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: 3
12
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 18 2010 @ 11:10 AM
link   
Please people, enough with the Mall-Mentality, you come here for information and debate, then debate, don't fight like silly little girls...

FOA: I'm pretty fond of the Ancient astronaut theory but i'm "scientific" enough to UNDERSTAND that there is still no hard evidence, i'd like it to be, but since we still are in muddy waters, I have to keep a centered position.
I'd love for ZS's stuff to be true, i really do.
But if i'm something more than a stupid faith believer, if i'm trying to be an evolved being, as bill hicks would say, i have to balance all the arguments...

And the OP makes some great points about it, and he does it in a very serious way, he's not just saying "He is wrong" he is EXPLAINING WHY he thinks that, and (more important) HE IS USING LOGICAL ARGUMENTS.

So, if you are a "fan" of ZS, listen to him, TRY TO UNDERSTAND what is he saying and then, if you don't agree, ELABORATE LOGICALLY WHY.

And to the amoeba brain that spoke about darwin, 2 things:
1- WE DO NOT DESCEND FROM APES, i will repeat: WE DO NOT DESCEND FROM APES, WE SHARE A COMMON ANCESTOR.
2- Evolutionary theory wasn't frozen when darwin died, so "darwinism" is just the BEGINNING of modern evolutionary theories and it has been worked on, A LOT.


Pleeeease, please READ and THINK before you speak, it's the only way of being free.


Be free, or die trying.
Drakus




posted on May, 18 2010 @ 12:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Max_TO
 





People believe him because they want to believe his story .


Why would people WANT to believe his story. Why would anyone want to accept that everything they have learned about humanity has been a big lie just for the sake of supporting the opinions and findings of one guy?

The OP's attempt to debunk all of Stichin's research based on what is presented in his introduction fails. I also wonder . . . if the OP is able to point out flaws in Sitchin's interpretations, why doesn't the OP take his own apparent interpreting skills and decipher the writings on these cuneiforms himself? Also, is the OP trying to suggest that Sitchin's work has not been supported by ANY other researchers? If so, this would not be factual.

Have there been others who’ve researched this issue as extensively as Sitchin and documented their findings in a book or series of books that present a summary in a chronological manner the way Sitchin has done? If so, I would like to read them, because it seems to me that Sitchin remains at the center of this controversial issue. If he’s so lacking in skill and knowledge, then why hasn’t his work been long forgotten, given the fact the OP claims “every other researcher” has proven him wrong?

Granted, there may very well be flaws in Sitchin's findings. Frankly, some of his research may prove to clarify certain events contained in the Bible, making the stories more plausible than anything taken at its literal interpretation. Noah carrying the DNA of every animal species makes a hell of a lot more sense than him gathering up two of every kind and floating around with them on an ark for 40 days and nights.

Sitchin's work is extensive and covers many areas not mentioned in the OP's introduction, some of which do not encompass physics. I think to disregard all of Sitchin's research based on some flawed physics would be a mistake. Sitchin's work is worthy of everyone's examination. I think it should at least be considered with everything else we have gathered about possible origins of humanity. People will determine for themselves if it rings true to them or not, even if his approach to physics hasn't been flawless.

[edit on 18-5-2010 by NightGypsy]



posted on May, 18 2010 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Why would people WANT to believe his story.


People who question the validity of religions that tell of an all-powerful entity that has say over what you should do, where you should go after you die, and how you came to be may be prone to believe the 'Ancient Alien' theories or at least have the desire to.

After all, these people still want answers to creation and may need to believe that there is something out there greater than us. Stitchin's specific theories may or may not be true or scientifically possible but the idea that we may have been created by beings from another world is about as plausible as anything else human beings have conceived of to alleviate the fear that "that's all there is."



posted on May, 18 2010 @ 01:11 PM
link   
reply to post by NightGypsy
 


Can you tell us someone that is familiar with Sumerian cuneiform that agrees with Sitchin?

Sitchin's work is poor. He makes claims that have been shown to be impossible physically. It's not that there are flaws in his claims or minor problems. What he claims is impossible. Kind of a major flaw don't you think - being impossible.

Then there are failures in his archaeology. He appears to make things up as he goes along. His translations are wrong.

PS, Noah floated for over 300 days.



posted on May, 18 2010 @ 01:25 PM
link   
I have read Sitchin's books, and they are great stories. That there being my main point, stories. A great resource for people interested in reading actual translations of some of the Sumerian tablets, like the story of Gilgameš, which is covered by Sitchin, should take a look at the following link to do their own comparison.

etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk...#

Brought to you by the University of Oxford =)

(if you are lost right off the bat, check out the "corpus content by category")

Thanks and enjoy

Druidae

*edit to make my horrid english a little better

[edit on 18-5-2010 by Druidae]



posted on May, 18 2010 @ 01:46 PM
link   
There is a guy who is seriously 'done' with Sitchin and asked Sitchin to start a public debate with him....but Sitchin refuses to communicate with him.

If you are interested what this guy has to say then you should visit his website. He is a credentialed scholar of Ancient Hebrew and Semitic Languages...a heavy hitter in the field of the language Sitchen claims to have translated the proper way.

His name is Michael S. Heiser and his website carries the undisputed name....sitcheniswrong.com.

I really like Sitchen but as always there is a lot of money to be made with claiming to know the truth about interesting stuff. And like Mulder people want to belief.

There are only a few people on this earth who can read the old sumerian text and it seems hat Sitchin is not one of them.



posted on May, 18 2010 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by DrJay1975
 


Ad Hominem = invalid method, not to be taken seriously.

Get real dude..!

Credibility arguments are designed to take the attention away from whatever scraps of truth might have been dug up by an investigative researcher (even if they are few and far between). Don't discount Sitchin's work in its entirety; there's lots of interesting stuff in there.

People who spend their time thinking up ways to discredit others (instead of researching valid topics for themselves) should really GET A LIFE...!



posted on May, 18 2010 @ 02:26 PM
link   
Having battled on behalf of Sitchin a few times now (and having been unimpressed with many of the base arguments against him), it's time I researched fully all of the varied arguments 'against'.

NB - People need to stop saying things like 'He is a liar' without backing it up fully. He did his research, and gave his references... Call me old-fashioned, but if people want to call him a liar, then the least that should be expected is that they should be willing to present the evidence that PROVES it, beyond all reasonable doubt.

I'll present my findings soon, but my point above still stands - don't just discredit the man; check his work. To be honest, I'm at the point that I want to learn how to read cuneiform, if only to get a feel for exactly how close or otherwise he is/was. It would be VERY interesting to see whether I get 'debunked' as a 'liar' if my translations correlate with his...



posted on May, 18 2010 @ 02:30 PM
link   
Has anyone considered that if people as a whole found out that we were created by aliens, that the billion (trillion?) dollar industry that is organized religion would go up in smoke?

There are too many people on this earth involved in these industries to make it even a mere possibility that it would end up common knowledge even if it were true.

Not to mention that religion indirectly or directly keeps the masses placid and that, too, would probably end.

I'd even go so far to say that it wouldn't even benefit our species at this juncture if most people found out we were created by, er, not-Gods. I can't even imagine the repercussions.... Nor can our governments and the system that allows us to keep up the ant hill, so to speak.

So with that, do I trust Sitchin? No. But as a non-scientist, linguist, archeologist, or physicist, etc (ie completely ingnorant) would I trust the mainstream scientific community to even tell me the truth if it were true? No. In fact, the exact opposite would happen: the very best attempts that money and power can buy to prevent said 'truth.'

As far as I'm concerned, when I see debates like this, it just means the human mouse wheel is humming along quite nicely and nothing extraordinary has yet happened.

Either way, some part of me, however, is dying to turn on the TV one day and see all networks covering some 'other worldly' event transpiring.



posted on May, 18 2010 @ 02:35 PM
link   
reply to post by DrJay1975
 


By the way - where are your references matey..? If you've added them in later on that goes some way to proving my point - they should have been incorporated into the original post.

Why should we look in the Chicago Assyrian dictionary..? Because a small group of academics said that Nibiru means crossing point (as opposed to planet of the crossing) that means we should look no further..? Earth means both 'SOIL/DIRT' and 'THE PLANET EARTH'. See my point..?

I didn't see one scrap of a reference in your first post - I did see evidence that you're not a scholar (your wildly flailing accusations and poor presentation of the argument). I won't spend too much time on this as I'm a busy man, but seriously, there's a lot of problems with your argument - this leads to a potential risk of lowering your own credibility.

Keep it real; keep searching.


Noah.



posted on May, 18 2010 @ 02:58 PM
link   
Reading his book in the past I thought some of his views were interesting, such as the high advancement of the Sumerian culture and how most other cultures came from them, but the Sumerians seem to not have history as to where their advance culture evolved from.

Saying that I did see two points that bothered me that much of the book rested on, and the first one was how he applied the meaning of a few Sumerian words to justify/prove his conjectures. Take away those definitions and much of his theories fall apart, also I had issues with the planet Nibiru or more importantly its orbit. This orbit would have extremes greater than Mercury and Pluto and one would need to wonder how can any life much less advance life evolve on a planet that doesn’t have a steady orbit for long term evolution. Just think of life on earth if the average temperature changed +- 10 degrees, much less +- 100s of degrees that Nibiru would go through.



posted on May, 18 2010 @ 03:05 PM
link   
Well, all will be clear when 2013 arrives without any problems...



posted on May, 18 2010 @ 03:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by union_jack
Well, all will be clear when 2013 arrives without any problems...


As far as I'm aware, Sitchin does not state that 2012 is when Nibiru will make an appearance, but 2085 (I think).

Doesn't mean it's real like. I've read Sitchin's work, and I don't believe a lot of it, but certainly some of these things deserve examination on. It's opened a whole new idea on life as we know it (Jim).

It's certainly allowed others to study ancient history and challenge mainstream facts. This is what it is about.

Andy Lloyd's The Dark Star is a cracking book explaining the science behind Nibiru and a potential brown dwarf. I think many of Sitchin's numbers are wrong, but I'm intrigued about the knowledge on Uranus and Neptune prior to the known existence of these planets?



posted on May, 18 2010 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Phoenix06
 


Does Andy Lloyd explain how far away a brown dwarf has to be to make it undetectable? I saw a short part of a video in which he seemed not understand much about this issue.



posted on May, 18 2010 @ 04:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Phoenix06
 


Does Andy Lloyd explain how far away a brown dwarf has to be to make it undetectable? I saw a short part of a video in which he seemed not understand much about this issue.


Hi Stereologist,

It's a while since I've read it, but I've just skimmed through it, and there's something called a 3 Body Solution. It's basically just some theories about it's position. There are other theories which all follow a similar theme that it's way out amongst The Kupiter Belt and the Oort Cloud, which will take a probe to find it, hence the WISE probe (I think).

Other than that, not much really. It's primarily about the position of The Nibiru System (Nibiru is a Dark Star orbited by several planets for those not aware of The Dark Star).

What I will add to balance this is that Lloyd does try to support Sitchin as much as possible, which may put some people off. I'm just fascinated by the whole subject myself.



posted on May, 18 2010 @ 04:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by starsyren
reply to post by serbsta
 


Sitchin does have many critics, and some of his translations have been found to be off a bit...but he's the one publishing novels, getting his ideas out into the general populace FOR us to consider.

To me, it's hard NOT to respect someone who's actually taken that leap, taken the initiative to give people more interpretations on the traditional and make us think critically. I simply believe the criticism he's recieved is a bit much, taking into consideration that he's the one with a bona fide accomplishment to his name.


I always say the person that takes a lot of criticism for their work must be on the right track for all the hate. A lot of scientists and archeologists have a lot at stake if sitchin is right. People are just afraid in my humble opinion.



posted on May, 18 2010 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Max_TO
 


How is a miss translation? The Anunna or Anunnaki means "those who come from heaven to earth" What would you then think that means if it is wrong how he translates that it could be an alien life form?

I think he mistranslated Nibiru and it should be Nibru. Nibiru (also transliterated Neberu, Nebiru) is a term in the Akkadian language, translating to "crossing" or "point of transition". So if we are in a binary system and we cross path with our solar sytem with a brown dwarf system then it doesn't sound far-off that it cold be a planet.

Oh yeah, Sitchin was right and Extraterrestrial is a bad word amongst any "scientific" community.



posted on May, 18 2010 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Phoenix06
 


It is funny though that NASA keeps on looking towards Sitchin's work and the Vedas manuscripts in India.



posted on May, 18 2010 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phoenix06

Originally posted by union_jack
Well, all will be clear when 2013 arrives without any problems...


As far as I'm aware, Sitchin does not state that 2012 is when Nibiru will make an appearance, but 2085 (I think).

Doesn't mean it's real like. I've read Sitchin's work, and I don't believe a lot of it, but certainly some of these things deserve examination on. It's opened a whole new idea on life as we know it (Jim).

It's certainly allowed others to study ancient history and challenge mainstream facts. This is what it is about.

Andy Lloyd's The Dark Star is a cracking book explaining the science behind Nibiru and a potential brown dwarf. I think many of Sitchin's numbers are wrong, but I'm intrigued about the knowledge on Uranus and Neptune prior to the known existence of these planets?


Sitchin states the age of pisces is when they will return and there is a tablet with proof on this.

You can watch the series of sitchin called 'Will the Anunnaki return in 2012?' He "calls out" his critics in this one.

This video is 12/12 of the series but it shows the date he interprets as when the Anunnaki will return.




posted on May, 18 2010 @ 05:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by zatara
There is a guy who is seriously 'done' with Sitchin and asked Sitchin to start a public debate with him....but Sitchin refuses to communicate with him.

If you are interested what this guy has to say then you should visit his website. He is a credentialed scholar of Ancient Hebrew and Semitic Languages...a heavy hitter in the field of the language Sitchen claims to have translated the proper way.

His name is Michael S. Heiser and his website carries the undisputed name....sitcheniswrong.com.

I really like Sitchen but as always there is a lot of money to be made with claiming to know the truth about interesting stuff. And like Mulder people want to belief.

There are only a few people on this earth who can read the old sumerian text and it seems hat Sitchin is not one of them.








Yes, that site I have read is quite misleading. What say that the first person who saw the word Elohim and translated it as the word Gods. but in your whole life you have been taught we have to worship one god. Then human emotion come in and decides to misinterpret on purpose because of their belief might be wrong. Now we have the sumerian tablets and they state that they worshiped more than one 'god'. So how far-off is it now?

I know the human mind quite well and believe Ellohim was misinterpret by the first translator because their belief was at stake. The elders said no and just right in one god. You don't believe me? Then look at how the Bible is being rewritten for the sake of how human beliefs are in jeopardy and they change words to suit their needs. Human stupidity is in error here and don't believe it is Sitchin.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join