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.

 

The Stichin Hoax

page: 1
12
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 17 2010 @ 11:15 AM
link   
I've seen Zecharia Stichin shredded in threads but I haven't found an independent one. So I'm going to attack the credibility of one of the main instigators of this Nibiru hoax.

1. Misconception #1- His translation of the word elohim in the hebrew bible. He claims it's plural and means Gods. AKA the Annunaki. WHile it's the plural form the meaning isn't plural. See fish, deer, etc.... You don't say look a herd of deers. There are also numerous times when elohim is used in synchronicity with Yahweh, which isn't plural.

2. #2. Stichin clearly doesn't understand ancient Sumerian. If he's right every legitimate researcher in the field is wrong. I don't think so. He makes mistakes in Hebrew that a 12 year old wouldn't make. He doesn't know the languages he claims to.

3. The sumerians knew there were 12 planets because of the cylinder seal. To put it quite simply, there are 1000s of pictures of how the sumerians depoicted the sun. What he says is the sun is not the sun.

4.Nibiru. Look at the Chicago Assyrian dictionary. Nibiru isn't a planet. There are never Annunaki associated with it. Nibiru means "crossing point". It's also referred to as a star but never a 12th planet. Nibiru is also referred to as Marduk meaning Jupiter. Niniru was seen every year which means that his 3600 year cycle is false.

5. The ancient Sumerians astonomy was comparable to other societies of the day. They left few astronomical records but enough to know that they didn't know about ANY OF THE NONVISIBLE TO THE NAKED EYE PLANETS. The sumerians, by their own records, knew of 5 planets. 5. Yep 5.

6.His translation of Nephillim as people in fiery rockets isn't possible. He also can't tell the difference between Aramaic and Hebrew. An excellent linguist no doubt.. But if his meaning of the word Nephillim is wrong, it discredits most of his hypothesis. Sitchin assumes "Nephilim" comes from the Hebrew word "naphal" (as opposed to ARAMAIC - see below) which usually means "to fall." He then forces the meaning "to come down" onto the word, creating his "to come down from above" translation. "Nephilim" - in the form we find it in the Hebrew Bible - COULD come from Hebrew "naphal," but it could ONLY be translated one way in light of the spelling - "those who are fallen" (i.e., either "fallen in battle" - which is out of the question given the context of Genesis 6 - or "spiritually fallen" / evil - which fits the context IF the sons of God are evil). To see that the sons of God in Genesis 6 were evil divine beings and this cohabitation was evil, one needs only to turn to either Jude 6-7 and II Peter 2:4-6, or the Book of Enoch.



7.Meaning of Sumerian MU. Did you know the Sumerians had a dictionary? It means hevean or possibly rains. Not Rocketship.

8. Sitchin argues in turn that the Genesis account of the tower of Babel, where the people wanted to make for themselves a "shem," actually describes the construction of a flying craft/rocket.there is an Akkadian word shumu. This word has its own meaning, a meaning that did in fact get absorbed into Biblical Hebrew, from whence Hebrew shem originated. Both this Akkadian shumu and Hebrew shem mean “name” or “renown,” the word meanings Mr. Sitchin ridicules in The 12th Planet on his way to fabricating rocket ships in Mesopotamia and the Biblical Tower of Babel story. Other than the concocted word origin (SHU.MU), how do we know that Mr. Sitchin’s word meanings are wrong?

In the absence of any linguistic support for his rocket ships, Mr. Sitchin’s supporters might claim a linguistic cover-up. No, scholars aren’t hiding “rocket ship” meanings in the cuneiform tablets. In fact, the discerning reader of the Sumerian and biblical Babel accounts need not retreat to linguistics at all to know Mr. Sitchin’s theories are nonsensical. Consider first the biblical story of Genesis 11:1-9:

1 And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech. 2 And it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Babylon; and they dwelt there. 3 And they said one to another, Go to, let us make brick, and burn them thoroughly. And they had brick for stone, and slime had they for mortar. 4 And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top [may reach] unto heaven; and let us make us a name (shem) lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth. 5 And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men built. 6 And the Lord said, Behold, the people are one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. 7 Let us go; let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech. 8 So the Lord scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they stopped building the city. 9 Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the Lord confounded the language of all the earth there: and from thence did the Lord scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.

The people are not building the shem; they are building “a city and a tower” (verse 4). The Hebrew words here are not shem in either case, they are ‘ir (“city”; pronounced ghir) and migdal (“tower”). The word shem comes later in the verse, and is the purpose for building the city and tower – to make a great name for themselves, just what the Akkadian word shumu means! The tower is being build with brick and mortar... Yeah rocketship materials right there.


The point is for all you stichenites out there, he is flat out wrong. His translation skills lack or are outright fabrications. He doesn't even bother to use the sumerian dictionaries to aid him. Probably because they contradict him. Maybe its an ancient sumerian government conspiracy. The point is if his hebrew and sumerian translations are correct then every other researcher in the field is wrong. Hebrew grammar is wrong. The ancient sumerians didn't know what their own language meant.

Maybe his Hebrew, Aramaic and Sumerian translations are wrong because he doesn't have a legitimate degree.




posted on May, 17 2010 @ 11:55 AM
link   
Well I don't doubt that Stichin's work is flawed and off-base, considering his position as an economist and not a historian; can you explain your credibility, and knowledge in this field?



posted on May, 17 2010 @ 12:20 PM
link   
reply to post by DrJay1975
 
Starred and flagged. What's a hoax? What is fraud?

A lot of Sitchin die-hards enjoy debating the validity of his translations. Quicksand. I prefer to question the physical claims. There's no evidence of vast goldmines, spaceports, artifacts or population centres to fit his claims. No contemporary accounts of the last 'fly-by' by Nibiru...no paintings, folklore, myths etc.

It's fascinating from a psychological perspective that Sitchin has so many believers and defenders.



posted on May, 17 2010 @ 06:21 PM
link   
It amazes me as well to see people flocking to this nonsense and not asking whether or not any of this might be correct. The Sitchin nonsense fails on all levels from the translations, to the physics, to the archaeology. Truly amazing.



posted on May, 17 2010 @ 07:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by DrJay1975
I've seen Zecharia Stichin shredded in threads but I haven't found an independent one. So I'm going to attack the credibility of one of the main instigators of this Nibiru hoax.

1. Misconception #1- His translation of the word elohim in the hebrew bible. He claims it's plural and means Gods. AKA the Annunaki. WHile it's the plural form the meaning isn't plural. See fish, deer, etc.... You don't say look a herd of deers. There are also numerous times when elohim is used in synchronicity with Yahweh, which isn't plural.



Though I'm not a fan of Mr. Stichin, the bible does talk of multiple gods... Whether we like it or not, that is a fact.

Exudos Chapter 12 verse 12

For I will pass through the land of Egypt this night, and will smite all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and against all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgment: I am the LORD.

Exudos Chapter 15 verse 11

Who is like unto thee, O LORD, among the gods? who is like thee, glorious in holiness, fearful in praises, doing wonders?



There are many more examples of gods (plural) being mentioned within the bible. That truth simply cannot be denied... Is Mr. Stichin exaggerating with his works? That I cannot say simply because I cannot read Cuneiform, and I would argue that neither can any of you. However what I can do is check his comments against others and see if what he is saying is truthful or not. I have read other peoples comments about Stichin, and though some are not favorable of his translations, and others are flatass rude... there are many I’ve read who agree with his translations, including a personal friend. Just because some in academia do not like his translations, I don't consider that a complete denunciation of his work. (Though I must admit I've only purchased two of his books and could only finish one... his latest work was junk IMO… I say that because he continued to say the same phrase over and over, and that bothered the hell out of me… I simply couldn’t finish that book.) But there are hundreds within the scientific community who agree with what Mr. Stichin has to say, to denounce them all as unbelievable, is in my opinion, while only accepting those translations that fit your world view… is in a word… Childish.


--Charles Marcello




[edit on 17-5-2010 by littlebunny]



posted on May, 17 2010 @ 07:28 PM
link   

But there are hundreds within the scientific community who agree with what Mr. Stichin has to say, to denounce them all as unbelievable, is in my opinion, while only accepting those translations that fit your world view… is in a word… Childish.


Hundreds? That I do not believe. To make such a claim is laughable.



posted on May, 17 2010 @ 07:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist

But there are hundreds within the scientific community who agree with what Mr. Stichin has to say, to denounce them all as unbelievable, is in my opinion, while only accepting those translations that fit your world view… is in a word… Childish.


Hundreds? That I do not believe. To make such a claim is laughable.



This from a person who posts a link in Dutch and then when its reposted in English tearing down your debunking opinion and your source, while you run and hide... I'll take that as a complement. Especially since you don't do anything but call people names who disagree with you and (sometimes) post laughable and ridiculous links. Who gives a damn what you deny!


--Charles Marcello


[edit on 17-5-2010 by littlebunny]



posted on May, 17 2010 @ 07:37 PM
link   
I was immediately taken aback upon seeing this thread title on the thoroughness of how the OP couldn't even spell this persons name properly.

However at the end of the day unless one was there in the time of the Sumerians and did actually see, hear and feel what happened there. Either way we dont know and thus this thread and any thread for or against Mr Zecharia Sitchin interpretations is simply conjecture and hearsay



posted on May, 17 2010 @ 09:51 PM
link   
I think people want to call him (sitchin) a hoax is because they are afraid to die because of Nibiru or want to believe they are created by an advanced species of alien.

LOL People make me laugh.



posted on May, 17 2010 @ 10:31 PM
link   
reply to post by littlebunny
 


It is clear that no effort has been made to substantiate the claim that

there are hundreds within the scientific community who agree with what Mr. Stichin has to say


So it appears that this is a lie. No surprise there.



posted on May, 17 2010 @ 10:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Epsillion70
 


Not true at all. The claims by Sitchin do not stand up in terms of physics or archaeology. The eccentric orbit is unstable. No new planet can exist that has an orbit entering the orbits of the known planets. Gravity and visual studies as well as orbital simulations exclude the ridiculous claims of Sitchin.



posted on May, 17 2010 @ 10:36 PM
link   
reply to post by dragnet53
 


That's very funny that anyone would think Sitchin is anything but the perpetrator of a hoax.



posted on May, 17 2010 @ 10:54 PM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 


Careful what you put in your signature, lest it be turned back upon you. My crap detector is currently in the red, thank you very much.



posted on May, 17 2010 @ 11:19 PM
link   
reply to post by warpcrafter
 


So you think that Sitchin's claims are supported by physics?

Can you tell us whether or not you support the ideas of Sitchin and if so why?



posted on May, 17 2010 @ 11:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by warpcrafter
 


So you think that Sitchin's claims are supported by physics?

Can you tell us whether or not you support the ideas of Sitchin and if so why?


What the hell does physics have to do with Sitchin?




posted on May, 17 2010 @ 11:45 PM
link   
reply to post by dragnet53
 


Doesn't Sitchin claim a planet is coming that is called Nibiru?
Doesn't he claim a 3600 year orbit for Nibiru?
Doesn't he claim the orbit is highly eccentric?

Is this starting to sound like physics? It is. So can a planet exist in the solar system with these properties? The answer is no.



posted on May, 18 2010 @ 12:05 AM
link   
to the OP, this is a really REALLY poor attempt to slander someone. i have no idea who is right and who is wrong but your testimony is nothing but trash. you don't provide any proof for anythign you say yet you make huge demands on stitchin.

apparently it's ok for you to make blanket statements without the slightest SHRED of evidence to back it up but no one else can right? i read the first 5 or 6 of your points before i could stomach anymore.

you really sound like an imbecile when you do things like this. i can compare you to people on the internet who say the gem

"your stupid" or "your ignorant".

you sound like a 5th grader that constantly says nu uuuuuuh over and over and over.

please for god's sake. provide some EVIDENCE before you continue making yourself look like a fool.

and besides, i'm pretty sure the sumerians described uranus and neptune based on their colors right? correct me if i'm wrong i really don't care.



posted on May, 18 2010 @ 12:06 AM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 


please explain why that is?



posted on May, 18 2010 @ 12:15 AM
link   
The OP is simply making arguments that have pretty much been made before. If you search AboveTopSecret or Google, you will run into all of these arguments and even better ones.

Everyone take a chill pill.

Instead of attacking the OP's "attacking", respond with evidence to support your view on Zechariah Sitchin. It makes for a more interesting and educational thread this way...

Even though I've read Sitchin threads till I woke up next to my spilt beer.



posted on May, 18 2010 @ 12:18 AM
link   
People believe him because they want to believe his story .

Check out this link , perhaps this link was the inspiration for the thread ?
www.sitchiniswrong.com...

Here are a few more sites you may find to be of intreats

www.sitchiniswrong.com...

www.skepdic.com...





Given all of this people who like and believe Mr. Sitchin will continue to do so , why , because they want to believe what he is saying , even if there are no facts backing up the claim .

[edit on 18-5-2010 by Max_TO]




top topics



 
12
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join