Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * - - 5 votes

[Archived]Oera Linda Book and the Great Flood


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
11638 replies to this topic

#8956    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,104 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 23 December 2011 - 03:59 PM

View PostAlewyn, on 23 December 2011 - 03:52 PM, said:

You left out one possibility:

-5- Direct observation, i.e. the OLB is based on fact.

Biblical chronology and, by implication, the Friesche Volksalmanak which is based thereon is unlikely. Why would they have used an inferred or calculated  Biblical date (i.e. the Bible was their prime, and only source) and not have used the Biblical description of the flood. The OLB and Biblical descriptions of the flood are completely different from one another.

I didn't leave out anything.

I said, " -2- Astronomy (an actual/probable impact of a comet - Edmund Halley/William Whiston/Alewyn)"

And did you even read what I posted about Edmund Halley's theory?

His theory is almost a carbon-copy of yours, but 350 years older.

AND I linked to a site from someone who calculated the date of Noah's Flood to be at 2194.4 BCE (and it's the average of the 2 dates he came up with).

Either he read the OLB and wanted to arrive at a date to confirm the OLB... OR... he never even heard of the OLB, and just did his thing. And I think it's the last option: nowhere on his site I see any mention of the OLB.

++++++

You always say you do not have time enough to read this thread.

Great. Well, I have all the time in the world, and I do my best to come up with what I found out.

What you should do is link to the page of this thread, the page you last visited before you had to leave again for a week.

Then you enter that link into your browser, and read from there on.

I explained to Knul, and now I explain to you.

You have many times accused me of having some sort of 'agenda'.

Now I accuse you of having some sort of agenda: you claim to be too busy to read this thread every day, but then you finally show up with a post that shows us you didn't bother to read what has been posted during your absence.

There.

Feels great, eh?

You only post to make people believe you didn't write some book about an erroneous theory (a theory which happens to be ANCIENT and not anywhere near original >> Halley antedated you with his theory for about 350 years... because he sought an explanation for marine fossils showing up on mountains. And THAT'S the guy whom the writers of the OLB got their inspiration from).

But I write about what I found out, I have no 'agenda' and I do not need to sell my book.







.

Edited by Abramelin, 23 December 2011 - 04:30 PM.


#8957    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,104 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 23 December 2011 - 05:04 PM

To make it easy for you, here are some screenshots of the books I read/have:

From a book I have about astrology:

Posted Image

You recognize anything?? You should.

From Halley:

Posted Image

And again:

Halley believed that a comet had struck the Earth, changing the inclination of the poles and the Earth’s rotation, causing the sea to recede from the new position of the poles, and increase in their previous site. It also caused a ‘vast agitation’ in the sea, heaping vast quantities of Earth and high cliffs upon beds of shells, which once were at the bottom of the sea: and raising up mountains where none were before, mixing the elements into such a heap as the poets describe the old chaos.’ 2 Halley considered that the evidence for such a Flood and impact included the fossil remains of animals, great depressions like the Caspian Sea and other great lakes, and the intense cold in the American North, such as Hudson’s Bay. This latter may have been due, according to Halley, to that part of the world originally lying much further north than it is presently, and so preserving vast amounts of unthawed ice, which lowered the temperature in that region today. ‘that some such thing has happened’, stated Halley, ‘may be guessed, for that the Earth seems as if it were new made out of the ruins of an old world’.

http://beastrabban.w...theory-returns/


++++++

EDIT:

I say: someone into astrology and/or comets made up a grand story of what happened around 2200 BC, based on what he read.

.

Edited by Abramelin, 23 December 2011 - 05:10 PM.


#8958    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,104 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 23 December 2011 - 05:41 PM

Someone (or some people) well versed in astrology and/or astronomy, and well versed in Frisian, Greek and Roman myths concocted a story to fool people for whatever reason (most probably a religious reason).

I have posted about lots of anachronisms showing up in the OLB (the 'alligator' being the most recent one/ 'bedroom' or 'bedrvm' a second best).

I have shown where the ones who wrote the OLB might very possibly got their inspiration from.


#8959    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,104 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 23 December 2011 - 08:26 PM

The silence is deafening.

Where are you now, Alewyn?

Busy, no doubt?


#8960    Knul

Knul

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,045 posts
  • Joined:08 May 2011

Posted 24 December 2011 - 04:14 AM

View PostAbramelin, on 23 December 2011 - 03:43 PM, said:

Menno, I found the meaning of the word "KWIK" :

Idioticon Frisicum. Friesch Latijnisch-Nederlandsch woordenboek, uit oude HSS

http://www.archive.o...age/n2/mode/1up
http://www.archive.o...ge/n14/mode/1up

"kuic", pecus, vee. A.7.22: Fiarfote kuie, Viervoetig vee. (in English: "kuic", pecus, cattle. A.7.22: four-feeted cows/cattle, quadrupedal cattle).

"kuic" is "kwik".

It's on page 310 of the book, or page 172 of the online version I linked to.

++

This was the quote from te OLB:

tha aldergr‚testa ‚diska sind algaettar hÍten, thrvchdam se yvin grŻsich bitte an thet rotte kwik, that mith-a str‚ma fon boppa nÍi tha delta dryweth

Middle Dutch-ish:
de allergrootste eidechsen zijn 'algaettar' geheten, doordat zij even gretig bijten aan het rotte kwik dat met-de stroom van boven naa de delta drijft

Sandbach:
the largest are called alligators, because they eat as greedily the putrid cattle that float down the stream

.

Very, very good ! I had the idea that only small animals were kwik, but I see that cattle is meant. Unfortunately the origin of the word kuic is not explained.


#8961    Knul

Knul

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,045 posts
  • Joined:08 May 2011

Posted 24 December 2011 - 05:28 AM

View PostAbramelin, on 23 December 2011 - 03:59 PM, said:

I didn't leave out anything.

I said, " -2- Astronomy (an actual/probable impact of a comet - Edmund Halley/William Whiston/Alewyn)"

And did you even read what I posted about Edmund Halley's theory?

His theory is almost a carbon-copy of yours, but 350 years older.

AND I linked to a site from someone who calculated the date of Noah's Flood to be at 2194.4 BCE (and it's the average of the 2 dates he came up with).

Either he read the OLB and wanted to arrive at a date to confirm the OLB... OR... he never even heard of the OLB, and just did his thing. And I think it's the last option: nowhere on his site I see any mention of the OLB.

++++++

You always say you do not have time enough to read this thread.

Great. Well, I have all the time in the world, and I do my best to come up with what I found out.

What you should do is link to the page of this thread, the page you last visited before you had to leave again for a week.

Then you enter that link into your browser, and read from there on.

I explained to Knul, and now I explain to you.

You have many times accused me of having some sort of 'agenda'.

Now I accuse you of having some sort of agenda: you claim to be too busy to read this thread every day, but then you finally show up with a post that shows us you didn't bother to read what has been posted during your absence.

There.

Feels great, eh?

You only post to make people believe you didn't write some book about an erroneous theory (a theory which happens to be ANCIENT and not anywhere near original >> Halley antedated you with his theory for about 350 years... because he sought an explanation for marine fossils showing up on mountains. And THAT'S the guy whom the writers of the OLB got their inspiration from).

But I write about what I found out, I have no 'agenda' and I do not need to sell my book.







.

All so called facts belonging to 2193/94 BC pertain to the biblical flood only, which is referred to in the Friesche Almanak. Why do you omit the flood data in the Hynlepre Almanak, which are much older than the Friesche Almanak ? Only because they don't fit in Alewyns theory ?


#8962    Knul

Knul

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,045 posts
  • Joined:08 May 2011

Posted 24 December 2011 - 05:34 AM

View PostThe Puzzler, on 22 December 2011 - 02:24 PM, said:

I think it "is how it seems to be read."

So I don't think it would be a Frisian word, which is what you stated.

Why not? The word is probably not the Spanish version of it.

Why not Arabic like Al-hambra, Al-Jazeera, but adopted by the Spanish.


#8963    Alewyn

Alewyn

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 537 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2010

Posted 24 December 2011 - 06:37 AM

View PostAbramelin, on 23 December 2011 - 03:59 PM, said:

I didn't leave out anything.

I said, " -2- Astronomy (an actual/probable impact of a comet - Edmund Halley/William Whiston/Alewyn)"

And did you even read what I posted about Edmund Halley's theory?

His theory is almost a carbon-copy of yours, but 350 years older.

AND I linked to a site from someone who calculated the date of Noah's Flood to be at 2194.4 BCE (and it's the average of the 2 dates he came up with).

Either he read the OLB and wanted to arrive at a date to confirm the OLB... OR... he never even heard of the OLB, and just did his thing. And I think it's the last option: nowhere on his site I see any mention of the OLB.

++++++

You always say you do not have time enough to read this thread.

Great. Well, I have all the time in the world, and I do my best to come up with what I found out.

What you should do is link to the page of this thread, the page you last visited before you had to leave again for a week.

Then you enter that link into your browser, and read from there on.

I explained to Knul, and now I explain to you.

You have many times accused me of having some sort of 'agenda'.

Now I accuse you of having some sort of agenda: you claim to be too busy to read this thread every day, but then you finally show up with a post that shows us you didn't bother to read what has been posted during your absence.

There.

Feels great, eh?

You only post to make people believe you didn't write some book about an erroneous theory (a theory which happens to be ANCIENT and not anywhere near original >> Halley antedated you with his theory for about 350 years... because he sought an explanation for marine fossils showing up on mountains. And THAT'S the guy whom the writers of the OLB got their inspiration from).

But I write about what I found out, I have no 'agenda' and I do not need to sell my book.
.
There was no animosity in my previous post but, it is  clear that there is just no way that I can have a civilized discussion with you. You continue with your personal attacks. As for my book: You continue to bring it up.

Your abbrasive and negative posts have been mentioned before by others here and in other forums. I refuse, however, to sink to your level of debate.


#8964    The Puzzler

The Puzzler

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,486 posts
  • Joined:23 Feb 2007

Posted 24 December 2011 - 07:11 AM

View PostAbramelin, on 23 December 2011 - 12:08 PM, said:

The date of 2194 BCE in the Oera Linda Book, what was it based on?

-1- Astrology (some special and rare conjunction)?
-2- Astronomy (an actual/probable impact of a comet - Edmund Halley/William Whiston/Alewyn)
-3- Biblical chronology (Friesche Volksalmanak)?
-4- A combination of 1&2 or 1&3 or 2&3 ?

I think we have covered every possibility by now, but for option -3- I did find something new:

Noah's Flood: Bible Stories: Bible accuracy: bible calendars: Bible Patriarchs.
According to Antiquities 1:6:5 Abraham was born 292 ARTIFICIAL years after the flood. By this standard the flood occurred in 2184 BCE (unless the data was recorded in true solar years, in which case it will have occurred in 2205 BCE). Josephus reiterates the stipulated Biblical data of 292 years separating the Flood Event and the Birth of Abraham.


http://www.kingscale...=viewnews&id=29

http://www.kingscale...PPENDIX_17.html

The mean of 2184 and 2205 would 2194.5 BCE. That's what someone would do to be on the 'safe side'.

If anyone wants to check this guys calculations: be my guest, lol.

.
I read through both those links and didn't see him come up with the 'mean time' date of 2194.4 BC.

Maybe I missed where the guy had calculated it: "AND I linked to a site from someone who calculated the date of Noah's Flood to be at 2194.4 BCE (and it's the average of the 2 dates he came up with)."


Did HE (the guy) calculate this date? or have you? That is, the date of 2194.4BC (from the mean time equation).

In an mmm bop it's gone...

#8965    The Puzzler

The Puzzler

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,486 posts
  • Joined:23 Feb 2007

Posted 24 December 2011 - 07:36 AM

Looking for dates outside of the OLB, this was an interesting find. I'm not concerned about the ideas in the website, just the mention of the date. NOT when the Flood occurred but when 'the breaking up of the continents took place' - the year Peleg was born. 2194BC.

According to the genealogy of Genesis, the flood took place 1,752 (2294 B.C.) years after Adamís creation. The breaking up of the continents took place 1,853 (2194 B.C.) years after Adamís creation in the year that Peleg was born. Pelegís name means to divide.
http://www.layevange...-10/sec10-1.htm

The breaking up of the continents, which could be a description of what the OLB sounds like - really more so than a Flood imo.

In an mmm bop it's gone...

#8966    Knul

Knul

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,045 posts
  • Joined:08 May 2011

Posted 24 December 2011 - 10:49 AM

Mr. Alewyn, if you would have a scientific approach, you would not rely on a source, which is generally regarded as an hoax, but on the years mentioned in 'accepted' sources as the Frisian Almanak, the Groninger Almanak (2193 BC) or the Hynlepre Almanak (2326 BC) and find out, what their calculations of the biblical flood were based on. You will find, that the dates given in these almanaks are based on the Bible and have been rejected by scientists.  One cannot proof the authenticity of a hoax by using the hoax as proof.


#8967    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,104 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 24 December 2011 - 11:27 AM

View PostKnul, on 24 December 2011 - 05:28 AM, said:

All so called facts belonging to 2193/94 BC pertain to the biblical flood only, which is referred to in the Friesche Almanak. Why do you omit the flood data in the Hynlepre Almanak, which are much older than the Friesche Almanak ? Only because they don't fit in Alewyns theory ?

I only showed a site that shows HOW that date (around 2194 BC) might have been calculated because in all the almanaks I have posted about they do not show the calculation.


#8968    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,104 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 24 December 2011 - 11:29 AM

View PostThe Puzzler, on 24 December 2011 - 07:11 AM, said:

I read through both those links and didn't see him come up with the 'mean time' date of 2194.4 BC.

Maybe I missed where the guy had calculated it: "AND I linked to a site from someone who calculated the date of Noah's Flood to be at 2194.4 BCE (and it's the average of the 2 dates he came up with)."


Did HE (the guy) calculate this date? or have you? That is, the date of 2194.4BC (from the mean time equation).

No, he came up with 2 dates (and gave his reason for it), and I calculated the mean.

.

Edited by Abramelin, 24 December 2011 - 11:54 AM.


#8969    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,104 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 24 December 2011 - 11:36 AM

View PostThe Puzzler, on 24 December 2011 - 07:36 AM, said:

Looking for dates outside of the OLB, this was an interesting find. I'm not concerned about the ideas in the website, just the mention of the date. NOT when the Flood occurred but when 'the breaking up of the continents took place' - the year Peleg was born. 2194BC.

According to the genealogy of Genesis, the flood took place 1,752 (2294 B.C.) years after Adamís creation. The breaking up of the continents took place 1,853 (2194 B.C.) years after Adamís creation in the year that Peleg was born. Pelegís name means to divide.
http://www.layevange...-10/sec10-1.htm

The breaking up of the continents, which could be a description of what the OLB sounds like - really more so than a Flood imo.

There you go: 2194 BCE !

Now wouldn't it be great to know how they came to that date on that site?

If you don't see some sort of calculation it is still possible someone read the OLB and just adopted that date, like you can see on several other sites.


#8970    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,104 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 24 December 2011 - 11:57 AM

View PostAlewyn, on 24 December 2011 - 06:37 AM, said:

There was no animosity in my previous post but, it is  clear that there is just no way that I can have a civilized discussion with you. You continue with your personal attacks. As for my book: You continue to bring it up.

Your abbrasive and negative posts have been mentioned before by others here and in other forums. I refuse, however, to sink to your level of debate.

No, you suggested I intentionally left out a real impact (the OLB story), and I didn't. I also mentioned your name.

And I said what I said is because it is slowly dawning on me that you do not comment at all about what we found during every time you are absent, and just post something like "the OLB is true, because it is true".

You are not telling me you didn't read about Halley's theory?

An impacting comet, change of the tilt of the earth's axis, floods, he even thinks seas like the Caspian Sea could have been the result of such an impact.

Another thing: the OLB talks about there being a cloud or mist hanging over the land for months, and that is what people believed in centuries ago would happen if the earth passes through the tail of a comet.

This is not about 'just' a flood, and whatever else happened, people in the 19th century - someone interested in astrology/astronomy/comets - could have read what I have posted about.

+++

From the scan I made of that text about comets in the book about astrology:

Famine, pestilence, drought, floods, bloodshed, war, slaughter, fevers, epidemics, endemic diseases, calamities, earthquakes, tidal waves, wind, storm, hail, hurricanes, "corrupt air", volcanic eruptions, .. and so on.

.

Edited by Abramelin, 24 December 2011 - 12:13 PM.