I hear laughter from beyond the grave. could it be Zecharia Sitchin?
Snippets from source:
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. 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. 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.
Peter James, co-author of the controversial book Centuries of Darkness, 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.
William Irwin Thompson comments on what he calls Sitchin's 'literalism':
What Sitchin sees is what he needs for his hypothesis. 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..."
source with references: en.wikipedia.org...
I think were all Oreo cookies and the ancient aliens were tall glasses of milk. The cookies represent man and all of the orbs in the heavens and the
tall glass of cold cow juice is the Milky Way and the gods, get it?
Nah, I don't either.