posted on Oct, 14 2007 @ 08:40 AM
Holes in some Debunker Theory:
I've studied the standard debunking answers and solutions meant to attack phenomenon in ancient texts and artforms. One example of a debunking is
regarding the plethora of seemingly related examples, cross culture, and in different languages. It seems inconceivable to some, that the ancient
peoples had similar experiences and shared a common understanding of their own current and past history. Some of that is related, of course, to
political, historical or religious limitations.
For example, many have trouble understanding why there are close to nothing but mesopotamian artifacts in the first major city of the first egyptian
dynasty. It seems so inconceivable to them, they simply choose to ignore it. Later examples, show the mesopotamian artifacts mixing with local
artifacts: et. al, the native population burial sites vs. the foreign (mesopotamian) burial plots. What has been uncovered is that the Naqada and
Abydos sites were under the rule of people who left almost entirely mesopotamian artifacts and art styles. The people under their authority were the
locals, who were apparently the slaves of these mesopotamians. It's a riddle until you actually think about it for more than 2 seconds: Dynastic
Egypt was primarily started by someone/some group from Mesopotamia. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure it out, just a willingness to look
at it for what it is.
This problem boils over into areas where the names change with the culture giving the report, and the details are added to or ignored moreso on one
topic in the story than another, due to political climate and any number of other factors. It might be the same or a similar story/historical
account/myth, etc, but the language change creates confusion and as a result, there are thousands of examples of same same, that are called different
different because the names are in different languages.
It should come as no small surprise to anyone who studies mesopotamian royalty, that each royal had countless names and titles by which he/she was
known. Time and cultural barriers added yet more differentiation, and as the historical accounts aged, separation from the original events and
origins were jumbled - still recognizable if you know what you're looking for, but jumbled nonetheless. As a result, they been called TOTALLY
DIFFERENT STORIES/MYTHS, etc. I don't think they are different. Not even remotely. This is especially true where it touches on prominent figures
such as the gods or their divine offspring.
Furthermore, it's assumed by many that the ancient texts are myths and as a result, the material doesn't glean the kind of respect that would be
necessary to interpret what it meant to begin with. The researcher can't possibly arrive at a fair appraisal of a text that he/she has already
decided is bunk from the outset. Add to this, political or religious limitation and the problems become nearly insurmountable.
Let's take the example of a word like "Abzu" and it's related word names and meanings. The original Abzu preceeded Akkad, making it quite old.
Sumer itself, was composed of several city states in which the words of their language had variation between each city. Add to this, the same
histories as told from the Akkadian perspective with its language variations, and then the Egyptian variations, the Babylonian, the Assyrian, the
Indian, and the Chinese. To top it off, many of these texts underwent translations during the major empires of past history, such as the Greek empire
(almost everything in Egypt has been taught to you, as the student, in the GREEK translation (Isis is Aset. Abydos is Abdju. Osiris is Wesir. Etc.
and as a result, the trail is totally wiped out until the original words are found and researched. That one fact, has hidden within it, a whole other
area of research of the ancient past. Without it, you might as well be comparing the past to your modern history book because that's just about how
much the ancient texts will seem to have in common.
Now let's say we take a word like Abzu and start following the trail from ancient Sumer to modern times. What would we end up with as a result of our
Well, first off, we'd end up with countless variations in name and description. Since each culture approached the topic of presenting historical
texts differently. And how would a debunker approach this? They'd call foul on the whole thing under the pretext of what some refer to as "Ufo
syndrome" or some such "psychological" malady, in which the researcher starts making more connections than are actually there. The problem is,
with history that is already over 6000 years old, the idea that names and descriptions of the items, places, people and gods, would be the same is
completely ludicrous, and so of course, you'd end up with myraid examples of the same exact things.
In short, the argument that too many definitions/examples of the same thing are a result of wishful thinking, falls flat on its face due to the age of
the accumulated texts, the vastness of the cultural influences, and the varied approaches of each culture (even within the same country).
A long time is involved, so alot of different words/symbols will be involved as well.