Is all of history a LIE??

Anatoly Timofeevich Fomenko (born 13 March 1945 in Stalino, USSR) is a Soviet and Russian mathematician, professor at Moscow State University, well-known as a topologist, and a full member of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Despite his academic success, he is known for not agreeing with the current chronological model of our world history.

The New Chronology is a theory that the conventional chronology is fundamentally flawed, that events attributed to antiquity such as the histories of Rome, Greece and Egypt actually occurred during the Middle Ages, more than a thousand years after the time to which they have conventionally been assigned. The central concepts of the New Chronology are derived from the ideas of Nikolai Morozov,[1] although Jean Hardouin can be viewed as an earlier predecessor.[2] The New Chronology is commonly associated with Anatoly Fomenko, although it is a collaboration between Fomenko and several other mathematicians.

en.wikipedia.org...(Fomenko)
www.revisedhistory.org...

Fomenko examines astronomical events described in ancient texts and suggests that the chronology is actually medieval. For example: He explains the mysterious drop in the value of the lunar acceleration parameter D" between the years 700-1300 AD, which the American astrophycist Robert Newton had explained in terms of non-gravitational forces. By eliminating those anomalous early eclipses the New Chronology produces a constant value of D" beginning around 1000 AD.

He associates initially the Star of Bethlehem with the 1140 (±20) AD supernova (now Crab Nebula) and the Crucifixion Eclipse with the total solar eclipse of 1170 (±20) AD. In the course of further research he came to the conclusion that Crab Nebula supernova could not have exploded in AD 1054, but probably in AD 1153. He connects it with total eclipse of AD 1186. Moreover he holds in strong doubt the veracity of 'ancient' Chinese astronomical data.

He refines and completes Morozov's analysis of some ancient horoscopes, most notably, the so-called Dendera Zodiacs—two horoscopes drawn on the ceiling of the temple of Hathor—and comes to the conclusion that they correspond to either the 11th and 13th centuries AD. Moreover he makes in his vol.3 of 'History:Fiction or Science' series final computer aided dating of all 37 Egyptian horoscopes that contain sufficient astronomical data, and shows they all fit into xi-xix timeframe. Traditional history usually either interprets these horoscopes as belonging to the 1st century BC or suggests that they weren't meant to match any date at all.

In his final analysis of an eclipse triad described by the ancient Greek Thucydides in History of the Peloponnesian War, Fomenko dates the eclipses to 1039, 1046 and 1057 AD. Because of the layered structure of the manuscript, he concludes that Thucydides actually lived in medieval times and in describing the Peloponnesian War between the Spartans and Athenians he was actually describing the conflict between the medieval Navarrans and Aragonese in Spain from 1374 to 1387 AD.

Fomenko claims that the abundance of dated astronomical records in cuneiform texts from Mesopotamia is of little use for dating of events as the astronomical information they contain has solutions on the time axis X approx. every 30–40 years.

What do you guys on ATS think of this? I personally think he is wrong, but he does have an excellent point in talking about how our dating methods are off. Do you think this guy has some valid points?

If this is true, hate to sound cliche', but it would change history forever.
But, it probably won't be proven right.

Discussed before, actually:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

If you google using the expression "fomenko site:abovetopsecret.com" you'll see he's been discussed in many threads here.

There's several problems with his ideas. The main issues I see are geology (having done some archaeological work with the local archaeological and paleontological societies, I'm familiar with timeline profiles and with seeing evidence of things like yearly floods in soil and rock formations) -- people lie or misinterpret, but dirt is pretty straight forward. The stuff on top was put down last.

The other issue is that it requires an improbable number of people running around and forging personal mementos (his sources are somewhat cherry picked) including coins, gravestones, letters, trade good exchanges (folks in ancient Rome weren't getting the same stuff from the same trade sources as those in Middle Ages Europe (I just made up that example to give you a sense of how out of synch his evidence is)) and other sorts of evidence that scholars use, including references (someone refers to someone who died earlier and does a summary of their book.) and forging paintings in a really short time period.

So his evidence is correct and true (a lot of very ancient books don't exist in their original forms and our only copies are from Medieval libraries) but it's a surface connection -- like seeing one white horse here in Texas and anther white horse in Kentucky and assuming that they're clones manufactured by Dupont Industries.

Nice theory, but just going off the top of my head, the Grandparents Rebuttal work well for this. I shall explain.

We know of the events of World War II by media (film footage, radio broadcasts, etc.), documentation and the recollections of our grandparents. This is key. They knew of events of two generations past in the same manner. In other words, family anecdotes have been around for years. True, much has been lost (time will do that), but I'm fairly certain someone from 1232 would have commented on all the Roman soldiers running about. Just saying.

There are other things, as well. using simple math (just how long is a generation, anyway?) one can got to old family trees, wedding/birth/death records and what have you, and figure it up from there. Unless folks have been making it up whole cloth. (Which I wouldn't put past some of those European families...)

Just my two cents.

makes sense to me, how in sam hill did our historians ever get the 300-180 bc - or before christ died scenario, when writing down calendar events when they never knew christ, i laugh every time i open up a book that states bc, SO if they did not know christ, how could they possibly have an accrurate account of historical events

My hat is off to this guy

Oh... and the Dendara Zodiacs aren't horoscopes. They are sky maps, but there's no planets there. In order to have a horoscope (I was at one time a professional astrologer... yes, really) you have to have planetary positions noted. Those are constellations only.

reply to post by Byrd


Thank you for bringing that up. One thing like you said I agree with; that it would take an immense amount of forgery to pull off all the old Roman/Greek coins and paintings/pottery work. But none the less he does bring up a good point, that we do not know a lot about this world, let alone our history before 1000 A.D. I think we should keep an opened mind when dealing with things to far back in the past. Another thing he talks about is the dating methods used and how flawed they are. Do you have any personal opinions about that Byrd?

While I wouldn't argue that the historical timelines and chronologies meted out to the public are tainted at best. I would think it is more likely that some things are much older than we are told, rather than more recent.

jcolavito.tripod.com...

This is a site debunking some of the stuff.

I still think the guy makes a few good points though like how he links Egbert, the uniter of England (ruled 38 years), to Justinian the Great, restorer of the Roman Empire (ruled 38 years). But again the coinage says it all. It would be to hard to fake all of history. There is history of all the Popes in the Vatican dating way before 1000 A.D

Fomenko et al insist that Roman and Egyptian records (for example) have been misattributed to a period some thousand years and more before their actual date of somewhere in the Middle Ages. They claim that our history is only an outcome of Medieval scholars' misinterpretation of existing records. Is that a fair summary?

Let's share their perspective of history for a moment. Let's say that the written records after 1000AD are closer to the truth? Herodotus, Tacitus and the Harris Papyrus can be put to one side.

A large obstacle to this idea is that piece of dark rock known as the Rosetta Stone . Discovered in the late 18th Century and finally deciphered in the early 19th Century (recent history really), it opened the world of Ancient Egypt to scholars. They could finally set about understanding what the Egyptians had recorded about their lives and beliefs.

Scholars could begin to interpret the hieroglyphs. The scrolls of papyrii and inscriptions were readable at last. In amongst the vast amount of texts they found stele that became known as the 'Kings Lists.' These offered chronologies of the rulers and Dynasties of Egypt. In the Abydos King List are some 70 odd rulers. Even if they ruled an average of ten years each, it would take us up to around the 1700s according to Fomenko's ideas. Napoleon's forces were in Egypt shortly thereafter and found a place of ruined glory centuries past its prime.

For Fomenko to be right we need to somehow squeeze in many generations of Egyptian Dynasties and then add Greek, Roman and Persian occupations. All this in the 700 years between his 1000AD start date and modern records in the 17th Century.

It's a push, huh?

reply to post by Maddogkull


Answering the question , yes most of the official history in all areas consider official is a paradoxical lie.Just to start the way me measured time , the way we order accounts,how is possible the entire world have piramyds and all of those countries turn the head the other way???.....is it really a common couse for humanity to know what really went on with christ or without christ????

Rome in the middle ages? But Rome owned the most of Europe at its greatest extent. Which would be what, 1000 AD (if the "new" history is taken into account)? How could that be possible if 200 years earlier Charlemagne was rivalling the Byzantines, which were the spiritual successor of the romans after rome had fell? Charlemagne had conquered Italy, and most of western and central europe.

It's conflicting.

He does make some interesting points and in short, yes all of history is a lie. There is a great (but thick and academic) book called Forbidden Archeology by Micheal Cremo. The first part talks about how science and culture fall into just disregarding anomalous finds that fall outside of accepted worldview rather than revising the worldview. The second half of the book catalog anomalous finds that suggest there was technologically proficient humanity in extreme ancient antiquity, which throws our whole accepted history into question. Velikovsky is another great read for alternative history timelines and developments.

As to those family histories.....
Only the royals kept records of family members, and it would be to their advantage to add several generations to show the masses that they had a long history of being Kings.

And those Egyptian Kind lists.....It has been found that they were not all consecutive, many of them were co-rulerships. This alone has, so far, cut some 300 years off the time line.
Likewise for those "dark ages".

I have 3 of the 7 Fomenko books.
I find much of it very plausable. HIs charts of parallel rulers from different time periods is a big convincer that many of the older ones were made up copies of more current events.

He shows copies of dated records where the dates were listed such as: i450 or j515 etc. The prefilx letters subsequently became interpreted as number 1. So, if even this is correct our dating system is off by 1000 years., and so this is only year 1010. This then also lends credence to his contention that stories were made up to fill the gap.

Here is an article on the problem of dating history:
www.revisedhistory.org...

There are also other interesting articles on this site. One is one the Egyptian zodiacs.

He loses me completely when he tries to pin the events of Jesus onto one of the popes as well as onto a King (forgetting the names at the moment). I don't think he said anywhere what his religious beliefs were, but since I believe that the Jesus story is a copy of ancient legend, I can't go along with his co-respondences. Maybe he is Christian and therefor just has to put Jesus somewhere.

It's possible.

I know people will debate against it.

But really the ONLY way to know for sure, is to either ask Aliens for a video record of all of it, or to make a Time Machine and go back and take a look for ourselves.

If neither possibility is realistic, than we will never actually know either way. So debate on friends. I am enjoying the reading.

I'd like to get these books. Even if I don't initially agree with them, I enjoy peoples creativity in these matters, I like what they come up with, not in a judgemental way either. it's just interesting. It's going to be difficult to find here though, anyone know any sources?

reply to post by OhZone

He shows copies of dated records where the dates were listed such as: i450 or j515 etc. The prefilx letters subsequently became interpreted as number 1. So, if even this is correct our dating system is off by 1000 years., and so this is only year 1010. This then also lends credence to his contention that stories were made up to fill the gap.

Well I'm going with this guy..
If it's only 1010 then we have another 1002 years till 2012

Originally posted by allprowolfy
makes sense to me, how in sam hill did our historians ever get the 300-180 bc - or before christ died scenario, when writing down calendar events when they never knew christ, i laugh every time i open up a book that states bc, SO if they did not know christ, how could they possibly have an accrurate account of historical events

My hat is off to this guy

this is possibly one of the most ignorant things I have ever read on ATS. please take a minute and think about what you are saying. *facepalm*

reply to post by Electric Crown

this is possibly one of the most ignorant things I have ever read on ATS. please take a minute and think about what you are saying. *facepalm*

Yes, I wonder if they wish to buy some old coins off me..
Really old and clearly marked 1100BC..

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by OhZone

 

He shows copies of dated records where the dates were listed such as: i450 or j515 etc. The prefilx letters subsequently became interpreted as number 1. So, if even this is correct our dating system is off by 1000 years., and so this is only year 1010. This then also lends credence to his contention that stories were made up to fill the gap.

Well I'm going with this guy..
If it's only 1010 then we have another 1002 years till 2012

Now that is what I call a curve ball.

Very nice thinking there. All of our prophecies would suffer massive set backs!