I just wanted to know who here agrees with it and why

I do because it makes more sense (to me) than any other theory. It answers almost all questions and seems quite logical and possible based on the ancient texts and so forth. I have read extensively (thousands and more books) and I like this theory. Our current UFO and alien experiences fit like a glove onto this theory. I love his books and I wish he would write one about "newer" times...jesus etc.

I don't.

Sitchin has been proven to -- if not out and lie about his translations, then be liberal enough with the translations that no-one with serious training in ancient languages credit them.
The existence of a larger-than-Jupiter size planet in an eccentric orbit in this solar system would disprove literally everything we currently know about gravity.
The putative biology of such a planet is at best extremely questionable.

--Jaylemurph

What's the sitchens theory? I've never heard of it. Sorry for being so naive. ^^;;

I've never heard of him or his theory either.

His full name is Zecharia Sitchin... I've heard enough interviews with him on the radio to allow me to come to the conclusion that he's a kook.

Here's his Web site and you can make up your own mind (and he really needs to get off the front page templates, dang that site is ugly. haha): http://www.sitchin.com/

Wikipedia

No, I don't believe his theory at all. It's completely idiotic.

I know, I personally think he's as kooky as Ron L. Hubbard.

Going more in-depth.

Assuming that Nibiru could support life, it has to be solid. Coupling that with it's larger than Jupiter size, it couldn't even exist in the Oort cloud without altering the trajectory of Earth, so claiming that such a body could reach the inner solar-system without completely ripping Earth apart is beyond me.

Also, all I've seen Sitchen successfully do is get rich off of people uneducated in the required fields of study to understand how ludicrous the idea is.

Sitchen and the Sumerians actually state that is a dwarf planet I personally belive and support this theory as when you read a lot of what he has to saya nd what the ancients say it just adds up to me and I believe that there is enough facts to support it unlike religion(no offence) that goes off what people who can heal say and then everyone take it as though they are people who have been put here by god(in most cases)...I just think there is good hard facts to support his theory but thanks for you guys opinions on this and why because it gives a different out look to it and gives both sides of views

I just thought I would also add that another reason why I agree with what he has said that the sumerians have said is because they talk of a giant alien race who were humanoid and today scientists and archaeologists are finding giant skeletons so how could these people have known otherwise and there is must more evidence today to suggest it is all factual

I am not sure if what Sitchen proports is true. But I know one thing "...where there's smoke, there's fire...". HIs theories do have answers for many questions. Whether these are the right answers only time will tell.

I certainly never disregarrd anyone's claims based on evidence like this:



When people are labeled like this it just makes them more credible to me sometimes.

Aren't theories supposed to have some supporting evidence? Rather than being entirely made up? (Sitchin interprets Sumerian texts completely differently to everyone else. Every wondered why?)

Might as well ask who supports George Lucas' theory.....

The problem to agree with it is he does not have the required proof.

On the other hand science is getting like the Church in the middle ages. Anything that is not with accordance with the scinecetists is labled wrong and blasphemic.

I like Stichin. If he is right, I do not know. But what I am sure of is that there is more to our history than the dinosaur fossils. We are not alone in this Space, nor did we invent Life.

Our being is proof that nothing is imposible other than our mind to recognize it.

If humans were made from sand and dust, wouldn't we disintegrate from water?

I'm sorry, but thousands of reports over the span of a millennium is very surprising. UFO reports surface everyday. Aliens exist. Whether Sitchen's theories are correct for false I do not know, but all I know is that they are more accurate then some theories....

I deffinently do not believe that humans were made of sand and all the rest of the carry on but I do believe in us being a hybrid race created with blood of that of the aliens(Anunnaki) and I agree with you they are more accurate and much more logical with all the facts he presents

...so the existence of super- (or at least preter)naturally advanced race from an impossible planet in an impossible orbit genetically modifying hominids for slaves to mine gold to save their atmosphere and then ****ing them, scarpering it all, destroying almost all the evidence and going home, only to have the whole story dug up and mistranslated by an economic historian IS MORE LOGICAL than the scientific model of evolution on Earth?

*shakes head
Oh my. Oh my goodness...

Good. I do have a problem with "impossible" though. Please explain what is impossible.

People say it is impossible that there are other lifeforms like ours somwhere in the universe. If it was possible here why not elswhere?

You missed out sooo much information in between...I personally think people need to read these things and think about things with an open mind otherwise you will never understand things and you will interpret them wrong because you might think it is rediculous to start with...Everything you said didnt even begin to sum it up it just basically touched on the events but you forgot sooo much information in between so describing it the way you did and missing all of the vital points in between makes it seem as though it is rediculous...And why could it all be impossible you know these ancient civilisations namely the Sumerians, knew soooo much and were soooo advanced and apparently they were primative and not only that but its just like Jesus...People claim they saw this man Jesus heal and all the rest of it and then they all wrote down in this book about everything he said n all the rest of it and yet people believe there was a man called jesus(im not argueing that he wasnt real)and believe in everything he did yet these ancient people say that they saw these aliens and know what happened and they wrote it all down in their language and no one today believes it and why? because it happened too long ago and it seems too far out(to people on earth at this time) to even comprehend or understand because we are told every single day that god made us and we come from Adam and Eve and all the rest of the hoohaaa

Do you lot believe in Noddy and Big Ears as well?

You do realise that the total evidence in support of Sitchin's theory is as follows:































.


You still think he might be right? And if so why?

thats a waste of a post. well empty barrels an all that.
so where is your evidence that stitchens theory is nil. he quoted a few scriptures and agencys NASA stc, so you show me your evidence.

Well, "impossible" isn't quite the right word. It's better explained earlier in this thread, but briefly: a planet as large as what Sitchin states (at least the size of Jupiter) would have crushing gravity if were solid (even if it weren't actually). Anything like a man would be crushed in goo on the surface, making it difficult for life like on Earth to evolve. I'm not saying it couldn't evolve its own life, but it wouldn't look anything like Terran life.
Its orbit would be impossible because its gravity would throw several other planets out of their orbits and tear Earth apart whenever/if it got close.




Nope. I've actually read most of his books. I defy you to say my description doesn't accurately portray what he suggests. If I make it seem ridiculous, that's because it IS ridiculous and takes a level of credulity and/or naiveté that borders on deliberate refusal of facts. Speaking of which, I have this nifty bridge right down the street I can sell you for a most reasonable price...

--Jaylemurph

I believe his theories are useful in the determination of the events that led up to the formation of this earth. I don't know that you can pinpoint the exact planetary alignments or formations by using the Sumerian tablets. You can use his references and view the entire solar system as one planet of whatever content it was by the existence of the differing asteroid belts in our solar system. And you can use his idea of a planetary collision, but I multiply the collisions to 4 or 5 separate events. Now, the planet they call planet X or Niburu may or may not be but there are many other ancient writers that share the same idea, but say the planet was destroyed. And we, our own selves, have witnessed the changing of the trajectory of comets by nuclear satellites, much like China has just done with the satellite. We really have no worries about any planet colliding with earth anytime soon, though. It has already happened several times before and just recently, I say recently, it was around 1975-85 that there was witnessed a comet the size of a couple of football fields breaking up over Turkey. If there is planned or in the making another species eliminating event, we just do not have to worry about it. We won't even know what hit us unless we turn on the TV and watch.

That's assuming that there is only 1 way that life could exist. This solar system is the same as any star that you see in the night sky. And there are twin stars. This solar system at one time may have been one giant gas planet with a twin. And somebody said that the revolution of the planet Niburu in relation to this solar system is how many years? Niburu may have collided with another planet long time ago and we have been waiting all this time, all of these ages and eons for it to return while our existence gets smaller and smaller. And we just rely on stories of good times when the gods could fly . . .

Ok, he proposes the Anunnaki were advanced enough to prevent the planet freezing on it's lengthy journey far away from the sun. So they were able to maintain 'Goldilock Zone' conditions.

Sounds good except how did they get that advanced in the first place? They presumably evolved during which time they wouldn't have had the technology to keep themselves from freezing to death

Or were they 'created' super smart?

Having read the site I can say I do not subscribe to his fantasy.

why is it that "they" are always looking for gold?...

...maybe the Cybermen were invading? Makes about as much sense as "to save their atmosphere".

--Jaylemurph

That gets into the concept of gas planets and water canopies. It would take any species that evolved from lower to upper intlligence such a long period of time to reach the point of using technology that the reason they needed the technology would consume them because you cannot rise above your environment.

Everyone has the right to believe as they wish....But i have to say i think i'd find something or someone better then Sitchen's to follow or believe....

You want me to provide evidence that Sitchen doesn't have any evidence?

How about you (or anyone else) find one single piece of independent evidence which collaborates the theory that a planet 4 times the size of the earth orbits the sun on a 3,600 year eliptical orbit, is inhabited, that those inhabitants came down to earth, built the pyramids as navigational beacons, genetically altered archaic humans, used them to mine gold, had a big nuclear war, and then left a few thousand years ago .....

Hello everyone.

I've read Sitchens' books and found them to be very interesting. Although all of his theories don't fit with current mainstream scientific understanding I do feel that he had a very fresh look at the role that the Gods/Goddesses played and an interesting interpretation of ancient myth/histories. While I don't feel that his entire body of work is always correct there is enough food for thought to look at the old myth/histories with a fresh eye.

We are taught to read/see/expect certain symbols from stories/paintings. If can somehow extract from our thoughts what we have been told to expect and actually examine what is presented without bias sometimes what we find can be very different from what we've been told to expect.

Warm regards, Mabon.

Yes, but if you're excited about his fresh, new look at his stories, doesn't it bother you he's been caught actively mistranslating languages to get those stories?

--Jaylemurph

Ok, I want some proof that he deliberately lied about translations. If that's true, then his books are totally wack. I have read his books/am still reading his books. I like reading them for the story they tell. It's just fun to think about. The thing that really bothers me about this board is something someone said on the first page:
"On the other hand science is becoming like the Church in the middle ages. Anything that is not in accordance with the scientists [or church as the case may be] is labeled wrong and blasphemic." (I fixed the grammar a little)
That is the most accurate statement I've heard on this board lately. Except the grammar, lol. It pisses me off that people are so skeptical to things that even we are postulating. Our ideas of the universe and what is in it comes from theories. Who's to say that one theory is more acurate than another? We have only explored our own little galaxy. Is it extremely presumptuous to say that we know about everything in the universe? I think it is!!! We have no idea! Were just this little ball of an example. How do we know that there arent bigger planets out there with life on them? Now don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to say that Sitchin is telling us the truth and his books should be the new science books on the shelves. No way. But what I am trying to say is that the human race thinks it knows everything. We are a mere blip on the radar as big as our entire universe, how is it that we can presume we know everything about everything already? And the reason I say that is because our astronomical "science" which is based on observations and theories is somehow able to dismiss the theories that Sitchin has. That's retarded if you ask me. A theory shouldnt be able to debunk another theory.

Okay --

Here's a link that refutes the Babylonian/Sumerian names he calls planets in our solar system (what he calls them versus what everyone else does): http://www.ramtops.co.uk/siren.html;

Another one, here: http://www.ianlawton.com/mes6c.htm , challenges his translation of the word 'shem'. Everyone else translates it as 'name'. Sitchin translates it as something like 'rocketship'.

The good person at Sitchiniswrong.com offers many such examples... here's one about his use of the term nephilim: http://www.sitchiniswrong.com/sitchinerrors.htm#nephilim .


--Jaylemurph


PS: About theories -- We do have both direct and indirect evidence that supports our astronomical theories; nothing holds up what Sitchin proposes other than people's wanting it to be true.

I guess I might if I couldn't think for myself and couldn't make up my own mind. If I doubt a passages translation I look at other sources, sometimes several sources and draw my own conclusions. I'm not obliged nor inclined to believe one person's opinion without checking their facts, work or theories. Even if he mistranslated through honest error or intent it still was a valid read for me because it was different and made me question the accepted translations.

Warm regards, Mabon.

Problem is, the "ancients" don't say anything that resembles in the least what Sitchen claims.


I agree about these people that could supposedly heal. But, at least the Bible actually says what the Church claims it says, though it's true that they were the ones that put the Bible together in the first place!


No giant skeletons have been found anywhere. There's just nothing at all to suggest that even the smallest portion of what Sitchen says is correct. "Annunaki" is not even a Sumerian word. IOW, the Sumerians never mention the Annunaki, nor do the Akkadians that came immediately after them.


That's pretty funny, considering that the last time I was at Sitchen's website (I don't go there often!), he had an article posted there about an interview he'd done with some Catholic Archbishop, who congratulated Sitchen on the correctness of his theories.
When you read or hear someone saying something like what you quoted, about scientists hiding or ignoring the supposed "truth" merely because it doesn't fit in with their "worldview," you should shift your wallet to your front pocket and look like you know where you're going because you about to be robbed.


Yeah? Well I'm still pissed off at VonDaniken for making me feel like such an idiot, and I certainly don't think or claim that I "know everything." I do, however, claim that I know VonDaniken, Sitchen and the rest are full of it.


No scientist on Earth assumes that there is no life "out there," regardless of planet size.


Sitchen's ideas about the orbit of Niburu aren't nearly exact enough for them to be completely dismissed by the laws of orbital mechanics. But he claims to base his ideas on ancient cuneiform writing. It's easy enough to verify this, try the Sacred-Texts.com website. Most of Sitchen's crap comes from the Enuma Elish. You can find it there and read it yourself.

Harte

Well after reading everyones opinions I still support this theory and there have actually been giant skeletons that have been dug up go search about it(which they could be the hominid aliens- Nephilim) Also, don't forget that the people who added their bits into the bible n things like that and all the things inside the bible which are meant to be "true"(and in other things such as the quran-if thats how its spelt) get taken soooo seriously today as if it all did happen and yet nobody believes what the Sumerians and other ancient civilisations said happened back then after writting(in their own ways) what they saw happen. So why believe one and not the other when we didnt see Jesus and other prophets who believe they spoke to these "angels" who came down to earth from heaven so why do we believe them and not the ancients who say how human life was created? I just think its a little stupid how people believe how the world was created n things like that from what the bible and other scriptures say and we just dismiss what the ancients had to say about the creation of life aswell why is this? Is it because one was more recent than the other? whose to say that for example in another 1000 years no one believes what is put in the bible? Just like how people on here totally dismiss what the Ancients say about the Anunnaki and how they mixed their DNA with ours to take us from Homo Erectus to Homo Sapiens. I hope those of you who think Sitchens theory is stupid can understand the points I am trying to make or maybe I am not wording it right or correctly saying what I am meaning to say. It is interesting though to see what all of you think about this and I agree with Rezna that another theory shouldnt be able to debunk another.

But to sum it all up basically what I am trying to say is that you have these ancients who have written in their heiragliphics about how they saw "gods"-which can be interpreted as angels as the sumerians depict them with wings even before the bible and other such things were written and even before people thought about "angels with wings" and they also have written about how they were told the creation of humans came to be yet no one believes them and then on the flipside you get these written scriptures today such as the bible which people follow yet they are just the same as the Sumerians Jesus believes he saw the angels and all the rest of the hoohaa and whoever wrote it writes all this stuff down and now people follow it I just don't understand it so can someone help me understand why this is. I am not trying to say that no one should believe in what the bible teaches n things like that but c'mon the Sumerians talked of a flood and all the rest of it and then all of a sudden this book called the bible comes out and talks of basically the same things that they say but twist it a little it seems like they kinda rip them off!

As for the planet Nibiru itself, I have read a lot about it and some sites say it is a dwarf planet and some say it is a giant planet so I am torn between that and also we cannot forget how scientists are actually saying that they believe that there is a planet out there with a huge gravitational pull as something is tugging on the likes of Uranis and things like that. There is so much more but I must go now

And if people want to say how Sitchen can not read or translate properly what the Sumerians say well what is in the bible may not be true completely either as it got changed from Hebrew to English and when you change languages the words and sentences change and it can be interpreted differently and not only that but the bible has been written so many times and people add in their bits so if someone wants to say that it is more legitimate than what sitchen says he translates you need to think about this first

I don't really see the relation to Scholars translating the bible and Sitchen, but thats just me.

It all sounds very similar to the garbage Von Daniken was coming out with in the 70s, & he's been totally discredited. so i don't see why anyone would fall for this fairytale, unless of course
we're more gullible now than we were then, which is possible considering the nose dive in educational standards in the last 30 years.

I've searched high & low to try to locate anything @ all that discredits ALL of Von Daniken's theories/work and Stichin's for that matter.
Maybe i'm just looking in all the wrong places.
If anyone can provide links/evidence that proves Sitchin & Von Daniken were loonies, i'l like to see it.

caio.

Sitchen is not a loonie he just merely translates what the Sumerians said that's all so really those who believe this is stupid are really calling those ancient civilisations loonies lol and besides where ever there is a belief or something that people say someone else will always find something wrong with it

Giant skeletons have never been dug up. Where are your references and proof?

And the Planet X theory is pure nonsense:

1. An orbit that is that eliptical would eventually even itself out and become more or less even
2. We would be able to detect a planet by its gravitation pull - we never have
3. The planet would be beyond Pluto, and utterly unable to support life

Never mind this ancient astronauts crap; these are FACTS.

Haven't you taken in a single thing people have written here?

Read this: http://www.sitchiniswrong.com/sitchinerrors.htm

This guy is working on his phd in ancient hebrew. I think he knows what he's talking about. And unless someone on this board knows more about it than him, I think this argument is over.

I think it's pretty arogant to say the argument is over. There are many ancient civilizations that do support the theory of ancient astronuats..too many in fact to just completely dimiss it. Sitchen may be a bit on the fringe...but his thoeries have NOT been disproved.

Hi Reb. Now i never said V.D. was a loony, but perhaps a clever marketing man for his books.(he actually had a theme park built based on his books) Back in the 80's the BBC did a documentary on 'HORIZON' doing an in depth investigation in the claims made in his book, blowing many of his claims & theories out of the water. I will elaborate on some of what i can remember if you wish, but it'll have to be later as i'm at work & the boss is hovering.

Well here is your proof you may need to read all 19 pages there are a lot more articles out there about this and it was all over the news quiet a while back(don't know where you were when the news was on) and as for proof of a planet x there is actually proof as such. Scientists believe there is a planet out there due to this gravitational pull.

http://s8int.com/giants19.html this shows some pics and other information on the giant skeletons

I hear ya on that theme park bit it's, when i first started reading about that it kinda of threw me right off...i think he may have become a little derranged from all that wealth i think.
Cool it's, no sweat, like to hear more about what ppl have to say on Von Daniken.
Stichen,... well only read 2or3 of his books (War of gods & men, lost realms & the 12th planet) and for a first timer on his particular studies/works i have to admit that in most parts it was pretty confusing and hard to understand in most parts.
But on that last book i have read articles & off certain web sites where scientists in the last 10yrs or so have discovered/acknowledged a so called 12th planet orbiting our solar system, not certain if its related to Sitchen's theories but i'l try to find what i can and provide the link to it.

As for your boss 'hovering'...is that like kind of like UFO type hovering or just your standard helicopter type?

catch ya

Okay so you say you go off facts well here you go here is facts that support that there is a Planet X and it isnt all just in your words "ancient astronaut crap" maybe you need to do your homework http://xfacts.com/x2.htm

Thanks Mareikaura, you saved me the trouble