

[edit on 6-10-2007 by undo]