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

We discussed this before. I left the idea about the Middelzee = Zuiderzee, when I found, that in the OLB only the Middelzee = Mediterranean Sea is meant.

By the way I have good news about the Waraburch and Aldega. I identified Aldega as Hoorn, Jensma as Enkhuizen.

However. there has existed an other place called Horn close to Andijk. Probably this place has disappeared in the Zuiderzee, so they built a new place Hoorn on a safer place at some distance from the Zuiderzee like happened in the case of Old Naarden - Naarden. But again the new place Hoorn was threatened by the Zuiderzee, when the Hoornse Hop was formed as a result of a flood. The Aldergamude indeed is at Enkhuizen at the Oude Gouw gates.

Look on Google Maps for Andijk, Hornpad 7 and see the ringdik of the former Waraburch, which can be reached from Medeasblik along the sea dyke in 3 hours (15 km). The distance is 3 poles (3x5 km) from Medeasblik. The Waraburch is a quarter of an hour (ca. 1,2 km) from Horn.

If the Middel Sea is nothing but the Med throughout the OLB , then there is something wrong in the description of the extense of Frya's empire (Aster Sea in the direction of the morning, Middle Sea in the direction of the evening). The only people who can say the Med is in the direction of the evening are those living in Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, and Israel. Some say the word "Europe" comes from a Semitic word meaning "west" (erev), others say it was a Greek word meaning "west" while Asia was a Greek word for east. But maybe they are all wrong, and Europe is an ancient word meaning North??

==

About that ringdike:

post-18246-0-60830400-1330679992_thumb.j

How old is that ringdike in Andijk? Did it exist in the 19th century and before?

And did you notice that "Aldega" is spelled in 2 different ways? It's "Aldega" and "AldeRga".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Abe, I am trying to put some figures in here from photobucket but I I have forgotten how. Can you help?

EuropeSunriseSunset-Model.jpg

Edited by Alewyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Abe, I am trying to put some figures in here from photobucket but I I have forgotten how. Can you help?

Wow, I was busy with a reply, and all of yours is gone.

Yes, copy the url to your image. Then create a post. Click on the button just above the text box (your reply) that says "Insert image" (its left of the litle envelope). Then enter the link to your image. But be sure before you clicked on that button, that you had your cursor on the position where you wanted to place your image.

Another, more safe way is this: copy and paste the url of the image into the text box. Then type directly in front of the url:

[img]

and directly to the right

[/img]

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, I was busy with a reply, and all of yours is gone.

Yes, copy the url to your image. Then create a post. Click on the button just above the text box (your reply) that says "Insert image" (its left of the litle envelope). Then enter the link to your image. But be sure before you clicked on that button, that you had your cursor on the position where you wanted to place your image.

Another, more safe way is this: copy and paste the url of the image into the text box. Then type directly in front of the url:

[img]

and directly to the right

[/img]

.

Thanks Abe, I think I found the problem. Now I'll try again

Edited by Alewyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Middel Sea is nothing but the Med throughout the OLB , then there is something wrong in the description of the extense of Frya's empire (Aster Sea in the direction of the morning, Middle Sea in the direction of the evening). The only people who can say the Med is in the direction of the evening are those living in Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, and Israel. Some say the word "Europe" comes from a Semitic word meaning "west" (erev), others say it was a Greek word meaning "west" while Asia was a Greek word for east. But maybe they are all wrong, and Europe is an ancient word meaning North??

No Abe, there is nothing wrong with the OLBs description.

Consider the following sketch (in edition 2 of my book):

Here I show the present day sunrise and sunset as observed from Amsterdam.

At the summer solstice (June), the sun rises in a north-easterly direction and sets in a north-westerly direction. (Longest day and shortest night).

At the winter solstice (December), the sun rises in a south-easterly direction and sets in a south-westerly direction (shortest day and longest night).

The OLB, however, says that before the bad times came the sun rose over the Baltic Sea (N to NE?) and set over the Mediterranean (S to SW?). At a first glance this seems like an error.

EuropeSunriseSunset-Model.jpg

The OLB, however, also says that before the bad times came, the sun rose higher and Europe was warmer (they could bake their grain in the suns rays). This could only be true if the earths orientation relative to the sun was different before the disaster which, according to the OLB, lasted 3 years.

I have previously quoted from the Book of Enoch which described how the earth was thrown of its pillar(s) and the earth became inclined. The book described earthquakes and a loud noise (impact?) that was heard from the extremities of the earth to the extremities of heaven.

Now we find the Potsdam-Institut fuer Klimafolgenforschung (Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research) in Germany, headed by Prof. Dr. Martin Claussen saying that The change from the mid-Holocene climate to that of today was initiated by changes in the Earth's orbit and the tilt of Earth's axis.

Admittedly, they do not say that this change in the earths orbit and axial tilt happened suddenly. In fact, they are not certain whether this happened over thousands of years or over a few centuries. The OLB and the Book of Enoch, however, describe a very sudden event.

Consider the following 2 sketches. The first merely serves to illustrate a top which continue to spin around its axis even if it changes its orbit and inclination. In the second sketch I merely tried to show how this principle can be applied to earth.

OrbitalChange-Model1.jpg

OrbitalChange-Model.jpg

I maintain that the OLB is correct. The anomaly in the OLB re the sun setting over the Mediterranean and the"sun rose higher" can only be explained by a change in earths orbit and/or axial tilt.

How could anyone in the 19th century have known that earths axial tilt and orbit changed during the mid- Holocene? To me this is overwhelming evidence that the OLB is not a 19th century fabrication. It is the smoking gun if you wish.

Edited by Alewyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The link had "http://" twice.

Just remove one of them.

Thanks Otharus and Abe.

Yes, that was exactly the problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alewyn, you said:

"How could anyone in the 19th century have known that earths axial tilt and orbit changed during the mid- Holocene? To me this is overwhelming evidence that the OLB is not a 19th century fabrication. It is the “smoking gun” if you wish."

Well, that's because they didn't know; whatever is supposed to have happened according to the OLB took place at least a 1000 years after the end of the Mid-Holocene:

Mid-Holocene Climatic Optimum

This is a somewhat outdated term used to refer to a sub-interval of the Holocene period from 5000-7000 years ago during which it was once thought that the earth was warmer than today. We now know that conditions at this time were probably warmer than today, but only in summer and only in the extratropics of the Northern Hemisphere. This summer warming appears to have been due to astronomical factors that favoured warmer Northern summers, but colder Northern winters and colder tropics, than today (see Hewitt and Mitchell, 1998; Ganopolski et al, 1998). The best available evidence from recent peer-reviewed studies suggests that annual, global mean warmth was probably similar to pre-20th century warmth, but less than late 20th century warmth, at this time (see Kitoh and Murakami, 2002).

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/11/mid-holocene-climatic-optimum/

Paleoclimatologists have long suspected that the "middle Holocene" or a period roughly from 7,000 to 5,000 years ago, was warmer than the present day. Terms like the Alti-thermal or Hypsi-thermal or Climatic Optimum have all been used to refer to this warm period that marked the middle of the current interglacial period. Today, however, we know that these terms are obsolete and that the truth of the Holocene is more complicated than originally believed.

In summary, the mid-Holocene, roughly 6,000 years ago, was generally warmer than today, but only in summer and only in the northern hemisphere. More over, we clearly know the cause of this natural warming, and know without doubt that this proven "astronomical" climate forcing mechanism cannot be responsible for the warming over the last 100 years.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/globalwarming/holocene.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have previously quoted from the “Book of Enoch” which described how the earth “was thrown of its pillar(s)” and “the earth became inclined”. The book described earthquakes and a loud noise (impact?) that was heard “from the extremities of the earth to the extremities of heaven”.

Now we find the “Potsdam-Institut fuer Klimafolgenforschung” (Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research) in Germany, headed by Prof. Dr. Martin Claussen saying that “The change from the mid-Holocene climate to that of today was initiated by changes in the Earth's orbit and the tilt of Earth's axis”.

But whatever Enoch was describing, it must have happened many ages before Noah's flood.

As you will remember we spent many pages discussing about the date of that flood or Deluge, but whatever date it was, it must have happened between roughly 2350 and 2200 BC, according to Biblical chronology.

So whatever Enoch witnessed (dream? vision?) happened long before the Flood, and long before the OLB date of 2194 BC.

Enoch appears in Genesis as the seventh of the ten pre-Deluge Patriarchs. Each of the pre-Flood Patriarchs lives for several centuries, has a son, lives more centuries, and dies.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enoch_(ancestor_of_Noah)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alewyn, you said:

"How could anyone in the 19th century have known that earths axial tilt and orbit changed during the mid- Holocene? To me this is overwhelming evidence that the OLB is not a 19th century fabrication. It is the smoking gun if you wish."

Well, that's because they didn't know; whatever is supposed to have happened according to the OLB took place at least a 1000 years after the end of the Mid-Holocene:

[

Let me rephrase my question.

How could anyone in the 19th century have known that the earth's climate changed from that of the mid-holocene?

Also, how could anyone in the 19th century have known that earth's orbit and axial tilt changed since the mid-holocene?

Edited by Alewyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But whatever Enoch was describing, it must have happened many ages before Noah's flood.

The Book of Enoch

Chapter 55

(4) And when that agitation took place; the saints out of heaven perceived it; the pillar of the earth shook from its foundation; and the sound was heard from the extremities of the earth unto the extremities of heaven at the same time.

Chapter 64

In those days Noah saw that the earth became inclined, and that destruction approached.(2) Then he lifted up his feet, and went to the ends of the earth, to the dwelling of his great-grandfather Enoch. (3) And Noah cried with a bitter voice, Hear me; hear me; hear me: three times. And he said, Tell me what is transacting upon the earth; for the earth labours, and is violently shaken. Surely I shall perish with it. (4) After this there was a great perturbation on earth, and a voice was heard from heaven. I fell down on my face, when my great-grandfather Enoch came and stood by me.

Edited by Alewyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No Abe, there is nothing wrong with the OLB's description.

Consider the following sketch (in edition 2 of my book):

Here I show the present day sunrise and sunset as observed from Amsterdam.

At the summer solstice (June), the sun rises in a north-easterly direction and sets in a north-westerly direction. (Longest day and shortest night).

At the winter solstice (December), the sun rises in a south-easterly direction and sets in a south-westerly direction (shortest day and longest night).

The OLB, however, says that "before the bad times came" the sun rose over the Baltic Sea (N to NE?) and set over the Mediterranean (S to SW?). At a first glance this seems like an error.

EuropeSunriseSunset-Model.jpg

The OLB, however, also says that "before the bad times came, the sun rose higher" and Europe was warmer (they could bake their grain in the sun's rays). This could only be true if the earth's orientation relative to the sun was different before the disaster which, according to the OLB, lasted 3 years.

I have previously quoted from the "Book of Enoch" which described how the earth "was thrown of its pillar(s)" and "the earth became inclined". The book described earthquakes and a loud noise (impact?) that was heard "from the extremities of the earth to the extremities of heaven".

Now we find the "Potsdam-Institut fuer Klimafolgenforschung" (Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research) in Germany, headed by Prof. Dr. Martin Claussen saying that "The change from the mid-Holocene climate to that of today was initiated by changes in the Earth's orbit and the tilt of Earth's axis".

Admittedly, they do not say that this change in the earth's orbit and axial tilt happened suddenly. In fact, they are not certain whether this happened over thousands of years or over a few centuries. The OLB and the "Book of Enoch", however, describe a very sudden event.

Consider the following 2 sketches. The first merely serves to illustrate a top which continue to spin around its axis even if it changes its orbit and inclination. In the second sketch I merely tried to show how this principle can be applied to earth.

OrbitalChange-Model1.jpg

OrbitalChange-Model.jpg

I maintain that the OLB is correct. The anomaly in the OLB re the sun setting over the Mediterranean and the"sun rose higher" can only be explained by a change in earth's orbit and/or axial tilt.

How could anyone in the 19th century have known that earths axial tilt and orbit changed during the mid- Holocene? To me this is overwhelming evidence that the OLB is not a 19th century fabrication. It is the "smoking gun" if you wish.

Presented this sometime back, but apparently you missed it. To reiterate:

To start with two of your "interpretations":

Climate variability during the present interglacial,

the Holocene, has been rather smooth in comparison

with the last glacial. Nevertheless, there were some

rather abrupt climate changes. One of these changes, the

desertication of the Saharan and Arabian region some 4 -

6 thousand years ago, was presumably quite important for

human society. It could have been the stimulus leading to

the foundation of civilizations along the Nile, Euphrat and

Tigris rivers. Here we argue that Saharan and Arabian deserti

cation was triggered by subtle variations in the Earth's

orbit which were strongly amplified by atmosphere- vegetation

feedbacks in the subtropics. The timing of this transition,

however, was mainly governed by a global interplay

between atmosphere, ocean, sea ice, and vegetation (Emphasis added).

Around 9 ka, the tilt of the Earth's axis was

stronger than today and the time of perihelion was at the

end of July [berger, 1978]. This led to a stronger insolation

of the Northern Hemisphere during summer which amplied

the African and Indian summer monsoon. However, variations

in orbital parameters through the Holocene are rather

smooth, whereas changes in North African climate and vegetation

were comparatively abrupt [see, e.g., Petit-Maire and

Guo, 1996]. This suggests that there are feedbacks within

the climate system which amplify and modify external forcing

leading to marked climate variations (Emphasis added).

http://www.mpimet.mp...hara_grl_99.pdf

The change from the mid-Holocene climate to that of today was initiated by changes in the Earth's orbit and the tilt of Earth's axis. Some 9,000 years ago, Earth's tilt was 24.14 degrees, as compared with the current 23.45 degrees, and perihelion, the point in the Earth's orbit that is closest to the Sun, occurred at the end of July, as compared with early January now. At that time, the Northern Hemisphere received more summer sunlight, which amplified the African and Indian summer monsoon (Emphasis added).

The changes in Earth's orbit occurred gradually, however, whereas the evolution of North Africa's climate and vegetation were abrupt (Emphasis added).

http://www.scienceda...90712080500.htm

As has been previously presented, there would not appear to be any support for a major axial shift during the time period of your speculation.

Edit: Emphasis.

Edited by Swede

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alewyn, you posted this picture:

EuropeSunriseSunset-Model.jpg

Even on that picture (pre-2194BC) the Mediterranean would not be near the sunset ("evening") whether during winter or summer.

(btw, these images of yours appear to have a life of their own, lol: small, big, and then small again)

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Book of Enoch

Chapter 55

(4) And when that agitation took place; the saints out of heaven perceived it; the pillar of the earth shook from its foundation; and the sound was heard from the extremities of the earth unto the extremities of heaven at the same time.

Chapter 64

In those days Noah saw that the earth became inclined, and that destruction approached.(2) Then he lifted up his feet, and went to the ends of the earth, to the dwelling of his great-grandfather Enoch. (3) And Noah cried with a bitter voice, Hear me; hear me; hear me: three times. And he said, Tell me what is transacting upon the earth; for the earth labours, and is violently shaken. Surely I shall perish with it. (4) After this there was a great perturbation on earth, and a voice was heard from heaven. I fell down on my face, when my great-grandfather Enoch came and stood by me.

OK, I never read the Book of Enoch, and just scrolled through an online version:

The book of Enoch, the prophet:

an apocryphal production,

supposed for ages to have been lost;

but

discovered at the close of the last century in

Abyssinia;

Richard Laurence, 1838, 3d edition

http://books.google.nl/books?id=kPsoAAAAYAAJ&hl=nl&source=gbs_book_other_versions

I would like to see how other writers translated this sentence:

"In those days Noah saw that the earth became inclined".

Anyway, the book I just scrolled through (see link) was the 3d edition of 1838. It must have created a stirr amongst theologicians. Would you think a man like Halbertsma, who had studied theology and was a minister/preacher, a man who spent an incredible amount of money to buy books about many topics, had owned or at least had read this book?

Just yesterday I posted about the discovery of a 1500 years old book, the Gospel by Barnabas, in another forum here. I can imagine a theologian will love to read that book because it will prove to be nothing less than spectacular. If it's not some falsification, of course.

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Om de erfenis van Friso ~ 175 jaar Fries Genootschap"

by Goffe Jensma,

published in

"Het Fries Genootschap 1827-2002" (2002).

(translation, for original see attached scan; p.61-62)

The Oera Linda-book, that surfaced in 1867 as one of the many manuscripts that were discussed in the meetings of the Fries Genootschap (Frisian Society), for many years in bursts dominated the discussions within the Frisian Society, as well as outside. The manuscript seemed to agree with all Frisian fantasies and exaggerated them. The Frisians did not descend from Friso, who would have come from India to Friesland, they were much older: Friso was a descendant from a colony of Frisians that had already moved from Friesland to India in the fifteenth century BC, led by the daughter of Great Pier [(c.1480 – 1520 AD)], would you believe. The book did make use of the new methods to approach ancient history; it referred to theories about the qualities of races, as explained by Quatrefages, and it suggested that the history of the European white race equalled that of the Free Frisians.

The reputation of the Frisian Society suffered a lot from this history, not so much because of the book itself, but mostly because a prominent board member of the Society, Jan Gerhardus Ottema believed in it, and published it (independantly from the Society) in 1871.

François Haverschmidt - vicar ànd member of the Society - and his friend Eelco Verwijs - working member of the Society -, who created and brought it into the world respectively, demonstrated in other works by their hands, that they rejected the fantastic historiography. By choosing the form of a mystification, this remained implicit, and the discusion did not come to an end, neither about the OLB, nor about the Frisian myth. It would take another generation before the Society would start discussing the myth not only as a form of literature, but also scientifically.

friesgenootschap2002.jpg

This was 2 years BEFORE Jensma published his THEORY about Haverschmidt and Verwijs.

To translate GÉRT.PIRE.HIS TOGHATER with the daughter of Great Pier is very daring.

In this forum we concluded that it makes no sense at all.

It is a very liberal interpretation by Jensma, but he does not present it here as such.

When Jensma wrote this, he was 'doctorandus' (master of arts) in history and philosophy.

Even in my first year at university (I am a master of science), I would not have gotten away with presenting my theories as if they are facts.

The board members of the Frisan Society, who were about to celebrate their 175th jubilee must have wanted him (and paid him) to finally silence the OLB debate, to leave no doubt about it being fake and mystery solved.

I have read and heard enough by now to understand that the OLB is the worst pain in their asses. Thinking about the book means having sleepless nights and headaches... or worse.

And I know too well (from personal experiece) that scientists of my generation are paid to 'prove' whatever our patrons want us to 'scientifically' prove.

Science is the new religion, and people like Jensma are its priests.

maskerdesot.jpg

Edited by Otharus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL, I like that pic of Jensma on the cover. My first reaction was , "What??!".

Btw, nothing important, but 2 days ago someone (an Anglo-Mexican) posted a musical video on my site... the title of his post was "Ott" !!

And yeah, that translation, "Grutte Pier's daughter". That was plain wrong.

According to OLB lingo that should have been something like "PIRE.TONAMATH GRUT_HIS TOGHATER"

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL, I like that pic of Jensma on the cover. My first reaction was , "What??!".

Btw, nothing important, but 2 days ago someone (an Anglo-Mexican) posted a musical video on my site... the title of his post was "OTT" !!

LOL, as in Over The Top?

Yep, must be about me!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL, as in Over The Top?

Yep, must be about me!

Heh, well, if you can make music like that... two of the three videos I liked.

(I guess you missed my edit: check the underlined word in my former post.)

And no, I should have writen "Ott" - a name, not an abbreviation - because that was the title of his post.

I added your 'book cover' in a reply.

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jensma: "The reputation of the Frisian Society suffered a lot from this history, not so much because of the book itself, but mostly because a prominent board member of the Society, Jan Gerhardus Ottema believed in it, and published it (independantly from the Society) in 1871."

M'nheer Jensma! M'nheer Jensma! Och, och...

Ottema published the first OLB-transcription & -translation in 1872!

Edited by Otharus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And no, I should have writen "Ott" - a name, not an abbreviation - because that was the title of his post.

That distant cousin seems to have a similar taste as I.

Creative genes, I guess... :)

I kind of like Jensma's translation of our name: "gelukzaligheid" (bliss).

(Not ALL of his work is worthless!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That distant cousin seems to have a similar taste as I.

Creative genes, I guess... :)

I kind of like Jensma's translation of our name: "gelukzaligheid" (bliss).

(Not ALL of his work is worthless!)

Must be a VERY distant cousin: his true family name is not anything like yours, and he never claimed Dutch ancestry.

==

You should check the Hindu "ot"...

Now don't ask me what that was: it was one of those days my ex came around, banged on my door, and me closing everything in a hurry, including what I had saved on Notepad.

I was about to post it, just for fun, and then lost it.

It was not anything 'bad', I guess you would have liked it.

But I have no idea what it was, sorry.

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As has been previously presented, there would not appear to be any support for a major axial shift during the time period of your speculation.

Edit: Emphasis.

You seem to state it as fact that science has already all the answers as to when the climate change happened and what caused it. See Abe's post above:

Today, however, we know that these terms are obsolete and that the truth of the Holocene is more complicated than originally believed.

Secondly, how do you explain the Book of Enoch's description? (as well as the OLB and all the other ancient scribes I quoted here before)

Thirdly, how do you explain the global floods and tsunamis and the demise of all those civilizations that collapsed suddenly and all at the same time in ca 2200 BC if the changes occured "gradually" over thousands of years?

Fourthly how do you explain the sudden change in the salinity of the North African fresh water lakes and the sudden increase in the salt content of the ground at Tell Leilan - all around 2200 BC (and how come North Africa turned into desert after ca 2000 BC.)

Why don't you "speculate" a bit and give us a single scenario that explain all these happenings around 2200 BC? (Please don't try to tell us all these events were not connected because that would be very naïve)

My so-called "speculation" is based on my interpretation of scientific facts and I stand by what I said here and in my book.

Edited by Alewyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Secondly, how do you explain the Book of Enoch's description? (as well as the OLB and all the other ancient scribes I quoted here before)

I will, in Swede's place, if you (and he) don't mind.

That book was known in the 19th century. A Halbertsma would surely have known about it.

Alewyn, we do not need ancient books people were bound to have read, we need archeological proof, be it about citadels or ancient manuscripts, or a letter by Halbertsma in which he confesses to have fabricated the OLB.

If not anything like that shows up, this thread will grow to a 1000 pages.

But I won't mind. This thread taught me a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You seem to state it as fact that science has already all the answers as to when the climate change happened and what caused it. See Abe's post above:

Secondly, how do you explain the Book of Enoch's description? (as well as the OLB and all the other ancient scribes I quoted here before)

Thirdly, how do you explain the global floods and tsunamis and the demise of all those civilizations that collapsed suddenly and all at the same time in ca 2200 BC if the changes occured "gradually" over thousands of years?

Fourthly how do you explain the sudden change in the salinity of the North African fresh water lakes and the sudden increase in the salt content of the ground at Tell Leilan - all around 2200 BC (and how come North Africa turned into desert after ca 2000 BC.)

Why don't you "speculate" a bit and give us a single scenario that explain all these happenings around 2200 BC? (Please don't try to tell us all these events were not connected because that would be very naïve)

My so-called "speculation" is based on my interpretation of scientific facts and I stand by what I said here and in my book.

1) Your selective quote from the reference provided by Abe is deliberately misleading. As the papers recently presented illustrate, the climatic changes that have occurred during the Holocene are indeed the result of complex interactions. This does not imply a major shift in the planetary axial rotation. For more on the complexities of the period:

http://rivernet.ncsu.edu/courselocker/PaleoClimate/Bond%20et%20al.,%201997%20Millenial%20Scale%20Holocene%20Change.pdf

2) The Book of Enoch is a source material that one should not consider to be of a high degree of historical accuracy or precision, nor should any such related works.

3) You would appear to be working under the presumption that the authenticity and veracity of the OLB has been firmly established. This would not appear to be the case.

4) Once again, you would appear to be misinterpreting and conflating information. Global flooding? Source? As to "civilization collapse" - Such of these as occurred were in a comparatively limited geographical area and are generally understood to be due to a number of interrelated factors. For example, in Egypt we have the combination of excess expenditures by the prior ruling classes combined with the culmination of a drying period that had been in progress for quite some time. If you question the socio-economic impact of even a relatively brief drying period, you may wish to investigate the recent model of the Dust Bowl years in North America.

5) You have also repeatedly misrepresented the salinity matter in North Africa. There is a difference in the use of such terms as "sudden" as used in the geological context and the manner in which that term may be utilized in a more human timeframe.

Prior to about 4200 years ago, Lake Yoa was a freshwater lake. Over the next several hundred years, the lake became rapidly more saline until becoming a salt lake about 3900 years ago. This dramatic change is thought to be the result of a site-specific shift from surface or subsurface outflow from the lake to water loss only through evaporation in response to gradual regional drying. According to the researchers, "the exact timing of this transition depended on a site-specific threshold in the evolving balance between summed inputs (rain, local runoff, groundwater, and river inflow) and outputs (evaporation and subsurface outflow), rather than the timing and rate of regional climate change." This is in agreement with the indicators of vegetation type in the cores which show a progressive change over several millennia from a humid climate suite of plants including populations of tropical trees, ferns, shrubs and herbs, to an arid plant assemblage. The association of tropical trees with ferns prior to 4300 years B.P. indicates that they probably grew in river valleys that flooded periodically. Based on the data from Lake Yoa, the transition from a humid to an arid climate occurred over a period of about 2500 years (Kröpelin et al., 2008a). (Emphasis added).

http://academic.emporia.edu/aberjame/student/nester2/sahara.html

6) Back to your primary contention. As has been well established via the presentation of numerous research papers and other relevant references, there is no indication of a major axial shift at any point in time even remotely related to the period circa 4200 BP. Nor is there any geological, climatological, biological, atmospheric, or archaeological evidence to support an impactor of the size required to initiate such a shift.

Until such time as you can present credible data that would support your axial shift you are accomplishing little more than attempting to manipulate and force-fit certain elements in order to support a text of questionable provenance.

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That distant cousin seems to have a similar taste as I.

Creative genes, I guess... :)

I kind of like Jensma's translation of our name: "gelukzaligheid" (bliss).

(Not ALL of his work is worthless!)

OTT_345-44flasb.jpg

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.