[Archived]Oera Linda Book and the Great Flood

[Abramelin]

The only persons ever to use the word "watchstar" were Sandbach (translator of Ottema's book about the OLB) and a science fiction writer, Pamela Sargent (1980).

What could this word mean, or the OLB word "wak-star" ("waak-ster" in modern Dutch) it is a translation of?

"watch kept on a festival eve"

vigil

early 13c., "eve of a religious festival" (an occasion for devotional watching or observance), from Anglo-Fr. and O.Fr. vigile, from L. vigilia "watch, watchfulness," from vigil "watchful, awake," from PIE *wog-/*weg- "be lively or active, be strong" (cf. L. vigere "be lively, thrive," velox "fast, lively," vegere "to enliven;" Skt. vaja- "strength, speed;" O.E. wacan "to wake up, arise," wacian "to be awake;" O.H.G. wahta "watch, vigil"). Meaning "watch kept on a festival eve" is from late 14c.; that of "occasion of keeping awake for some purpose" is recorded from 1711.

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=vigil&searchmode=none

wake (n.2)

"state of wakefulness," O.E. -wacu (as in nihtwacu "night watch"), related to watch; and partly from O.N. vaka "vigil, eve before a feast," related to vaka "be awake" (cf. O.H.G. wahta "watch, vigil," M.Du. wachten "to watch, guard;" see wake (v.)). Meaning "a sitting up at night with a corpse" is attested from early 15c. (the verb in this sense is recorded from mid-13c.). The custom largely survived as an Irish activity. Wakeman (c.1200), which survives as a surname, was M.E. for "watchman."

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=vigil&searchmode=none

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=wake&allowed_in_frame=0

"Watchstar": a star of which a certain position in the skies or just its appearence announces some festival/special day of the year?

+++

Pamela Sargent used the word as the title for her book about some comet.

In Dutch we had a word for 'comet' and the word was "staartster", and it meant a star with a tail or 'tailed star'.

Another word was "gehaarde ster" or in English, a 'hairy star".

http://www.etymologiebank.nl/trefwoord/komeet

.

Edited December 22, 2011 by Abramelin

[Abramelin]

Page 149 of:

Physical Theories of Comets, From Aristotle to Whiple 2008

http://books.google.nl/books?id=Fo-GY4J1h4cC&pg=PA129&lpg=PA129&dq=2349+William+Whiston+edmund+halley&source=bl&ots=qPvM5QMLPk&sig=wMV4GKdFonKzFupzSoQm8l3e6wg&hl=nl&sa=X&ei=hH_zTtPvLoef-wau66DUAQ&ved=0CCIQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

[Abramelin]

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

-1- Astrology (some special and rare conjunction)?

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

-3- Biblical chronology (Friesche Volksalmanak)?

-4- A combination of 1&2 or 1&3 or 2&3 ?

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

Noah's Flood: Bible Stories: Bible accuracy: bible calendars: Bible Patriarchs.

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

http://www.kingscalendar.com/cgi-bin/index.cgi?action=viewnews&id=29

http://www.kingscalendar.com/kc_free_files/APPENDIX_17.html

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

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

.

Edited December 23, 2011 by Abramelin

[Abramelin]

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

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

http://www.archive.org/stream/idioticonfrisic00hettgoog#page/n2/mode/1up

http://www.archive.org/stream/idioticonfrisic00hettgoog#page/n14/mode/1up

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

"kuic" is "kwik".

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

++

This was the quote from te OLB:

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

Middle Dutch-ish:

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

Sandbach:

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

.

Edited December 23, 2011 by Abramelin

[Alewyn]

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

-1- Astrology (some special and rare conjunction)?

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

-3- Biblical chronology (Friesche Volksalmanak)?

-4- A combination of 1&2 or 1&3 or 2&3 ?

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

You left out one possibility:

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

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

Edited December 23, 2011 by Alewyn

[Abramelin]

You left out one possibility:

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

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

I didn't leave out anything.

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

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

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

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

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

++++++

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

There.

Feels great, eh?

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

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

.

Edited December 23, 2011 by Abramelin

[Abramelin]

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

From a book I have about astrology:

You recognize anything?? You should.

From Halley:

And again:

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

http://beastrabban.wordpress.com/2007/11/24/halley%E2%80%99s-cometary-flood-theory-returns/

++++++

EDIT:

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

.

Edited December 23, 2011 by Abramelin

[Abramelin]

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

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

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

[Abramelin]

The silence is deafening.

Where are you now, Alewyn?

Busy, no doubt?

[Knul]

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

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

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

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

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

"kuic" is "kwik".

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

++

This was the quote from te OLB:

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

Middle Dutch-ish:

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

Sandbach:

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

.

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

[Knul]

I didn't leave out anything.

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

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

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

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

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

++++++

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

There.

Feels great, eh?

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

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

.

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

[Knul]

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

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

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

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

[Alewyn]

I didn't leave out anything.

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

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

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

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

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

++++++

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

There.

Feels great, eh?

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

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

.

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

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

[The Puzzler]

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

-1- Astrology (some special and rare conjunction)?

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

-3- Biblical chronology (Friesche Volksalmanak)?

-4- A combination of 1&2 or 1&3 or 2&3 ?

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

Noah's Flood: Bible Stories: Bible accuracy: bible calendars: Bible Patriarchs.

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

http://www.kingscalendar.com/cgi-bin/index.cgi?action=viewnews&id=29

http://www.kingscalendar.com/kc_free_files/APPENDIX_17.html

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

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

.

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

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

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

[The Puzzler]

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

According to the genealogy of Genesis, the flood took place 1,752 (2294 B.C.) years after Adam’s creation. The breaking up of the continents took place 1,853 (2194 B.C.) years after Adam’s creation in the year that Peleg was born. Peleg’s name means to divide.

http://www.layevangelism.com/advtxbk/sections/sect-10/sec10-1.htm

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

[Knul]

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

[Abramelin]

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

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

[Abramelin]

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

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

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

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

.

Edited December 24, 2011 by Abramelin

[Abramelin]

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

According to the genealogy of Genesis, the flood took place 1,752 (2294 B.C.) years after Adam’s creation. The breaking up of the continents took place 1,853 (2194 B.C.) years after Adam’s creation in the year that Peleg was born. Peleg’s name means to divide.

http://www.layevangelism.com/advtxbk/sections/sect-10/sec10-1.htm

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

There you go: 2194 BCE !

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

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

[Abramelin]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

+++

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

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

.

Edited December 24, 2011 by Abramelin

[The Puzzler]

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

.

OK, cool, because it appeared in your sentence the guy had come to this conclusion, which I think is very clever of you actually. The info you have provided lately has been really good too.

There is something in this date imo. Given as the year the 'earth was divided', when 'the continents split' - maybe something of this nature did occur, a giant earthquake or comet impact etc, could be explained as this I reckon. It might not have been global but felt as if it were.

[The Puzzler]

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

I have no idea.

[Abramelin]

I have no idea.

Because many Spanish words that start with Al- came from Arabic (= the Moors in Spain).

[Abramelin]

OK, cool, because it appeared in your sentence the guy had come to this conclusion, which I think is very clever of you actually. The info you have provided lately has been really good too.

There is something in this date imo. Given as the year the 'earth was divided', when 'the continents split' - maybe something of this nature did occur, a giant earthquake or comet impact etc, could be explained as this I reckon. It might not have been global but felt as if it were.

Yeah, and the craziest thing is that I had been thinking of all this for a very long time, but every time I thought, "Nah".... Lol.

It would be great if you found the source of both the calculation and the impact scenario as used on that site you linked to.

--

Found something more, an entire book about comets and Halley's comet:

Comet lore, Halley's comet in history and astronomyhttp://www.archive.org/stream/cometlorehalleys00emerrich#page/49/mode/1up

[The Puzzler]

Merry Christmas everyone here!

Santa's sleigh is passing now while Orion watches him.

The Sun has had a long day, as the Centaur moves on in.

Peace and best wishes guys, here's to a good year of OLB discussions!