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.

 

Bob Lazar seems to confirm Zecharia Sitchin

page: 16
38
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 01:18 PM
link   
I'll go ahead and clear up a few things to end your argument quicker (hopefully).

1. Facial expressions and body language do not always "prove" that someone is lying. I've made the same exact expressions many times while I was telling the truth. Sometimes the recipient didn't believe me due to my unintended expressions, which seemed to "indicate" to them that I was "lying", even though I wasn't. Do you see the problem there? That excuse does not discredit Lazar in any way.

2. The information Max has provided may seem only like science fiction to you, but many Area 51 insiders say that most science "fiction" is actually science fact because it has already been done. I know anti-gravity works because I've seen it work. It is not science fiction in any way and it never will be. Tachyons may actually exist and they might be found someday. Physicists find new particles quite often, every few years or so.

3. If Lazar was really a disinformation agent, wouldn't he be denying most of the secret information instead of supporting it? Wouldn't he be trying his best to cover the facts with false information or denial? If government agents were shooting at him and trying to kill him, he was obviously disclosing information that they did not want to be disclosed to the public. The fact that even some whistle-blowers actually disappear without a trace after they admit everything just seems to make sense. I've seen a consistent pattern of disappearances among insiders. Once they spill everything, they're gone (probably in fear for their lives) and the interviewers cannot find them.

Anyone who has watched the video I posted will understand my point. Just because he can't personally hand you a pile of evidence doesn't mean he's lying. Either he cannot do it (safety reasons) or he doesn't have it. There is too much disclosure from inside sources for all of it to be considered false. There will be more coming forth later this year, most of them quite old and near the end of their days. As soon as you enter Area 51 or S4 with a need-to-know clearance, science fiction no longer exists; it becomes a reality and denial of it is almost impossible.




posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


I think Gazrok has pointed out quite clearly that the 'evidence' that he lied about his credentials is entirely circumstantial, and in fact, proof of nothing!

Keep trying.

EDIT TO ADD - in addition, you clearly didn't read the content I embedded, or the source website, or any of the source papers that were quoted on that site. Because - here's the thing - if you had, you wouldn't go on to talk about whether he had to 'reconstruct' the lies he had earlier memorised.

Throwing the word 'shill' about makes me even more convinced that you're hijacking the meaning of the term to further your own - whatever. Because that's an entirely unreasonable thing to assume based on your posts in this thread eh?

* Second eye roll in two minutes *

edit on 14-1-2011 by FlyInTheOintment because: (no reason given)

edit on 14-1-2011 by FlyInTheOintment because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 04:18 PM
link   
reply to post by LiberLegit
 


Yeah, 'or whatever'.

Like that's never happened before eh?



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 08:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by A51Watcher
 


Both Bob and Zecharia are shills...


You continue to avoid answering what/who they are shills for, and what evidence you have to support this claim.
Pretty simple question...



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 08:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by A51Watcher

Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by A51Watcher
 


Both Bob and Zecharia are shills...


You continue to avoid answering what/who they are shills for, and what evidence you have to support this claim.
Pretty simple question...


Look, take off your pink glasses for a minute and ask yourself this question:

What OBJECTIVE proof do those guys have?

And then make a list. Only include things that would count as proof infront of court or as scientific evidence.

I loooooove alien conspiracy theories, but I refuse to be a blind sheep and accept the word of every muppet out there. If they want to convince me, I need solid scientific evidence, not some random claims.

I actually tried to make such a list. A list of things where I could approach anyone, and they would have to acknowledge it as solid evidence. Guess how many things I managed to assemble....ZERO!!

As much as you WANT to BELIEVE, if you look at it objectively (dunno if you can still do that), you have to admit that they most certainly don't have any credible evidence.

If all you need is someone's word to believe, by all means...go for it an believe. But for all I care, I wan't solid evidence and not random claims by people who obviously lie about their educational backgrounds.

I don't expect you to change your mind, just like the 2012 fools won't open their eyes to reality, but at least make an effort to stay objective. Because if you are, you will realize that there's no solid evidence to support their claims.

It's all based on BELIEF, just like religion...which should tell you how wrong this path is. You are falling for the same people selling snake oil 150 years ago...



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 11:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrXYZ

Originally posted by A51Watcher

Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by A51Watcher
 


Both Bob and Zecharia are shills...


You continue to avoid answering what/who they are shills for, and what evidence you have to support this claim.
Pretty simple question...


Look, take off your pink glasses for a minute and ask yourself this question:


Thank you for avoiding the direct question for the third time in a row:


Both Bob and Zecharia are shills...


This is the charge you made in your original post, which you have ever since ignored, and all your attempts to deflect away from the question will not get you anywhere.

The reason why you avoid answering what/who they are shills for, and what evidence you have to support this claim, is now pretty obvious to all.

edit on 14-1-2011 by A51Watcher because: sp



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 01:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyInTheOintment
reply to post by A51Watcher
 



I would suggest to the person to whom you were replying that they recognise that methods of reply which follow such patterns will be called out time after time, and as you so rightly highlighted:


won't get you many sparks


At least, not from the awakening ones at ATS. The disinformation agents (few that they actually are) will likely have a snicker as they slurp their coffee at their desks in their operations command centre.



Agreed. They must have peed their pants from laughing whenever Phil Klass was on. I bet the swamp gas line brought the house down!



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 01:14 AM
link   
Here's one of my favorite snippets from a 2003 interview with Art Bell,


"Art Bell: Would you say there should be full disclosure or is this something better kept from the American or the world, public?

Bob Lazar: Well it's not better kept from the American people because we are SUPPOSED to be the government. We hire these guys, elect them to their positions to take care of business. So nothing is supposed to be kept from us; However, you know there are other countries, we do have an awful lot of people in the world that hate us because we're alive, and you know, if you're concerned about weapons & the proliferation of things of that sort, you do need to keep certain things secret from the rest of the world; however, it's one of the things that I had said initially, go ahead & keep all that stuff secret, but just admit.. hey by the way, a long time ago we ran into some of these things, this technology is real. There apparently is actual intelligent extraterrestrial life somewhere else, and.. we have a few artifacts, and go ahead & release some stuff to the public, look it's here, you know? Here's a hinge made on another world, just.. something generic, and keep all the other stuff secret. But then I could also see the flipside of that, that's gonna wet everybody's appetite and there's gonna be a fear over disclosing the rest of the information, and if the government has been keeping that secret for so long, what else have they been keeping secret? I don't see the government coming clean with any of this stuff, I mean they're, they're up to all kinds of no good, so..

Art Bell: Do you believe there's a government behind the government, sort of pulling the strings as it were?
Lazar: I don't know about that, I think ours is pretty screwed up as it is so I don't think it needs anybody else pulling any strings.

Art Bell: Yeah, you're right about that.. But surely there is some method for keeping this gigantic secret, and not all politicians & perhaps not all presidents are told about the existence of that, you think?
Lazar: Yeah, I think very few people know, and one of the things they told me, which was one of my first comments there when I finally knew what I was working on, 'How do you guys keep this stuff secret?' And what they told me was, 'This is the easiest thing in the world to keep secret.. because it's so unbelievable.' And you know what? When you really think about it, they're right!
Art Bell: And you're pretty much right, everything just gets dismissed or erased.."



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 07:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Crisis
 


That's true. Lazar is right about that. It is definitely easy to keep unbelievable things as secrets. Most people just entirely dismiss it, conclude that it's something else and completely reject it due to the "lack" of evidence. The technology is in those bases and that's all that is needed for it to be true.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 01:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Condemned0625
 


Hi, more info on the way as I download/understand/upload.

Google Stan Romanek as he is a great best example of knowledge & understanding of Anuuki / Bob Lazar and what I "dream" in a different form. And element "115".

This should open a new can of worms as Stan correlates the data, backs up Bob, and can verify some Sitchen theories

And also keep this thread alive and teach, one day that we'll synergise all the info between and go beyond.

This way you'll get stars and flags, I don't need them, just here to learn, understand & teach.

Happy Hunting

HADES



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 01:26 AM
link   
reply to post by maxwellsdemon
 

Hi, more extrapolation, connect the dots time guys, Find the "hidden "Aleph Project", NASA, element 115, Bob, Sitchen & Stan Romanek;

Happy Happy Hunting

HADES

Influence of the constellation: ...It was thought by the Romans to be very harmful to cattle and productive of storms. By the Kabalists it is associated with the Hebrew letter Aleph and the 1st Tarot Trump "The Juggler". (The Magician).




Influence of the constellation: ...It was thought by the Romans to be very harmful to cattle and productive of storms. By the Kabalists it is associated with the Hebrew letter Aleph and the 1st Tarot Trump "The Juggler". (The Magician).


From Stan Romanek
12-30-3

Jeff

You and your webmaster have done a fine job presenting my material, looks good! I've noticed that it is getting a lot of attention. I think it might be a good idea to let everyone know I am Very Dyslexic and, unfortunately, I have been so stricken all of my life. Like it or not, I have only a 5th grade math competency level and have no idea what any of these equations or drawings mean. None. The equations everyone is viewing really did come from whoever or whatever is involved with my encounters/abductions, as crazy as that sounds. It is very frustrating for me, because I don't understand any of this stuff. I just am repeating the images they have burned into my memory. For whatever reason, I am led to believe - either by coincidence or design - that these equations are incomplete and someone out there has been given the other parts. Thanks, again, for your help.

Important Response To Romanek's Equation

From The Library
Editor@IPNcomm.org
IPN Communications
12-29-3

EQUATION 1:

Upper left corner is a "Matrix" with 2 external (Seed Key)inputs.

It is used to derive the next solution set. The equation for the solution set is "Mathematically Meaningless" but ... it reflects a geometric progression "Code" for selecting a desired condition from a random "Scatter Plot" indicated by the dots with one dot circled. This
is a "Similar" code set found in the Viterbi Algorithms used in modern cryptography. On each side of the vertical dashed line we see a "Mirrored Convergence" of two sets
of parabola indicating an "Asymptopic" condition (In phase by the direction of the arrows)the left condition being a frequency base of 2 while the right is a multiple of 2 (Frequency of 4 - which indicates "Harmonic" Coupling.

MEANING

Using the code set to select the desired item from the scatter plot - possibly an astral time demarcation (planet, star positions etc...), a coupling (Lenz effect) can occur a***** the date sensitive barrier represented by the vertical dashed line. The shortest distance between two points is a straight line = the circle with 2 points. This "Equivalency" reflects the curvature of Time and Space "Relative" to the distance between 2 known points (locations). The variance in baseline frequency on each side of the vertical dashed line indicates the "Asymptopic" concept of the barrier between 2 universes...Asymptopic being that "2 universes can approach but never "Converge".
Passage from one to the other is through the "Lentz like" Coupling (similar to that found in an ordinary transformer).

SUMMARY

This could be indicating a point of "Natural" convergence between our universe and another "Similar" universe. I believe the date and location are embedded in the "Code". It may be possible for a "Knowledgeable" intelligence to "Couple through" to our Time sphere at the specified location and date ... (in this concept, "Coupling Effect" is the heart and soul of "Worm Hole" theory).

Courtesy "The Library" in care of IPNcomm.org



Comment

From William Alek
To Richard Hoagland
12-29-3
I love mysteries, and this one appears to be a REAL gem.

What do you make of this: www.rense.com...

Now, what I see here is something rather intriguing. #1 seems to be referring to element 115, made popular by Bob Lazar. Perhaps this is some sort of transmutation of that element resulting in a current flow, or energy transduction process. The element is perhaps disassociating into electrons.

#4 seems quite interesting because you see the number 137 which can be found here: intalek.com...

137 is closely linked to Poliakov's Gravitonics, or Gravitational Electronics.

Going back to #4, I see a spacetime metric calculation which can be found in Hal Puthoff's paper: intalek.com...

On page 140 under Space-Time Metrics. Going back to #4, the metric equation appears to be coupling gravitons and vorticular motion, perhaps describing a motion through instellar media. #4 then correlates back into #1.

#5 is, of course, the classic gravitational inverse square law.

It is my speculation THEY, or THEM, are using Poliakov imaginary gravitational electron mass, and using it as some sort of Space Drive. Perhaps producing a spacetime curvature within the craft.

The whole KEY to this method is changing the flow of time - interesting...
Bill
The NUCLEAR VILLAGE Project
groups.yahoo.com...



From: Richard Hoagland
To: William Alek
12-29-3

Subject: Stan Romanek's Mystery Equations
Bill,
I think "the Library's" interpretation is closer ....

These "equations" (who's 'Stan Romanek?!') clearly seem to be referring to an impending "hyperdimensional" Event!

Look at the last figure: that's a hypercube!!!

And the inset figures in it and around it, seem to refer to a particular configuration of the solar system ... when this "Event" will occur ....

Above, in his "equation 2," this is clearly another solar system configuration. Redundancy. But, it appears backwards to the one by the hypercube, below.

If this is the "date" when this "Event" is supposed to occur (which seems to involve an "interdimensional linkage" of some kind, as "the Library" suggests), then using some of the astronomical programs I have here, I MAY be able to arrive at the actual "date."

It actually looks familiar (from some of the work I was doing before I fell ill in November), like the solar system config in ... 2012!

I'll let you know what I come up with ....

RCH


From William Alek
To Richard Hoagland
12-29-3

Subject: Stan Romanek's Mystery Equations
Richard,
A friend of mine also picked that up in regards to #6. He gave this link: log24.com...

If I'm not kidding, I think that star pattern looks like one of the stars in Orion's belt (#1 & #6), perhaps related to the Giza Complex Analog in Egypt. And perhaps related to the Great Pyramid?

The key here is manipulating time to make the journey. Which appears to be the technical subject matter.

An interesting pattern in the Mystery Equations is the straight line and semi-circle as being equal. This suggests the curving of space between two points. Or, again, manipulating time. The idea here is that you don't directly manipulate space between two points, but the time it take to traverse space. You "simply" shorten the time.

#2 seems to be showing the position of the 7 planets?

#3 shows a fish in the sky, perhaps relating to constellation Pisces?

The solar system configuration in 2012? This is starting to get spooky??? I love spooky stuff...

I have no idea who Stan Romanek is? But, his scribblings are rather intriguing. I wonder who he's "connected" to?

Bill



Comment
From V
12-30-3

Here are some things about Equation 1:

The two things in the top left is helium; two protons, 2 netrons, with a ring of 2 electrons.
The arrow shows helium going into what would be element 115,
www.algebra.at... (note that it's 5f-14, not 56-14 as drawn).

The star that's circled in Orion's belt is Alnitak. See #6.

As for equation 5:
I can't quite see what's above the E in the equation.

The diagram is about something involving charges and magnetic fields. www.plus2physics.com...
Basically the diagram would indicate that the current is flowing inside, or towards us.

#6:
There's a difference between the Orion in 1 and 6. The arm lengths are wrong in 1 or something. Also, the image in 6, if earth was where it was in the diagram, Orion would not look like that from Earth's position.

I said that star was Alnitak but the diagrams in the lower left seem to point towards two planets, around a star in the area, i don't have the name for the star, but its one of the ones in here: www.janis.or.jp...
You see Alnitak as the lower left of the three main stars. Below it are the three minor stars from the diagram. So the medium bright star in the lower left of the three is the mystery star.

The symbols on the lower left do seem to show a shortening of space. But the first symbol is still showing a magnetic current, with the current coming out of the page and the force going to the right.

I'll get to checkin on the equations in 4 some time later, if you're interested.


Comment
From William Alek
12-30-3

Stan's Mystery Equations - Alnitak Star System

The star circled in Stan's Mystery Equations: www.winshop.com.au...

The ancient Jews sometimes called these stars "Nimrod", a biblical figure who was bound to the heavens for disobeying God, whence perhaps came the "Bands", or "Bonds", of Orion, which some say should be "Cords", or a "Girdle"; but the conception of Nimrod as "the mighty Hunter before the Lord," at least in the ordinary sense of that word, is erroneous, for the original, according to universal Eastern tradition, signifies "a Lurking Enemy", or a Hunter of men rather than of beasts. This idea may have led to a Latin title, Venator, for the stellar Orion.

It is often " the Magi", the "Three Kings", the "Three Marys", or simply the "Three Stars".

An atomic number, 115 (currently an "undiscovered" element in civilian science) is set equal to the Maxwellian Equation describing the curl of a magnetic field (Maxwell states that the curl of a magnetic field at a point is equal to the time rate change of the electric field at that point, plus the current flowing through that point (if in a conductor)). However, Romanek's expression includes a coefficient 1/c2 in front of the partial of E wrt T, which doesn't agree with Maxwell's (unless 1/c2 = mu). Furthermore, stating that the atomic number of element 115 (its # of protons) is equal to the curl of a magnetic field doesn't seem to make sense. Continuing, Maxwell's Equation is then set equal to a figure depicting what appears to be a particle with a magnetic field line encircling it. Qualitatively, this seems somewhat reasonable when considering an infintesimal particle with a time-varying electric field.



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Condemned0625
 

I've been around a while and know Lazar is full of it and Zecharia Sitchin was as well. John Lear I respect but his claims can get way out there. I was believer in these guys years ago but alas came around to reality. Do some more research. I wasn't going to say anything but when I see someone being smug while they're swimming in B.S. I feel a need to say something. Again do some more research.



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 12:35 AM
link   
Bob Lazar holds some valid points in this retro video, that science is just NOW understanding, which just adds relavence to what Lazar speaks of in the retro video. I believe, whatever technology Lazar was exposed to in the 80's is outdated and or fully functional, and in operational use today (TR-3B). With that being said, anyone who doesn't have their heads in their own @$$ knows, government technology supersedes that of civilian technology by at least 100-150yrs, or so described by Phillip Schnieder, William Cooper and others. I remember a couple months back while browsing ATS, I stumbled across a video of a scientist (don't remember who he was, but will look into it to find the video and embed it) that worked at one of these facilities for Lockheed Martin, or McDonnell Douglas and said something along the lines of (don't quote me)......Today man has the ability to travel among the stars, and anything you can think of can be done. Again, Don't quote me, but it was along these lines...... I will try to dig up that video and provide names, for all you non-believers lol.


By the way Great post awesome find on the Retro Lazar Vid.



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 01:41 AM
link   
reply to post by LDragonFire
 


Bob Lazar is a fraud. Even Stanton Friedman, a UFO Believer hardcore, did a expose where he slams Lazar as a fraud and he provides proof to back it up.



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 09:21 AM
link   
reply to post by NavalFC
 


When you sign a piece of paper that say's "shut the F*& up" for 50 years you know that what you learn is a secret for 50 years, hence the technology learnt is kept secret for 2 generations. So yes the technology is way ahead of public knowledge. That I know for a fact. I have to wait 35 years myself. If got peed off I could replicate any MAC/IP from anywhere and from anytime and trace back and make like you gave the info. Time travel quantum entanglement. 16 to the power of 16 inverse binary variable translations. No calculator needed either. Just magnetism.

Just kidding, thats a fantasy story of total fiction.

Happy Hunting

HADES



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 01:55 PM
link   
I love this stuff. the More info the better. Is there anyone out there like Bob telling stuff like that? If so let me know i would like to see some more videos like that.



posted on Jan, 26 2011 @ 01:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by capod2t
reply to post by LDragonFire
 


Wasn't Sitchen discredited, at least insofar as his translations of the Sumerian Tablets? I've tried to follow the Annunaki origination and it all seems to trace back to him. It seems basically, everyone just quotes him.

Wilcock, who also believes in the influence of other or future species, speaks of DNA changes by way of a more mystical media; to wit, cosmic vibrations and impulses originating from the Milkyway.

Anyway, thanks for the post. Lazar material is few and far between.


Considering Sitchen was one just a handful of modern folks (when he was alive, RIP) who could translate the tablets, I cant really see how he has been discredited thoroughly.



posted on Jan, 26 2011 @ 10:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by AlienGrey
Considering Sitchen was one just a handful of modern folks (when he was alive, RIP) who could translate the tablets, I cant really see how he has been discredited thoroughly.


en.wikipedia.org...



Criticisms

Criticism of Sitchin's work falls primarily into three categories: 1) translations and interpretations of ancient texts, 2) astronomical and scientific observations, and 3) literalism of myth.

Translations and Interpretations

When Sitchin wrote his books only specialists could read the Sumerian language, but sources such as the 2006 book Sumerian Lexicon,[18] have made the language more accessible to non-experts. Ancient language scholar Michael S. Heiser, states that he has found many inaccuracies in Sitchin's translations and challenges interested parties to use this book to check their validity.[15][19] Prof. Ronald H. Fritze, author of the book Invented Knowledge: False History, Fake Science and Pseudo-religions",[20] mentions the example of Sitchin's claim that the Sumerian sign Din-Gir means "pure ones of the blazing rockets", adding that "Sitchin's assignment of meanings to ancient words is tendentious and frequently strained."[21] Fritze also commented on Sitchin's methodology, writing that "When critics have checked Sitchin's references, they have found that he frequently quotes out of context or truncates his quotes in a way that distorts evidence in order to prove his contentions. Evidence is presented selectively and contradictory evidence is ignored."[21]

Sitchin bases his arguments on his personal interpretations of pre-Nubian and Sumerian texts, and the seal VA 243. Sitchin wrote that these ancient civilizations knew of a twelfth planet, when in fact they only knew five.[22] Hundreds of Sumerian astronomical seals and calendars have been decoded and recorded, and the total count of planets on each seal has been five. Seal VA 243 has 12 dots that Sitchin identifies as planets. When translated, seal VA 243 reads "You're his Servant" which is now thought to be a message from a nobleman to a servant. According to semitologist Michael S. Heiser, the so-called sun on Seal VA 243 is not the Sumerian symbol for the sun but is a star, and the dots are also stars.[22][23] The symbol on seal VA 243 has no resemblance to the hundreds of documented Sumerian sun symbols.

In a 1979 review of The Twelfth Planet, Roger W. Wescott, Prof. of Anthropology and Linguistics at Drew University, Madison, New Jersey, noted Sitchin's amateurishness with respect to the primacy of the Sumerian language:

Sitchin's linguistics seems at least as amateurish as his anthropology, biology, and astronomy. On p. 370, for example, he maintains that "all the ancient languages . . . including early Chinese . . . stemmed from one primeval source -- Sumerian". Sumerian, of course, is the virtual archetype of what linguistic taxonomists call a language-isolate, meaning a language that does not fall into any of the well-known language-families or exhibit clear cognation with any known language. Even if Sitchin is referring to written rather than to spoken language, it is unlikely that his contention can be persuasively defended, since Sumerian ideograms were preceded by the Azilian and Tartarian signaries of Europe as well as by a variety of script-like notational systems between the Nile and Indus rivers.[24]

Astronomical and scientific observations

Sitchin's "planetary collision" view does superficially resemble a theory which is seriously entertained by modern astronomers—the giant impact theory of the Moon's formation about 4.5 billion years ago by a body impacting with the newly-formed Earth. However, Sitchin's proposed series of rogue planetary collisions differ in both details and timing. As with Immanuel Velikovsky's earlier Worlds in Collision thesis, Sitchin states that he has found evidence of ancient human knowledge of rogue celestial motions in a variety of mythological accounts. In Velikovsky's case, these interplanetary collisions were supposed to have taken place within the span of human existence, whereas for Sitchin these occurred during the early stages of planetary formation, but entered the mythological account passed down via the alien race which purportedly evolved on Nibiru after these encounters.

While Sitchin's scenario for the creation of the Solar System is hard to reconcile with the Earth's current small orbital eccentricity of only 0.0167, Sitchin's supporters maintain that it would explain much of Earth's peculiar early geography due to cleaving from the celestial collision, i.e., solid continents on one side and a giant ocean on the other.[citation needed]

According to former Immanuel Velikovsky assistant turned prolific critic,[25] C. Leroy Ellenberger,[25] "[Sitchin states that] from an equal start, the Nefilim evolved on Nibiru 45 million years ahead of comparable development on Earth with its decidedly more favorable environment. Such an outcome is unlikely, to say the least, since Nibiru would spend over 99% of its time beyond Pluto. Sitchin's explanation that heat from radioactive decay and a thick atmosphere keep Nibiru warm is absurd and does not address the problem of darkness in deep space. Also unexplained is how the Nefilim, who evolved long after Nibiru arrived, knew what happened when Nibiru first entered the solar system."[26]

The scenario outlined by Sitchin, with Nibiru returning to the inner solar system regularly every 3,600 years,

. . . implies an orbit with a semi-major axis of 235 astronomical units, extending from the asteroid belt to twelve times farther beyond the sun than Pluto. Elementary perturbation theory indicates that, under the most favorable circumstances of avoiding close encounters with other planets, no body with such an eccentric orbit would keep the same period for two consecutive passages. Within twelve orbits the object would be either ejected or converted to a short period object. Thus, the failed search for a trans-Plutonian planet by T.C. Van Flandern, of the U.S. Naval Observatory, which Sitchin uses to bolster his thesis, is no support at all.[26]

Sitchin in “the case of Adam’s alien genes”[27] states that 223 unique genes found by the Human Genome Sequencing Consortium are without the required predecessors on the genomic evolutionary tree. Later researchers have argued that the conclusion from the Human Genome Sequencing Consortium cannot be drawn due to a lack of a comprehensive gene database for comparison. An analysis by Salzberg identified 40 potential genes laterally transferred into the genome from prokaryotic organisms. Salzberg also argues that gene loss combined with sample size effects and evolutionary rate variation provide an alternative, more biologically plausible explanation.

Literalism of myth

Peter James, co-author of the controversial book Centuries of Darkness,[29] has criticized Sitchin both for ignoring the world outside of Mesopotamia and more specifically for misunderstanding Babylonian literature:

He uses the Epic of Creation Enuma Elish as the foundation for his cosmogony, identifying the young god Marduk, who overthrows the older regime of gods and creates the Earth, as the unknown "Twelfth Planet". In order to do as he interprets the Babylonian theogony as a factual account of the birth of the other "eleven" planets. The Babylonian names for the planets are established beyond a shadow of a doubt—Ishtar was the deity of Venus, Nergal of Mars, and Marduk of Jupiter—and confirmed by hundreds of astronomical/astrological tables and treatises on clay tablets and papyri from the Hellenistic period. Sitchin merrily ignores all this and assigns unwarranted planetary identities to the gods mentioned in the theogony. For example, Apsu, attested as god of the primeval waters, becomes, of all things, the Sun! Ea, as it suits Sitchin, is sometimes planet Neptune and sometimes a spaceman. And the identity of Ishtar as the planet Venus, a central feature of Mesopotamian religion, is nowhere mentioned in the book—instead Sitchin arbitrarily assigns to Venus another deity from Enuma Elish, and reserves Ishtar for a role as a female astronaut.[30]

William Irwin Thompson comments on what he calls Sitchin's 'literalism':

What Sitchin sees is what he needs for his theory. So figure 15 on page 42 is radiation therapy, and figure 71 on page 136 is a god inside a rocket-shaped chamber. If these are gods, why are they stuck with our cheap B movie technology of rockets, microphones, space-suits, and radiation therapy? If they are gods, then why can't they have some really divine technology such as intradimensional worm-hole travel, antigravity, starlight propulsion, or black hole bounce rematerializations? Sitchin has constructed what appears to be a convincing argument, but when he gets close to single images on ancient tablets, he falls back into the literalism of "Here is an image of the gods in rockets." Suddenly, ancient Sumer is made to look like the movie set for Destination Moon. Erich Von Däniken's potboiler Chariots of the Gods has the same problem. The plain of Nazca in Peru is turned into a World War II landing strip. The gods can cross galactic distances, but by the time they get to Peru, their spaceships are imagined as World War II prop jobs that need an enormous landing strip. This literalization of the imagination doesn't make any sense, but every time it doesn't, you hear Sitchin say "There can be no doubt, but..."



posted on Jan, 26 2011 @ 06:38 PM
link   
reply to post by maxwellsdemon
 


Very interesting stuff Max. I've read some of the information from some of the links you provided, but other links didn't work.



posted on Jan, 26 2011 @ 06:50 PM
link   
LINK


Sitchin's theories are not accepted by scientists and academics who dismiss his work as pseudohistory and pseudoscience. Sitchin's work has been criticized for flawed methodology and mistranslations of ancient texts as well as for incorrect astronomical and scientific claims.


Says it all really...unless you're a blind believer who doesn't care about scientific evidence



new topics

top topics



 
38
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join