the anunnaki?

I read somewhere that Sitchen may have misinterpreted some of the content of the Sumerian tablets.
Some scholars have pointed out that Nibiru actually means "ferry boat."

Originally posted by masonicon
Anunnaki is the alien race who almost all of its members are Carnivorous and Cannibalistic Evil Geniuses, Murderers, and Mad scientists

[edit on 3-3-2010 by masonicon]

And that statement is based on what knowledge? The Annunnaki, a higher order, created, from humanistic creatures found here that were native to Earth, the Black Headed People. I believe the creature they used for a model was the Yeti. I could be wrong on this.
Other races were also created, by other groups, such as the Nordics, and the Pleiadians.

I too think it is time for them to come back, after all, they said they would, but I fear they are in for a very big surprise when they get here....now we are like they were when they left, only maybe even more advanced. And I don't think humanity will be too keen on falling down and worshipping them, but of course I cannot speak for the Muslims or Christians.

I am aware of a long time war going on between the Orion Group and a Confederation that i do not know the name of. Which side the Anunnaki ware on is anyone's guess. I have heard Enki and Enil, and even Marduk are all dead now. Who might be in charge now?

Originally posted by Lacenaire
I read somewhere that Sitchen may have misinterpreted some of the content of the Sumerian tablets.
Some scholars have pointed out that Nibiru actually means "ferry boat."

Nibiru has come to mean many things. It has been known as a title, the planet of the crossing, and I am not sure where the ferry boat terms comes from...Does this mean it is also not the name of the 10th planet described by the Sumerians though? No, not really, they are all just theories at the moment because there is not enough evidence that anyone is completely correct with their readings of the texts.

For people more interested in what we have been discussing here have a look at these 2 videos. Now not all that is revealed in these videos is true, some things have actually already been proven to be false. However there is a wealth of information to be had and it is quite evident that some people are starting to piece together this intense puzzle of the human race.

"Alien Anunnaki DNA of Man"



"ANUNNAKI - Coming Back !"

Google Video Link

[edit on 10-3-2010 by Smell The Roses]

Originally posted by Lacenaire
I read somewhere that Sitchen may have misinterpreted some of the content of the Sumerian tablets.
Some scholars have pointed out that Nibiru actually means "ferry boat."

"Misinterpreted" is not the word.

The man cannot translate cuneiform, so he didn't "interpret" anything.

What he did was lie about what they wrote.

IOW, he purposefully "misinterpreted" the content.

Niburu designates several things, chiefly a place of crossing - such as a bridge, a threshold, a river ford, or even (as you say) a ferry.

Harte

[edit on 3/10/2010 by Harte]

I have heared that once Annunaki made us as a slaves but they have grown spiritually since then and are more "good"

reply to post by Harte


Please show some proof where someone accurately deciphers the ancient tablets texts, mind you they are proven to be correct by your standards as well, then show how these same people go on to explain that Sitchin's work was complete lies as you call them.

Just wondering how you come to your information and what sources you have that obviously have completely and accurately learned the Ancient Sumerian language well enough to make such accusations.

What fascinates me is the the whole Sitchen fallacy has not become a modern living mythos. So many people seem to buy into it and propagate it. I actually do not believe in the reptilian agenda.

Originally posted by Smell The Roses
reply to post by Harte

 

Please show some proof where someone accurately deciphers the ancient tablets texts, mind you they are proven to be correct by your standards as well, then show how these same people go on to explain that Sitchin's work was complete lies as you call them.

Why should I?

You were already linked to all the info you needed in this post in this very thread, but you chose to ignore it.

Harte

Zecharia Sitchin said that maybe in 2160.

Great Lecture, a little bit slow, but plenty of information about history.

There are 12 parts, but it's amazing how the books of history are made up.

just my opinion.

here is the first



The guy has some credibility. Too many books sold.





[edit on 10-3-2010 by RUSSO]

...just glancing over a few passages of my bible here and find that Jesus says himself to be "the way", "the truth", calling Himself "bread", "the true vine", etc.

...and going a bit further, that those wishing to truly be His followers must "eat his flesh" and "drink his blood"; and at one point telling a Samaritan woman seeking to draw water from a well that the water He could offer her would be water where she would never thirst again.

I take these things to mean symbolism and not literally. As such it would appear that the use of symbolism is/or was accepted practice in those days.

Is Stichen then a barbaric heathen for finding a symbolic meaning (or perhaps an additiona meaning) in the cunieform texts or symbols?

And what of his own lifelong study of these texts and the various pursuits across different continents to read them, are his effort less noble and less accurate than that of Samuel Kramer, who purports to have spent just as much time and done the same thing?

I guess what I am saying is why do you suppose Kramer was given some special magic decoder ring, and Sitchen not?

And for that matter, quoting Kramer, in his book Sumerian Mythology, he says:

"(in Sumerian the word meaning "mountain" is the word used regularly for "nether world")." Id. pg. 32

If its good enough for Kramer to draw meaning from texts and symbols and transliterate them, then its good enough for Sitchen; which would be the only tolerable outcome of fair-minded thinking people.

I know that I have to live by that maxim because I certainly cannot prove Sitchen correct or Kramer wrong. My personal understanding of Sumerian text is equal to that of a butterfly as to physics.

Its my guess that you too must trust given interpretations, which by your posts suggests a bit of leaning towards Kramer. By way of intelligent and conscious choice. An election to belive by means of decision. Faith, in other words, pure faith alone.

Not a bad thing I must say.

"And what I say unto you I say unto all, Watch." Mark 13:37

That about wraps-up this round.

Originally posted by WarriorKing
First off, that I am clear, in the ancient days science was the religion. We have it backwards (to their way of thinking) today. Its like apples and oranges in discussion.

To effectively communicate you have to be on the same page.

That said, we must think like the writers of of the ancient texts at their writing. You know, "when in Rome do as the Romans do". That sort of thing. We must think like the Sumarians while in Sumeria. Reasonable enough.

It would be sheer falacy to think that all the effort spent by hand-carving all those tablets in stone and the time-consuming talent and effort required to make the clay cunniforms themselves would be spent on...mythology. Then go to all the trouble of storing and keeping and cataloging them all. Why not see them for what there are...science of the then-current time period. The cunniforms themselves being the functional equivilent to the modern day printing press with their own built-in ability to readily repeat the then-current "news of the day", akin to a daily newspaper. The Sumarian daily "newspapers" would not want to memorialize their mythology. Think about that a moment. All the Sumerians of the time would already know their own mythology. Not need it re-cunniformed on a regular basis.

First off, you present a very valid argument. An argument that can answer, in part, many of the "why's" we encounter (why were the pyramids built, why the Nazca lines, why this, why that?). We face difficulties to explain reasons behind what ancient peoples did simply because they were of a different mindset compared to us, today.

Yet, on the last paragraph you practically throw that away and try to "enforce" your logic and way of thinking on ancient Sumerians. So, you KNOW what they considered worthy of immortalizing in their tablets? How do you know that? You know how they thought? Are you absolutely, 100%, beyond a shadow of a doubt SURE that all Sumerians knew their mythology, so it wasn't necessary for them to preserve it in their tablets (if that is what they did), so what is on the tablets has to be "real"? And how do you know what they considered "real" to begin with?

I'd suggest to follow your own advice and declare, if you know, that you do know the mindset of a people "lost" for a good 3 millennia, if not more! And, once you do this, present some form of "how" you know this information.

And one other thing, WarriorKing, if you are handed down first hand knowledge then that knowledge is second hand for you. Or, as they say in courts of law, "hear-say". Either the Sumerians had first hand knowledge themselves or they were handed down some info in which case they had second hand knowledge, thus more unreliable.

RUSSO, if books sold bestow credibility then the most credible source in human history is the Bible - it is after all the best seller in the history of the written word. If we go by this, then what the Beatles sung about is far more credible as they sold much more copies, no? Not to mention Tolkien (although archaeologists still have found no clue of Minas Tirith or Hobbiton ).

reply to post by Maegnas


Thanks for your observations. You mention in particular the second paragraph.

I would have hoped that it be better understood as an expansion on the original thought, not conclusive. For if I did for certain KNOW rather than speculate what the Sumerian mindset was over 3 millennia ago I would in all probability be a mega-million best-selling bookseller and author myself. But alas, that is not the case...on all counts. No, I do not know their mindset, but as I look at the cylinder seals and their depictions I get the sense that as if they occured in today's world they appear to me to be snapshots of notable events. Some of them akin to a picture you might find in your local newspaper of a ceremonial ribbon cutting, or the ground breaking of a new building project. Journalism. I do not see them as depicting the furthering of their mythology or religious beliefs. Although an entertwining these two is still a distinct posibility. If not the only possibility.

I did laugh out loud where you mentioned next "hearsay". Not at you, but at the contradictions in law.

A police officer clocks a speeder and radios ahead to another officer just up the road so the second officer can make the traffic stop. In a court this is known as "implied knowledge". Because in the techical sense the officer making the stop, not having clocked the speeder himself, would not have the required probable cause to make the stop in the first place and the entire case gets thrown out as unconstitutional.

So in a court of law when law enforcement is concerned it is "implied knowledge" - and when a non-officer testifies it is called "hearsay". Funny thing the law.

But in any event I would hold out to you that any knowledge imparted to the Sumerians by the Anunnaki should be viewed under the "implied knowledge" doctrine rather than as "hearsay" rule. Why? Because in the strict sense "implied" is admissible in the court of public opinion while "hearsay" is not.

reply to post by WarriorKing



have you considered going to the text archive and searching "e-kur" to see if you believe kramer is right about mountain and underworld? have you ever searched for "nibru"? there? it is interesting reading.

Originally posted by WarriorKing

Is Stichen then a barbaric heathen for finding a symbolic meaning (or perhaps an additiona meaning) in the cunieform texts or symbols?

No, he's just a fraud because he can't actually read cuneiform.

And what of his own lifelong study of these texts and the various pursuits across different continents to read them,

He has done no such "lifelong study." He can't even read it.

He uses Kramer's translations.

are his effort less noble and less accurate than that of Samuel Kramer, who purports to have spent just as much time and done the same thing?

Yes, quite a bit less noble. In fact, his "effort" contains no "nobility" at all!! This is because he is simply lying. A somewhat unnoble practice, most would agree.

And for that matter, quoting Kramer, in his book Sumerian Mythology, he says:

"(in Sumerian the word meaning "mountain" is the word used regularly for "nether world")." Id. pg. 32

If its good enough for Kramer to draw meaning from texts and symbols and transliterate them, then its good enough for Sitchen; which would be the only tolerable outcome of fair-minded thinking people.

There is a Sumerian alphabet involved here. Kramer can read it. How is that "drawing meaning" other than the fact that he is simply reading what was written?

Perhaps many here are unaware that the Akkadians, after conquering the handful of city-states that comprised Sumer, adapted their alphabet and applied it to their own language, which was Semitic.

The Akkadians left dictionaries and lexicons of the Sumerian language. We were able to translate the Akkadian because of it's ties to other, known, Semitic languages. Thus we are able to translate Sumerian through the info left by the Akkadians.

Knowing both languages allows for such things as you mention Kramer doing.

So, is the next argument going to be that the Akkadians didn't know the Sumerian language?

I know that I have to live by that maxim because I certainly cannot prove Sitchen correct or Kramer wrong. My personal understanding of Sumerian text is equal to that of a butterfly as to physics.

Your knowledge of Sumerian then is the equal of Sitchin's.

Harte

My understanding is:

The Anunnaki are from the planet Nabiru. Nabiru is believed to be planet X.
www.libertyforlife.com...

There seems to be a regular cycle of Epochs on earth. This is established by archeologists finding ancient building build on top of other ancient building and the older building, the ones at the bottom, have higher quality construction. It is also established by determining that the earth axis and magnetic field have changed/reversed. When an Epoch occurs the slate of humanity tends to get whipped clean and people fall back to primitive existence.

The question is: "What triggers the Epoch?" Since an effect is necessary to cause the Epoch and clean the slate (wipe out "Civilization"). One reasonable answer is that it is the result of a large "heavenly body" like a planet coming so close to the earth that it causes massive effects.

Now since this has occurred before and in some cases civilization has been very advanced, then some people (the Vatican, governments) find or come into possession of this evidence, perhaps ancient repositories, or perhaps they have always had them preserved from Epoch to Epoch. Knowing when the next one is coming up, they would build colonies else where (moon, mars) and underground shelters, and arks of one kind or another. Now, the people in the know would conceal that information in order to avoid share then there isn't enough room for everyone. They may even try and get comfortable with the idea that the world population would be dramatically less and start promoting the 500 million number.

This would also explain how people like the Mayans would be able to predict the next Epoch.

Now if Planet X is real (NASA seems to think so) and it is the catalyst for these Epochs and it is coming real soon like around 2012, and "Nabiru" happens to be living on Planet X. Then the Annunaki would know that sometime after the Epoch, they should send care packages to the almost drowned earthlings who would be very happy to have them. And, perhaps the Annunaky might have an interest in profiteering from such an event with slavery, etc..

Good Lord!

Why do I even bother?

H.

When it come to Technology Level, The Anunnaki are type 3 Civlization

reply to post by Harte


It is probably not a coincidence that what ReelView posts above dovetails so nicely with my own here.

Whether or not I can read ancient text or not is inconsciquential to a fact.

Which is: Periodically the Earth appears to be wiped clean of civilizatioN(s) almost entirely - or for that matter perhaps entirely. What little we do know is left to us via stone carvings for the most part. More durable through the "Epochal" ages you understand.

In furtherance of my now three points: 1) being; the older the record, the nearer to original meaning intended can be trusted (provided of course the translation is accurate); and 2). the old records sometimes come true of their interpretation later in time than when they were first interpreted; and 3) that we have another contender in the mix with regards to 1) and 2) above - Ancient Lumeria.

Late 1800's - Augustus Le Plongeon, undertakes a study of the Maya in the Yucatan. Claims he has deciphered the record there. And according to Plengeon that record says the Mayan were older than the Inca, and older than the Egyptians, and that the civilization of the Mu preceded the Maya. (Note: apparently the Mu were of that generation known by the Mayans to have been wiped out).

Along comes Col. J. Churhward, he writes his five books (must have been percieved then as a nut case) and history rests for a time.

Neither Plongeon or Churchward could plunder the lost Lumerian continent for Mu artifacts, even if they knew precisely where it was. Underwater SCUBA gear was unavailable to them both.

That is not the case any longer. Enter the 21st century and there you have it. Bada Boom - Bada Bing.

www.youtube.com...

Time will prove Sitchen right or wrong, won't it?

The uncontrovertible underwater evidence already proves someone else was right.

(Man, do those ancient guys like to carve huge faces outta rock. Seems like every previously wiped-out earthly civilization we stumble upon has some.)

reply to post by ReelView


I could not agree with you any more that the evidence before each of us today is as plain as the nose on the face of the Sphyinx, that mankind suffers cyclical global catastrophe.

Kramer does nothing to explain that.

Sitchen does.

This is so easy even a caveman could do it.