Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 12
Riaan

[Archived]Oera Linda Book and the Great Flood

11,638 posts in this topic

The word alligator in the OLB doesn't have to be Frisian anyway imo. It's the only name he can recollect of what the people in the land between the Punjab and the Ganges call all these creatures is how it seems to be read.

So you think the people in the Punjab and around the Ganges call their crocs 'alligators'??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About Edmund Halley, the Biblical Flood and the date for the disasters in the OLB.

I'll spare you all the zillion links that I used, but Halley first assumed/calculated the period of 'his' comet to be 575 years.

.

I hardly think so. I've never heard of that before. If you can show some evidence for that...

Briefly:

In November 1703 Halley was appointed Savilian Professor of Geometry at the University of Oxford, his theological enemies, John Tillotson and Bishop Stillingfleet having died, and received an honorary degree of doctor of laws in 1710. In 1705, applying historical astronomy methods, he published Synopsis Astronomia Cometicae, which stated his belief that the comet sightings of 1456, 1531, 1607, and 1682 related to the same comet, which he predicted would return in 1758. Halley did not live to witness the comet's return, but when it did, the comet became generally known as Halley's Comet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmond_Halley

Which throws all the other calculations out.

He did however, propose the Hollow Earth Theory.

In 1692, Halley put forth the idea of a hollow Earth consisting of a shell about 500 miles (800 km) thick, two inner concentric shells and an innermost core, about the diameters of the planets Venus, Mars, and Mercury.[8] He suggested that atmospheres separated these shells, and that each shell had its own magnetic poles, with each sphere rotating at a different speed. Halley proposed this scheme in order to explain anomalous compass readings. He envisaged each inner region as having an atmosphere and being luminous (and possibly inhabited), and speculated that escaping gas caused the Aurora Borealis.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmond_Halley

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was from the Dienkes link.;a comment

Nevertheless, it is known that, c. 1300 BCE, SE Iberian civlization of El Argar adopts the Aegean burial style of pithos (burial in large jars). And certainly I am fully in agreement with the claim that Eastern Mediterraneans were then in much need of tin, and that this was found only, in great ammounts, in Atlantic Europe (Galicia and Cornwall). This scarcity eventually led to the devlopement of steel, what began the Iron Age. It is very possible that the Eastern Mediterranean peoples were by then cut off from their Atlantic sources (though the details are very obscure, the long list of apparent conflicts in the late 2nd milennium BCE seems related).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You think I'm making this all up....

Halley_575.jpg

Popular Mechanics june 1928

http://books.google.nl/books?id=yN4DAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA917&lpg=PA917&dq=period+of+Halley+comet+to+be+575+years&source=bl&ots=TWG3IGGFzZ&sig=1-9KoFAQqa8_12ZdH5szeQ3LKko&hl=nl&sa=X&ei=njrzTui4LI_rOb37hbcB&sqi=2&ved=0CEEQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q&f=false

This is the line form my post you must have missed:

"Soon after he knew he was wrong concerning the period of the comet (he had searched ancient archives), and that it was between 75 and 76 years, or to be more accurate, 75.32 yr (avarage)"

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you think the people in the Punjab and around the Ganges call their crocs 'alligators'??

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You think I'm making this all up....

Halley_575.jpg

Popular Mechanics june 1928

http://books.google.nl/books?id=yN4DAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA917&lpg=PA917&dq=period+of+Halley+comet+to+be+575+years&source=bl&ots=TWG3IGGFzZ&sig=1-9KoFAQqa8_12ZdH5szeQ3LKko&hl=nl&sa=X&ei=njrzTui4LI_rOb37hbcB&sqi=2&ved=0CEEQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q&f=false

This is the line form my post you must have missed:

"Soon after he knew he was wrong concerning the period of the comet (he had searched ancient archives), and that it was between 75 and 76 years, or to be more accurate, 75.32 yr (avarage)"

.

I didn't say YOU were making it up, I had never heard of Halley considering 'his' comet being 575 years, I wanted some evidence of this point. I find William Whiston though, comes up with this figure... 575 and a half year periodicity.

William Whiston and the Deluge

The years 1680 and 1682 were years of unusually bright comets. Many pamphlets were printed, especially in Germany, on the imminent end of the world; at the very least, great catastrophes were expected. There was nothing new in such prognostications. In earlier centuries and also earlier in the seventeenth century, comets were regarded with awe and every possible evil effect was ascribed to them. Thus a scholarly author, David Herlicius, published in 1619 a discourse on a comet that had appeared shortly before, in 1618, and enumerated the calamities that this comet, and comets in general, bring with them or presage:

Desiccation of the crops and barrenness, pestilence, great stormy winds, great inundations, shipwrecks, defeat of armies or destruction of kingdoms . . . decease of great potentates and scholars, schisms and rifts in religion, etc. The portents of comets are threefold—in part natural, in part political, and in part theological.(1)

David Herlicius also quoted Cicero: “From the remotest remembrance of antiquity it is known that comets have always presaged disasters.” (2)

The fear and even horror caused by the comet of 1680 was just beginning to calm down when in 1682 another great comet appeared.

Edmund Halley was twenty-six years old when this comet of 1682 appeared. He had experience in astronomical observations and calculations, having spent time on the island of St. Helena, cataloguing there 341 southern stars; he had observed the transit of Mercury, and made pendulum observations. Now he calculated the orbit of the comet of 1682, and predicted its return in 1759. Actually, the periodicity of comets was not first discovered by Halley. The ancient authors knew that comets have their time of revolution. Seneca wrote in his treatise De Cometis—in some respects still the most advanced discussion of this subject—that the Chaldeans counted the comets among the planets.(3) A comet with a periodicity of about 70 years was known to the rabbis.(4)

Nevertheless, only little aware of the works of the ancients, the modern world acclaimed Halley to be the discoverer of the periodicity of comets; however, this acclaim came only after his prognostication realized itself. The comet of 1682, or Halley’s comet, returned in 1759. It came somewhat retarded on account of its passage near the planets Jupiter and Saturn. This delay had been calculated, though not quite accurately, by Halley. On the grave of Halley these words are engraved: “Under this marble peacefully rests . . . Edmundus Halleius, LL.D., unquestionably the greatest astronomer of his age.”

But when Halley offered his theory of the periodicity of comets, and of the return of the observed comet after seventy-five years, this theory was not received immediately with enthusiasm. Yet in the mind of a contemporary mathematician the idea of a periodic return of comets was the beginning of a broadly-developed theory of the origin of the world and of the nature of the deluge.

William Whiston, born in 1667, published in 1696 his New Theory of the Earth. In this book he claimed that the comet of 1682 was of a 575&half year periodicity; that the same comet had appeared in February of 1106, in +531 in the consulate of Lampadius and Orestes, and in September of -44, the year of Caesar’s assassination.(5) Whiston further asserted that this comet had met the earth in -2346, and caused the Deluge.(6)

Whiston found in classical literature references to the change in inclination of the terrestrial axis and, ascribing it to a displacement of the poles by the comet of the Deluge, concluded that before this catastrophe the planes of daily rotation and yearly revolution coincided and that, therefore, there had been no seasons. He also found references to a year consisting of 360 days only, and although the Greek authors referred the change to the time of Atreus and Thyestes, and the Romans to the time of Numa, ca. -700, Whiston ascribed these changes to the effect of the Earth’s encounter with the comet of the Deluge. Whiston thought that the Earth itself was once a comet.

Whiston was chosen by Isaac Newton to take over his chair of mathematics at Trinity College in Cambridge when Newton, after many years, retired in order to dedicate himself to the duties of the president of the Royal Society. Whiston, like Newton, was a Unitarian. He was also close to being a fundamentalist. He was certain that only one global catastrophe was described in the Scripture—that of the Deluge. Of the phenomenon described in the book of Joshua, he wrote: “The Scripture did not intend to teach men philosophy, or accomodate itself to the true and Pythagoric system of the world.”

It is difficult to say what caused Newton, who selected Whiston as his successor, to oppose Whiston’s election to the membership of the Royal Society. We have another similar instance a century later, when Sir Humphry Davy, the mentor of Michael Faraday, conducted a strenuous campaign to keep Faraday from being admitted to the Royal Society, of which Davy was president.

But the very idea of a periodicity of comets, gleaned by Whiston from Halley, was not yet accepted. In 1744 a German author wrote: “It is well known that Whiston and others like him who wish to predict the comings and goings of comets, deceive themselves, and have become an object of ridicule by the entire world.” (7)

Still later Whiston was ridiculed by Georges Cuvier, himself a proponent of a catastrophist theory:

Whiston fancied that the earth was created from the atmosphere of one comet, and that it was deluged by the tail of another. The heat which remained from its first origin, in his opinion, excited the whole antediluvian population, men and animals, to sin, for which they were all drowned in the deluge, excepting the fish, whose passions were apparently less violent.”

http://www.varchive.org/itb/ecwhist.htm

EDIT: OK, found the evidence: [The 575&half year periodicity of the comet of 1682, and its previous returns beginning in -44, were first proposed by Halley and accepted by Newton (Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica third ed., 1726, Book III, Proposition XLI, Problem XXI).]

But it seems to be Whiston that has the Theory, interesting none the less.

Edited by The Puzzler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

OK, not a Frisian/Fryan word, but a Spanish word derived from Latin:

1560s, lagarto (modern form attested from 1620s, with excrescent -r as in tater, feller, etc.), a corruption of Sp. el lagarto (de Indias) "the lizard (of the Indies)," from L. lacertus (see lizard). Alligarter was an early variant.

What are you not getting from DE INDIAS/of the Indies?

It's crystal clear to me someone changed INDIAS into INDIA. Ommit one letter, and your alligator suddenly turns up in India, where there are none.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Several sources say that it is sometimes unclear who came with what idea first, Newton, Halley or others.

Well, here's more about that 575 period:

An image of a page (I cannot post the image itself):

http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/t2png?bg=%23FFFFFF&/seri/JRASC/0004/600/0000108.000&db_key=AST&bits=4&res=100&filetype=.gif

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1910JRASC...4..104C

What did Dr. Halley correct? Halley learnt the recurrence of comets from Flamsteed and others (J. Cassini was also a curious teacher to Halley: In 1681, Cassini told to him that the 1680 Comet was an incarnation or something like that of the 1577 Comet observed by Tycho as well as the 1665 April Comet). Halley was successful in the 76 year recurrence of the 1682 Comet based on the data, but it is well known that he also overplayed his hand by stating that the 1680 comet was the coming-back of the comets in BC44, 531, 1106 with the period of 575 years.

However, Halley lacked and abused the accuracy about the data which are necessary for the prediction of the 575 year period. In this respect we should point out that to do so he made bad use of Flamsteeds data to the effect that by the correction by Halley in the Third Edition the readers of it cannot know the original correct data made by Flamsteed. Fortunately nowadays because of the Koyré and Cohen Edition, we can recover the original data in comparison with Halleys arbitrary alterations: Apparently Dr. Halley altered the Flamsteed original observational data in order for them to agree with the calculations which are needful for the 575 year period. Occasionally he moved the original Flamsteed data by about 2 minutes of arc notwithstanding that Flamsteeds accuracy at that time was said within 10 arc seconds.

Halleys action, especially the framing Flamsteed up, was along with the intention of Isaac Newton, whereas because of the meddling of Halley, Newton was forced to be heavily confused. The abovecited famous statement inserted after E2, was included in the inserted paragraphs of 46 lines which was originally just about 5 lines, and they include the notorious description of the 575 year period comet. Furthermore Newton was forced to be afraid to stray between the elliptic orbit and parabolic one, and hence E3 is not easy to read even for the candid readers: Newton feared and tried to diminish the word parabolic. He used Flamsteeds observations on 21 December, 5 January and 25 January 1680/1 to derive the date of the passing the perihelion of the 1680 Comet but strangely preserved the value although he vanished Flamsteeds original observational data.

http://www.hida.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~cmo/cmomn2/Cahier07.htm

http://books.google.nl/books?id=nmB2sHXnDG0C&pg=PR12&lpg=PR12&dq=halley+comet+%22575+years%22&source=bl&ots=LK8H1un5-5&sig=x_bBpxKjXzSXNlx7_SYEl9nHTRc&hl=nl&sa=X&ei=Yz_zTraoGJGhOtGB9dcI&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAzgK#v=onepage&q=halley%20comet%20%22575%20years%22&f=false

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, not a Frisian/Fryan word, but a Spanish word derived from Latin:

1560s, lagarto (modern form attested from 1620s, with excrescent -r as in tater, feller, etc.), a corruption of Sp. el lagarto (de Indias) "the lizard (of the Indies)," from L. lacertus (see lizard). Alligarter was an early variant.

What are you not getting from DE INDIAS/of the Indies?

It's crystal clear to me someone changed INDIAS into INDIA. Ommit one letter, and your alligator suddenly turns up in India, where there are none.

There's nothing to 'get'.

Apparently there is alligators in India.

Indian alligators found dead in Chambal River

Etawah (Uttar Pradesh), Dec. 13: In a shocking incident, several Indian alligators (Gharials) have been found dead in the Chambal River in Etawah's Chakar Nagar sub-division of Uttar Pradesh.

The main habitat for crocodiles and alligators in India are the Rivers Chambal, Girwa, Rapti and Narayani in the orbit of central and northern India.

The deaths of the alligators has invited scrutiny after the Society for the Conservation of Nature, an NGO (non-government organisaiton), intimated the forest department after spotting two dead alligators near the river.

After visiting the spot, forest officials approached the National Chambal Sanctuary authorities to probe the matter further. The cause for alligator deaths is yet to be ascertained.

"The forest department has conducted a post-mortem on two to three Gharials. The Gharials were recently brought from Lucknow's Kukrail Gharial Rehabilitation Centre, and they might have become victims of some contagious disease or the target of some hunters, " claimed Rajeev Chauhan, the Secretary of the Society for the Conservation of Nature.

http://www.topnews.in/indian-alligators-found-dead-chambal-river-29003

So, even though this is actually a crocodile it seems the norm to call it an alligator. Gharials.

I'd say it was this species being referred to in the OLB:

Gharials once thrived in all the major river systems of the Indian subcontinent, spanning the rivers of its northern part from the Indus in Pakistan across the Gangetic floodplain to the Irrawaddy in Myanmar.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gharial

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Several sources say that it is sometimes unclear who came with what idea first, Newton, Halley or others.

Well, here's more about that 575 period:

An image of a page (I cannot post the image itself):

http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/t2png?bg=%23FFFFFF&/seri/JRASC/0004/600/0000108.000&db_key=AST&bits=4&res=100&filetype=.gif

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1910JRASC...4..104C

What did Dr. Halley correct? Halley learnt the recurrence of comets from Flamsteed and others (J. Cassini was also a curious teacher to Halley: In 1681, Cassini told to him that the 1680 Comet was an incarnation or something like that of the 1577 Comet observed by Tycho as well as the 1665 April Comet). Halley was successful in the 76 year recurrence of the 1682 Comet based on the data, but it is well known that he also overplayed his hand by stating that the 1680 comet was the coming-back of the comets in BC44, 531, 1106 with the period of 575 years.

However, Halley lacked and abused the accuracy about the data which are necessary for the prediction of the 575 year period. In this respect we should point out that to do so he made bad use of Flamsteeds data to the effect that by the correction by Halley in the Third Edition the readers of it cannot know the original correct data made by Flamsteed. Fortunately nowadays because of the Koyré and Cohen Edition, we can recover the original data in comparison with Halleys arbitrary alterations: Apparently Dr. Halley altered the Flamsteed original observational data in order for them to agree with the calculations which are needful for the 575 year period. Occasionally he moved the original Flamsteed data by about 2 minutes of arc notwithstanding that Flamsteeds accuracy at that time was said within 10 arc seconds.

Halleys action, especially the framing Flamsteed up, was along with the intention of Isaac Newton, whereas because of the meddling of Halley, Newton was forced to be heavily confused. The abovecited famous statement inserted after E2, was included in the inserted paragraphs of 46 lines which was originally just about 5 lines, and they include the notorious description of the 575 year period comet. Furthermore Newton was forced to be afraid to stray between the elliptic orbit and parabolic one, and hence E3 is not easy to read even for the candid readers: Newton feared and tried to diminish the word parabolic. He used Flamsteeds observations on 21 December, 5 January and 25 January 1680/1 to derive the date of the passing the perihelion of the 1680 Comet but strangely preserved the value although he vanished Flamsteeds original observational data.

http://www.hida.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~cmo/cmomn2/Cahier07.htm

http://books.google.nl/books?id=nmB2sHXnDG0C&pg=PR12&lpg=PR12&dq=halley+comet+%22575+years%22&source=bl&ots=LK8H1un5-5&sig=x_bBpxKjXzSXNlx7_SYEl9nHTRc&hl=nl&sa=X&ei=Yz_zTraoGJGhOtGB9dcI&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAzgK#v=onepage&q=halley%20comet%20%22575%20years%22&f=false

.

Yes well either way, it's this Whiston who has the Deluge Theory in 2346BC, which is not 2193BC.

William Whiston, born in 1667, published in 1696 his New Theory of the Earth. In this book he claimed that the comet of 1682 was of a 575&half year periodicity; that the same comet had appeared in February of 1106, in +531 in the consulate of Lampadius and Orestes, and in September of -44, the year of Caesars assassination.(5) Whiston further asserted that this comet had met the earth in -2346, and caused the Deluge.(6)

Apparently Halley was an athiest so he had no reason to come up with that theory. I agree though it seems Halley came up with the 575.5 figure.

Edited by The Puzzler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes well either way, it's this Whiston who has the Deluge Theory in 2346BC, which is not 2193BC.

William Whiston, born in 1667, published in 1696 his New Theory of the Earth. In this book he claimed that the comet of 1682 was of a 575&half year periodicity; that the same comet had appeared in February of 1106, in +531 in the consulate of Lampadius and Orestes, and in September of -44, the year of Caesar’s assassination.(5) Whiston further asserted that this comet had met the earth in -2346, and caused the Deluge.(6)

Apparently Halley was an athiest so he had no reason to come up with that theory. I agree though it seems Halley came up with the 575.5 figure.

Halley's number was 575, not 575.5; that was Whiston's.

Halley was no real atheist or why would he have spun a whole theory around what caused Noah's Flood?

The then accepted date of the Flood was - like I said - around 2340-2345, by means of Biblcal chronology.

"2346BC, which is not 2193BC"

I know, jesus. Do you conveniently skip past what you don't like? I explained there is a gap of 150 years between the dates, I talked about the number -7- being important, and I said I'd like to read the books written by the Frisians Alta and Dongjuma.

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's nothing to 'get'.

Apparently there is alligators in India.

Indian alligators found dead in Chambal River

Etawah (Uttar Pradesh), Dec. 13: In a shocking incident, several Indian alligators (Gharials) have been found dead in the Chambal River in Etawah's Chakar Nagar sub-division of Uttar Pradesh.

The main habitat for crocodiles and alligators in India are the Rivers Chambal, Girwa, Rapti and Narayani in the orbit of central and northern India.

The deaths of the alligators has invited scrutiny after the Society for the Conservation of Nature, an NGO (non-government organisaiton), intimated the forest department after spotting two dead alligators near the river.

After visiting the spot, forest officials approached the National Chambal Sanctuary authorities to probe the matter further. The cause for alligator deaths is yet to be ascertained.

"The forest department has conducted a post-mortem on two to three Gharials. The Gharials were recently brought from Lucknow's Kukrail Gharial Rehabilitation Centre, and they might have become victims of some contagious disease or the target of some hunters, " claimed Rajeev Chauhan, the Secretary of the Society for the Conservation of Nature.

http://www.topnews.in/indian-alligators-found-dead-chambal-river-29003

So, even though this is actually a crocodile it seems the norm to call it an alligator. Gharials.

I'd say it was this species being referred to in the OLB:

Gharials once thrived in all the major river systems of the Indian subcontinent, spanning the rivers of its northern part from the Indus in Pakistan across the Gangetic floodplain to the Irrawaddy in Myanmar.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gharial

Yeah, that's how some might call those typical Indian crocs... nowadays.

Show me an old Indian/Pakistan source that calls these crocs anything similar to "alligator".

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just for the sake of it, I got my calculator, curious to see if Halley's Comet might have passed in 2193/4.

It didn't. I got 2216BC and 2140BC.

It did pass in 1000BC though and also 1532BC and 1608BC, which might be dates near the Thera eruption.

The earliest known record of a possible Halley's Comet is 240BC. I backtracked 76 years over and over, not allowing for the sometimes 75 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, that's how some might call those typical Indian crocs... nowadays.

Show me an old Indian/Pakistan source that calls these crocs anything similar to "alligator".

.

I'm pretty much over the alligator and I doubt I can pull up some "old Indian/Pakistani source" - but I did show that these Gharials, which once ranged in the area referred to in the OLB are called alligators in an Indian newspaper source, yes recent, whatever. I pulled out a second etymology for alligator from Latin, which no one mentioned and showed it possible the word wasn't a Fryan word according to it's use in the OLB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just for the sake of it, I got my calculator, curious to see if Halley's Comet might have passed in 2193/4.

It didn't. I got 2216BC and 2140BC.

It did pass in 1000BC though and also 1532BC and 1608BC, which might be dates near the Thera eruption.

The earliest known record of a possible Halley's Comet is 240BC. I backtracked 76 years over and over, not allowing for the sometimes 75 years.

The 75.32 years period is an avarage, I know. The period is said to range from 74 up to 79 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty much over the alligator and I doubt I can pull up some "old Indian/Pakistani source" - but I did show that these Gharials, which once ranged in the area referred to in the OLB are called alligators in an Indian newspaper source, yes recent, whatever. I pulled out a second etymology for alligator from Latin, which no one mentioned and showed it possible the word wasn't a Fryan word according to it's use in the OLB.

Many people call an alligator 'crocodile', but then any American will say, "No, it's an 'alligator', but we do also have crocs here."

=

What does the OLB say about why that animal is called the way it is:

tha aldergrâtesta âdiska sind algaettar hêten, thrvchdam se yvin grûsich bitte an thet rotte kwik, that mith-a strâma fon boppa nêi tha delta dryweth

De allergrootste eidechsen zijn de '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

So, following the OLB, "algaettar" has something to do with 'greedily eating... rotten meat'. What do they mean, 'alga-eattar'?? 'Eattar' = eaters?

It is generally known 'gharials' only eat living fish, btw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Halley's number was 575, not 575.5; that was Whiston's.

Halley was no real atheist or why would he have spun a whole theory around what caused Noah's Flood?

The then accepted date of the Flood was - like I said - around 2340-2345, by means of Biblcal chronology.

"2346BC, which is not 2193BC"

I know, jesus. Do you conveniently skip past what you don't like? I explained there is a gap of 150 years between the dates, I talked about the number -7- being important, and I said I'd like to read the books written by the Frisians Alta and Dongjuma.

.

Halley didn't come up with the Deluge Theory, Whiston did.

In 1691 Halley sought the post of Savilian Professor of Astronomy at Oxford, but, due to his well-known atheism, was opposed by the Archbishop of Canterbury, John Tillotson and Bishop Stillingfleet. The post went instead to David Gregory, who had the support of Isaac Newton.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmond_Halley

Yeah OK, I have my own long winded theories too, I don't see any connection except that he thought a comet might have caused mass destruction, and I don't have that much time to wade through 3 pages of confusing astronomical idea you have, cut to the chase.

What did you think of those Ladies in Goa, very Cretan looking I thought. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1682 - (51*76)= -2194 >> 2195 BC

1682 - (51*75.99)= -2193.49 >> 2194.49 BC = 2194 BC

Using 1680 (wrong comet):

1680 - (51*75.94)= -2192,94 >> 2193.94 BC = 2194 BC.

We just don't know what avarage Halley (or someone else) used for the period of the comet.

nd from the book I downloaded (see post yesterday) the even claimed to know in what month it happened. There you have the decimals.

But I repeat: I want to read the books written by Alta and Dongjuma.

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Halley didn't come up with the Deluge Theory, Whiston did.

In 1691 Halley sought the post of Savilian Professor of Astronomy at Oxford, but, due to his well-known atheism, was opposed by the Archbishop of Canterbury, John Tillotson and Bishop Stillingfleet. The post went instead to David Gregory, who had the support of Isaac Newton.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmond_Halley

Yeah OK, I have my own long winded theories too, I don't see any connection except that he thought a comet might have caused mass destruction, and I don't have that much time to wade through 3 pages of confusing astronomical idea you have, cut to the chase.

What did you think of those Ladies in Goa, very Cretan looking I thought. :lol:

No, Whiston adopted Halley's theory, but made it even 'worse': he claimed that not only was the earth hit by a comet. but also that h earth was once a comet itself.

===

Lol, very Cretan looking. I love the dresses they wore too, heh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many people call an alligator 'crocodile', but then any American will say, "No, it's an 'alligator', but we do also have crocs here."

=

What does the OLB say about why that animal is called the way it is:

tha aldergrâtesta âdiska sind algaettar hêten, thrvchdam se yvin grûsich bitte an thet rotte kwik, that mith-a strâma fon boppa nêi tha delta dryweth

De allergrootste eidechsen zijn de '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

So, following the OLB, "algaettar" has something to do with 'greedily eating... rotten meat'. What do they mean, 'alga-eattar'?? 'Eattar' = eaters?

It is generally known 'gharials' only eat living fish, btw.

I haven't checked the original text but the e in algaettar seems to be an insertion into the transliteration.

Really an algattar. It could be all-getter - snaps and gets everything - gets all?

Yes, maybe they were really hungry, there may have been overpopulation, little fish etc, I can't know the exact reasons of their dietary behaviour back then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Halley was no real atheist or why would he have spun a whole theory around what caused Noah's Flood?

.

You asked that.

I answered with this.

In 1691 Halley sought the post of Savilian Professor of Astronomy at Oxford, but, due to his well-known atheism,

Then you tell me he did have the theory of the Deluge. I don't think he did, he had an idea a comet might have crashed into the Earth but I don't think HE spun a whole theory, it was Whiston who had the theory of Noah's Flood from what I can see - evn the Popular Mechanics article you gave says that - WHiston wrote the book, he used Halleys 575 year idea though.

Either way, again, what's the point??? EDIT: OK I saw your post #8943. I'll look over some more tomorrow.

Edited by The Puzzler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You asked that.

I answered with this.

In 1691 Halley sought the post of Savilian Professor of Astronomy at Oxford, but, due to his well-known atheism,

Then you tell me he did have the theory of the Deluge. I don't think he did, he had an idea a comet might have crashed into the Earth but I don't think HE spun a whole theory, it was Whiston who had the theory of Noah's Flood from what I can see - evn the Popular Mechanics article you gave says that - WHiston wrote the book, he used Halleys 575 year idea though.

Either way, again, what's the point??? EDIT: OK I saw your post #8943. I'll look over some more tomorrow.

...ZUCHT...

I even posted a screenshot of where Halley said what about his theory. I also downloaded the book.

Halley was not an atheist, but he was accused of being one because he sought to find a 'mundane' explanation for Noah's Flood (= not the will of God and all that, to punish Mankind).

And Whiston only added a lot more to Halley's theory.

But the whole point is that already in the 17th century people tried to explain that it might very well have been an impacting comet that caused the Flood, the earth's axis to tilt, and whatnot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't checked the original text but the e in algaettar seems to be an insertion into the transliteration.

Really an algattar. It could be all-getter - snaps and gets everything - gets all?

Yes, maybe they were really hungry, there may have been overpopulation, little fish etc, I can't know the exact reasons of their dietary behaviour back then.

"algaettar" = all-getter.

You know, if that was right, we would have another Anglicism in the OLB.

And "algaettar" even sounds English, lol.

Oh, and the gharial's beak is too weak to catch large prey, whether is dead or alive, whether they were really hungry or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...ZUCHT...

I even posted a screenshot of where Halley said what about his theory. I also downloaded the book.

Halley was not an atheist, but he was accused of being one because he sought to find a 'mundane' explanation for Noah's Flood (= not the will of God and all that, to punish Mankind).

And Whiston only added a lot more to Halley's theory.

But the whole point is that already in the 17th century people tried to explain that it might very well have been an impacting comet that caused the Flood, the earth's axis to tilt, and whatnot.

OK. But the OLB never ever said anything about a comet, only Alewyn did. I get the description in the OLB seems to indicate a comet hit, and ALewyn takes it that way as well, you think they'd mention something like that in the OLB though. All very interesting though, I'll try and find time to go over the pages I've missed. My parents are here for Christmas.

Goodnight from me for now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK. But the OLB never ever said anything about a comet, only Alewyn did. I get the description in the OLB seems to indicate a comet hit, and ALewyn takes it that way as well, you think they'd mention something like that in the OLB though. All very interesting though, I'll try and find time to go over the pages I've missed. My parents are here for Christmas.

Goodnight from me for now.

No, the OLB doesn't. However, it does hint at celestial phenomena, it mentions 'watchstars', it mentions people watching the stars/heavens from the top of the towers in the center of their citadels, and... it describes disasters (in 2194 BC) that are very similar to the centuries old ideas about what would happen if planets line up or when a comet appears in the skies. Halley and Eelco Alta are just a couple of examples.

If you only read Halley's theory (floods/THE Flood, earthquakes, earth's axis tilting, and so on) then you might get an idea of where the creators of the OLB got their inspiration from.

---

About Eelco Alta:

ALTA_1774_conjunction.jpg

Op 8 mei 1774 vond toen een samenstand plaats van de planeten: Mercurius, Venus, Mars en Jupiter met de Maan in het sterrenbeeld Ram.

Enkele maanden voor deze gebeurtenis verscheen er een boekje, geschreven door "Een Liefhebber der

Waarheid". Ook kranten gaven berichten over deze samenstand. Pas veel later kwam men er achter dat

het verhaal afkomstig was van Dominee Eelco Alta uit het plaatsje Bozum in Friesland. Hij had het

bericht over deze komende samenstand gelezen van de toen beroemde Duitse astronoom J.E. Bode die

er alleen maar op wijst dat men in de morgen voor zonsopgang van 8 mei deze fraaie samenstand aan de

hemel kan bewonderen. Voor Eelco Alta, die hele andere theorieën over het zonnestelsel had, was dit de

aanleiding om de mensen te waarschuwen voor wat volgens hem de gevolgen hiervan zouden zijn voor

onze aarde. Hij beweerde dat op die bewuste dag de planeten op elkaar zouden botsen waardoor er

vreselijke aardbevingen, vulkaanuitbarstingen en vloedgolven zouden plaats vinden. Uiteindelijk zou de

aarde uit haar baan en in "de poel des Vuurs" (dat was dus de Zon) ten onder gaan. Dat veroorzaakte

toen enorme paniek onder de bevolking.

// "(...) He claimed that on that day the planets would collide together creating

terrible earthquakes, volcanic eruptions and tsunamis would occur. Eventually the

Earth would leave from its orbit and perish in "the lake of fire" (which was the Sun).(...)" //

http://www.maanenplaneten.nl/documenten/mercurius/199910Mercurius.pdf

Nice pdf (and in English) about Eisinga and Alta (and read what 'we' discussed, lol)

Why Henk and Eise Eisinga?

• Last days of December 1983 we drove to

Friesland

– discussed Thet Oera Linda Bok (1867)

– visited the mummies of Wieuwert (1765)

– listened in Franeker to one of the last tours of Harke

Planeet (Terpstra), conservator of the Planetarium

(1941-1983): ‘denkt u om uw hoofd’, and bought a

signed copy of his beautiful book “Friesche

Sterreconst”

• Up to today Henk is fascinated by these

mysteries

A reverend Eelco Alta published a booklet in which he

predicted that the planets and the moon would collide,

with the result that the earth would be pushed out of its

orbit and burned by the sun.

• Due to this prediction there was a lot of

panic in Friesland

• Having read this book, Eisinga found

that it was time to teach the ignorant

people something about dynamics, by

making a working model of the Solar system

• Eisinga is typical of the Enlightenment. Like many other

working men he was convinced that practicing knowledge

improves both mankind and society (“Boereprofessors”)

http://www.lorentzcenter.nl/lc/web/2009/363/presentations/George%20Huitema.pdf

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 12

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.