[Archived]Oera Linda Book and the Great Flood

[The Puzzler]

Wonderful, I shall be working through that post Alewyn to see what that all says but I was just seeing what these translators have to offer up since Abe tells me the word used by Ottema could mean Middle Sea and Sandbach's translation may have corrupted this work.

Anyway, while looking into it, I read the intro by Sandbach and he says this about the paper and text which was a hurdle for me, but he seems to validate it as being very old, not made in 1850.

Dr E. Verwijs having heard of this, requested permission to examine the manuscript, and immediately recognised it as very ancient Fries. He obtained at the same time permission to make a copy of it for the benefit of the Friesland Society, and was of opinion that it might be of great importance, provided it was not supposititious, and invented for some deceptive object, which he feared. The manuscript

p. vi

being placed in my hands, I also felt very doubtful, though I could not understand what object any one could have in inventing a false composition only to keep it a secret. This doubt remained until I had examined carefully-executed facsimiles of two fragments, and afterwards of the whole manuscript—the first sight of which convinced me of the great age of the document.

Immediately occurred to me Cæsar's remark upon the writing of the Gauls and the Helvetians in his "Bello Gallico" (i. 29, and vi. 14), "Græcis utuntur literis," though it appears in v. 48 that they were not entirely Greek letters. Cæsar thus points out only a resemblance—and a very true one—as the writing, which does not altogether correspond with any known form of letters, resembles the most, on a cursory view, the Greek writing, such as is found on monuments and the oldest manuscripts, and belongs to the form which is called lapidary. Besides, I formed the opinion afterwards that the writer of the latter part of the book had been a contemporary of Cæsar.

The form and the origin of the writing is so minutely and fully described in the first part of the book, as it could not be in any other language. It is very complete, and consists of thirty-four letters, among which are three separate forms of a and u, and two of e, i, y, and o, besides four pairs of double consonants ng, th, hs, and gs. The ng, which as a nasal sound has no particular mark in any other Western language, is an indivisible conjunction; the th is soft, as in English, and is sometimes replaced by d; the gs is seldom met with—I believe only in the word segse, to say, in modern Fries sidse, pronounced sisze.

The paper, of large quarto size, is made of cotton, not very thick, without water-mark or maker's mark, made upon a frame or wire-web, with not very broad perpendicular lines.

An introductory letter gives the year 1256 as that

p. vii

in which this manuscript was written by Hiddo overa Linda on foreign paper. Consequently it must have come from Spain, where the Arabs brought into the market paper manufactured from cotton.

On this subject, W. Wattenbach writes in his "Das Schriftwesen im Mittelalter" (Leipzig, 1871), s. 93:—

"The manufacture of paper from cotton must have been in use among the Chinese from very remote times, and must have become known to the Arabs by the conquest of Samarcand about the year 704. In Damascus this manufacture was an important branch of industry, for which reason it was called Charta Damascena. By the Arabians this art was brought to the Greeks. It is asserted that Greek manuscripts of the tenth century written upon cotton paper exist, and that in the thirteenth century it was much more used than parchment. To distinguish it from Egyptian paper it was called Charta bombicina, gossypina, cuttunea, xylina. A distinction from linen paper was not yet necessary. In the manufacture of the cotton paper raw cotton was originally used. We first find paper from rags mentioned by Petrus Clusiacensis (1122-50).

"The Spaniards and the Italians learned the manufacture of this paper from the Arabians. The most celebrated factories were at Jativa, Valencia, Toledo, besides Fabriano in the March of Ancona." *

In Germany the use of this material did not become very extended, whether it came from Italy or Spain. Therefore the further this preparation spread from the East and the adjoining countries, the more necessity there was that linen should take the place of cotton. A document of Kaufbeuren on linen paper of the year 1318 is of very doubtful genuineness. Bodman considers the oldest pure

p. viii

linen paper to be of the year 1324, but up to 1350 much mixed paper was used. All carefully-written manuscripts of great antiquity show by the regularity of their lines that they must have been ruled, even though no traces of the ruled lines can be distinguished. To make the lines they used a thin piece of lead, a ruler, and a pair of compasses to mark the distances.

In old writings the ink is very black or brown; but while there has been more writing since the thirteenth century, the colour of the ink is often grey or yellowish, and sometimes quite pale, showing that it contains iron. All this affords convincing proof that the manuscript before us belongs to the middle of the thirteenth century, written with clear black letters between fine lines carefully traced with lead. The colour of the ink shows decidedly that it does not contain iron. By these evidences the date given, 1256, is satisfactorily proved, and it is impossible to assign any later date. Therefore all suspicion of modern deception vanishes.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/atl/olb/olb02.htm

I thought what he had to say made sense in many ways, because I knew a fair bit about this, I personally feel much of the history mentioned actually works, regardless of the words, those place names you (Abe) mentioned might have been named after the originals or vice versa even. I'm still not sure yet...will need to read up some more on it.

The reader may perhaps be inclined to laugh at these statements, and apply to me the words that I myself have lately used, fantastic and improbable. Indeed at first I could not believe my own eyes, and yet after further consideration I arrived at the discovery of extraordinary conformities which render the case much less improbable than the birth of Min-erva from the head of Jupiter by a blow from the axe of Hephaestus, for instance.

In the Greek Mythology all the gods and goddesses have a youthful period. Pallas alone has no youth. She is not otherwise known than adult. Min-erva appears in Attica as high priestess from a foreign country, a country unknown to the Greeks. Pallas is a virgin goddess, Min-erva is a Burgtmaagd. The fair, blue-eyed Pallas, differing thus in type from the rest of the gods and goddesses, evidently belonged to Frya's people. The character for wisdom and the emblematical attributes, especially the owl, are the same for both. Pallas gives to the new town her own name, Athènai, which has no meaning in Greek. Min-erva gives to the town built by her the name Athene, which has an important meaning in Fries, namely, that they came there as friends—"Âthen."

I have not looked into the place names properly yet Abe.

[Abramelin]

Puzz, you need Adobe Acrobat reader to view PDFs. Its a free download.

http://get.adobe.com/reader/

But then PDFs used to lockup my whole system on my old comps so if yours is a little slow, you still might have problems. I recommend using screencaptures to save them if you need to, otherwise the download can take forever and the files are huge.

There is a google HTML version (which they do for many PDFs) but half the text is mangled:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Dy1sqzVzwTMJ:dissertations.ub.rug.nl/FILES/faculties/theology/2004/g.t.jensma/GemaskeerdeGod.PDF+http://dissertations.ub.rug.nl/FILES/faculties/theology/2004/g.t.jensma/GemaskeerdeGod.PDF&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

I have installed Foxit Reader; it's much faster than Adobe because it doesn't have all those extras of Adobe you never use if you really only want to read.

[Abramelin]

The reason I became upset is that, thanks to Abramelin, I am now the only participant on this website who is not anonymous (or at least do not feel anonymous). But, be that as it may, let us move on:

Hello? You were upset even before I posted the summary and excerpt of your book.

And how did I find that? By simply Googling the title of your book,the title Riaan (not me) posted in the starting post of this thread. And I did that because you suggested I didn't know what your book is all about (and I always add the link where I get my info from). Well, now they all know exactly what your book is all about.

Must be me, but I don't get it: Someone invited you to talk about your book, and gave us the title of your book. And yes, you accepted the invitation, and started talking about your book. You really think that it is because of me that people now know what's your true name? I will bet there were many who did the same as I did: Google the title of your book.

[Abramelin]

Alewyn, I just try to focus on the OLB, and that's just because I have the book by Overwijn (the second translator, after Ottema) and because I am Dutch and know a thing or two about my own country. I think people like Kmt_sesh, who studied Egyptology, can add better founded comments on the things you say about ancient Egypt.

OK, so you said in your first post of today that the dates in the OLB are accurate.

So I started with the first date mentioned in the OLB:

OKKE MY SON

You must preserve these books with body and soul. They contain the history of all our people, as well as of our forefathers. Last year I saved them in the flood, as well as you and your mother; but they got wet, and therefore began to perish. In order not to lose them, I copied them on foreign paper.

In case you inherit them, you must copy them likewise, and your children must do so too, so that they may never be lost.

Written at Liuwert, in the three thousand four hundred and forty-ninth year after Atland was submergedthat is, according to the Christian reckoning, the year 1256. Hiddo, surnamed Over de Linda.Watch.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/atl/olb/olb03.htm

What flood are they talking about in the beginning of the text? "Last year" must be 1256-1=1255 AD, so that's the date of that flood.

Well, there was a disasterous flood around that time, but that happened in 1282 and 1287...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zuiderzee#cite_note-0'>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zuiderzee#cite_note-0

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Lucia%27s_flood

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

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

Another one:

The "1st St. Marcellus flood" which drowned 36.000 men mainly in West Friesland and Groningen (today provinces in the north of the Netherlands) took place on the same day (January 16) in 1219.

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

And another one:

1248 20 November, 28 December, and 4 February 1249: The coastal dunes were breached (likely at Callantsoog), flooding parts of North Holland. Also flooding occurred in Friesland and Groningen.

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

I hope you realize that every flooding was recorded, and not only in Friesland.

So, if the dates in the OLB are correct, why does 1255 AD not correlate with the date of any known flooding?

.

Edited July 12, 2010 by Abramelin

[The Puzzler]

Abe:

Tiinis wilde

thrvch thju str^te fon tha middels6 vmbe to f&,rane ikv

tha rika kfi,ning fon Egiptalandum, lik hi wel 6r den

hede, men Inka s^ide, that-i sin nocht hede fon al et

Eindas folk.

Teunis wished to sail

through the straits to the Mediterranean Sea, and enter the

service of the rich Egyptian king, as he had done before,

but Inka said he had had enough of all those Finda's

people.

Firstly, Egiptalandum sounds alot like Egypt since it mentions rich king...so although there is an Egypte in Friesland it might not be the same Egiptalandum mentioned here in the context of this sentence.

I think it's important to distingush that an alphabet evolved of an Indo-European language from a Semitic people, the Phoencians may have actually been Indo-Europeans to start with who arrived in an area of Semitic speaking people so they probably learnt to speak it too, but retained the style of their alphabet which developed into IE Greek alphabet.

Kadik means dyke, ok, the Phoencians apparently named it Gadeira (or close), a Ph. tongue then in Latin we get Cadiz, which is where he says it is..what if the Phoenician word was the same and from what I know it translates to walled stronghold in Ph. - what is a dyke but a walled stronghold?

Can you show that the word used for the naming of this place by the Phoenicians did not come from the word dyke?

Thought you had me on the Mediterranean but a deeper look shows us this:

The name Mediterranean is derived from the Latin mediterraneus, meaning "inland" or "in the middle of the earth" (from medius, "middle" and terra, "earth").

See ---- a Middle Sea. Oh my.

Oh my again.............In Modern Hebrew, it has been called Hayam Hatikhon (הַיָּם הַתִּיכוֹן), "the middle sea", a literal adaptation of the German equivalent Mittelmeer

I'll be back.

Edited July 12, 2010 by The Puzzler

[Alewyn]

OK. The second episode of "Survivors of the Great Tsunami"

I shall continue untill somebody stops me. In that way you will not have to buy the book.

Just a note for clarification before I continue:

I think all will agree that it is safe to assume that the Burckle Impact could have created a bit of havoc:

1. 18 miles in diameter, that is 30 kilometers or 30 000 meters.

2. It scooped up deep ocean sediments from a depth of more than 3500 meters and deposited this 1500 kilometers away on Madagascar. (and apparently also on the West coast of Australia)

3. The Burckle impact has not been dated yet but seems to be around 2500BC to 2800 BC)

3. After 4200 years (bear with me) the dunes are still 200 meters high.

4. Drs. Dallas Abbott and Bruce Macey appears to agree that the chevron dunes on Madagascar consist of cosmic impact debris and Deep Ocean Sediments. How could wind deposit "deep ocean sediments" on land - let alone "cosmic impact debris"?

5. From the above it may therefore not be unreasonable to suspect that the resultant tsunamis could have been several thousand meters high.

6. From both Egyptian and Biblical Chronology there was apparently only one flood or disaster and that occured around 2200 BC. Biblical chronology, whether you agree with it or not, describes only one flood. By using the date of 2193 BC, Biblical chronology checks out exactly. You can wait untill we get there or do the calcs yourself.

Now lets continue with Chapter 1:

What caused the 2193 BC event?

The possible causes of the 4.2ka BP event have been debated for some time. The impact hypothesis proposed by prominent scientists such as Dr Dallas Abbott, Dr W Bruce Masse and members of the Near Earth Object (NEO) planetary science community seem to vindicate both the writings of ancient scribes and other modern discoveries. We have already gathered from the work of Professor Weiss and Doctor Courty that the topsoil of Akkad was virtually barren and Professor Niroma described the high salt content of the ground. The ancient scribes of Egypt, Akkad, Western Europe, the Bible and other sources all refer to, inter alia, a flood. The combined evidence suggests tsunamis on a global scale which severely affected many, if not all, coastal and relatively low-lying areas. In addition, ancient scribes mentioned earthquakes and volcanoes.

Dr Abbott investigated chevron dunes on the island of Madagascar in 2005 . The same phenomenon was observed on the west coast of Australia. She postulated that the 200-metre-high dunes might have been caused by an asteroid or comet which struck earth some 4500 years ago. The chevrons consist of deep ocean sediments and cosmic impact debris.

FIGURE

Figure 1: Fenambosy Chevron, Madagascar

The Fenambosy chevron, one of four, is 200 metres high and five kilometres from the ocean. (Photo: With acknowledgement to The New York Times: November 14, 2006)

By projecting the direction and distance of the possible source of the dunes and with the assistance of satellite imagery, she located the Burckle impact crater at a depth of more than 3500 metres on the bottom of the Indian Ocean, some 1500 km south-east of Madagascar. The event has already been dubbed the Flood Comet.

There is no doubt that an impact which may have caused deep ocean sediments to be deposited 200 metres high some 1500 km away and from such a depth, would have caused mega tsunamis hundreds, if not thousands of metres high. The force of the impact would have been the equivalent of several million nuclear bombs exploding in quick succession. Such tsunamis preceded by massive shockwaves would have raced up the red sea to the Nile Delta and up the Gulf of Aqaba via the Wadi al-Jayb rift valley to the Dead Sea in Palestine. At the same time the tsunami would also have advanced at almost the speed of sound via the Persian Gulf into Mesopotamia and created the disaster as described.

It must also be pointed out that the chevron dunes on Madagascar are still 200 metres high after more than 4000 years of erosion. Initially they would have been much higher. It must also be borne in mind that the dunes would have been deposited by the initial impact. Subsequent waves from the disturbance would have reduced the height of the dunes very shortly afterwards.

The Burckle Impact would have caused vast quantities of seawater and perhaps even superheated steam to be projected into the upper atmosphere. The resultant salt rain would have precipitated in areas beyond the reach of these massive tsunamis and would have contaminated even more fresh water sources. In Egypt we still have the large Moeris (Birket Qarun) salt-water lake. Fossil evidence indicate that it used to be a fresh water lake in ancient times.

The Burckle crater is not the only impact that dates from this time. The Rio Cuarto and Campo Del Cielo impact crater fields in Argentina are evidence of asteroids that exploded in the Earth’s atmosphere during the same period, creating massive air blasts and meteorite showers. We have already observed the results of the relatively minor air blast that hit Tunguska in Russia in 1908.

While numerous chevrons, meteorite impacts and related phenomena have been discovered, not all have been dated yet. It is quite likely, though, that the earth may have moved through an asteroid belt or cloud around 4200 years ago which may have caused the planet to have been bombarded by asteroids, air blasts and perhaps several Burckle size impacts. Depending on the severity of these impacts, earthquakes and even tectonic-plate movements and volcanic eruptions may have resulted and continued for as much as three years after the event as stated in the Oera Linda Book.

All of the ancient scribes described a mysterious cloud or smoke cover but no rain. This would have obscured much of the meteorite activities. Ipuwer may have referred to such activities when he stated:

Behold, the fire has gone up on high, and its burning goes forth against the enemies of the land.

He also mentioned trees that were stripped bare and made reference to a lot of noise. Could this have been caused by air blasts and shock waves? Again, the 1908 Russian event comes to mind.

The Oera Linda Book states that the earth vomited fire and that forests throughout Europe were destroyed by fire. Was this only from volcanoes or might it have been from asteroid impacts and air blasts? It is only fair to assume that such young volcanoes would still have been very evident today unless, of course, they are now under the sea.

FIGURE

Figure 2: Tunguska Explosion, Siberia, June 1908

The explosion that flattened an estimated 80 million trees over an area of 2150 km² is believed to have been caused by the air blast of a comet or asteroid exploding and disintegrating about 5 to 10 km above the earth. The blast was estimated to have been about 1000 times more powerful than the Hiroshima bomb. In comparison to the Burckle Crater, the Tunguska event is insignificant.

Another important piece of evidence to determine the exact date and effect of the Burckle impact is locked up in the Oera Linda Book in the description of their land before the 2193 BC disaster:

Before the bad time came our land was the most beautiful in the World. The sun rose higher, and there was seldom frost .

Nowhere do they hint at a cosmic impact except for four little inconspicuous words: Before the disaster the sun rose higher. They were obviously closer to the equator. Neither the original authors nor any so-called forger in the 19th century could have realised the enormity of this seemingly unimportant observation. This is undeniable evidence that the impact caused the Earth to be tilted relative to its axis. Even the best deceiver in the 19th century could not have foreseen the overwhelming 21st century AD indications of a massive asteroid impact with earth some 4200 to 4500 years ago.

FIGURE

Figure 3: Burckle Asteroid Impact, 2193 BC

Schematic showing Europe relative to a possible

pre-2193 BC equator when the sun rose higher.

Note the possible positions of the old North and South Poles in Figure 3. Europe moved further away from the equator and North America closer. Earth wobbled for a while after the blow before settling and rotating around her new axis. The Oera Linda Book states that the Bad Times lasted three years.

In the Book of Enoch , which is considered non-canonical and pseudepigraphical (falsely attributed) in most Christian churches today, we find the following:

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

(1) 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.

It would appear logical to assume that the statements: the pillar (axis?) of the earth shook from its foundation and, Noah saw that the earth became inclined, confirm the Oera Linda Book’s the sun rose higher.

Could this realignment of planet earth around her axis have had an influence on the ancient lake Agassiz in Manitoba, western Ontario, northern Minnesota, eastern North Dakota, and Saskatchewan? Did it contribute to the de-glaciation of North America? This could also explain why we do not find evidence of advanced civilizations in Canada and North America. The area would have been part of the old polar regions and therefore covered with ice. Even the last Mammoths on Wrangle island in the Arctic Ocean became extinct in ca 2000 BC as a result of the asteroid impact.

If this impact theory is correct, it would imply that Egypt and the Middle East would have been very close to the old equator before the disaster. It is then further likely that the area could have been covered by lush tropical jungles before the area was denuded by giant tsunamis, saltwater rain, fires and even acid rain. The reader is reminded of Ipuwer’s reference to trees that were stripped bare. What trees was he referring to? Perhaps the vegetation was first destroyed by the intense heat of forest fires created by the asteroid impacts and then finally swept away by tsunamis.

Behold, the fire has gone up on high, and its burning goes forth against the enemies of the land.

The forests or jungles could also explain where the pre-disaster builders of the pyramids got their timber from for their construction scaffolding as well as the vast oil reserves we find in the desert today.

One can only imagine the magnificence of the marble cladded pyramids glistening in the tropical sun above the jungle canopy. These sparkling diamonds on the horizon would have been visible from very far off and would have served as beacons to travellers in an otherwise flat landscape. One could even speculate whether the impact could have had an influence on the rotational speed of the earth and therefore on the length of the days and nights.

The last evidence we will consider here are the findings of Professor Lonnie Thompson, professor of geological sciences at Ohio State University and leader of an expedition in 2000 to retrieve ice cores from Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania. From the analysis of these ice cores he found that Africa had suffered a severe 300 year drought from about 2000 BC. It is suggested here that this drought was exacerbated by widespread forest and grassland fires as described for Europe in the Oera Linda Book and which might have been brought on by meteorite showers. In addition, denudation of the land by severe floods and contamination by saltwater rain could have resulted in a very arid and dusty landscape that affected the continent for centuries, even during times of normal rainfall.

The extent of acid or other forms of toxic rain and gasses that would have resulted from all these fires or meteorite explosions is a question that will be left to persons more knowledgeable on the subject.

The Aftermath

From modern archaeological findings and from the ancient scribes we now know there were mass migrations of the survivors of the 2193 BC global disaster. These peoples moved all over Europe, the Middle East and Asia. The questions now are: where did they come from and where did they go? The answers to these questions are crucial if we are to understand man’s history over the last 4200 years, especially European history. One has to understand that pre-historical settlements and development will not give us the answers. The 2193 BC event depopulated large areas. Some countries would appear to have been particularly hard hit. It is suggested that those areas with the biggest diversity in their DNA profile today are the ones who suffered most. In the aftermath those were the areas that were repopulated by refugees from all over. Without this vital clue many of our theories will continue to be based on mere speculation.

Many, if not most, geneticists today suggest that all DNA Y-haplogroups in Eurasia migrated from the Middle East. If we accept this theory and compare it with the present day distribution of these haplogroups it would imply that some paternal chromosomes became concentrated in specific areas whilst others were destroyed. Haplogroup compositions can be altered or diluted by newer additions but can never be eradicated. Every person always carries the full genetic history of his predecessors. One should just look at the R1b haplogroup in Western Europe or the O-group in China as examples and ask the question:

Why do certain communities have higher concentrations of a specific DNA haplogroup in their genetic make-up than others and what happened to the rest – that is, if they all originated from the same area?

A specific haplogroup concentration can never be higher than its origins unless of course it was altered by a purer source. The argument would be illogical because the purer source would then be the point of origin. This can be compared to a tin of paint containing a mixture of different colours. The contents can be removed and splashed all over but the original colours will not be separated out again nor will other colour pigments go missing. The different splashes would still all be the same colour. The DNA migrations suggested in this dissertation is therefore just the opposite to that suggested by the proponents of the Middle East Origination Theory. The Middle East was not the origin of the various Eurasian haplogroups, but the end result of the mass migration after 2193 BC.

The following two figures illustrate the impossibility of the Middle East Origination Theory. Here the R1b group is used as an example but the same can be done for any other haplogroup:

FIGURE

Figure 4: Middle East Origination Theory

(The theory that all Eurasian Haplogroups

originated somewhere in the Middle East)

FIGURE

Figure 5: R1b Haplogroup Distribution.

Based on present day surveys in Europe.

From the above figures it should be evident, even to the layman, that the R1b group originated in Western Europe and the British Isles and not in the Middle East. From Spain to Scandinavia the concentration of this haplogroup is substantially higher than anywhere else. The fact that Northern Spain, Western France and the British Isles still have the highest concentrations today can be ascribed to the fact that they were less subjected to invasions than the rest of Europe.

DNA profiling is one of the key pieces in our attempt to understand these ancient migratory patterns. The following map was derived by looking at those areas where the biggest concentrations of specific DNA Y-Haplogroups are situated today. These are then assumed to be the areas from where these groups originated after 2193 BC. By comparing this with the different historical writings, we could start to understand who the carriers of these haplogroups were and where they eventually settled. This proposal seems to answer a number of our questions as will be seen throughout this book.

FIGURE

Figure 6: Proposed origins of Haplogroups

(After the 2193 BC disaster)

The 12 haplogroups in Figure 6 appear to have originated thus from the following areas:

Haplogroup C (The Buryats) from North Eastern Asia,

Haplogroup N (The Nenets) from North Western Asia,

Haplogroup I (The Saamis) from Scandinavia and Central Europe,

Haplogroup R1b from Western Europe and the British Isles,

Haplogroup E3b (Moroccans) from North Africa,

Haplogroup ExE3b from Central & West Africa,

Haplogroup A from Central West Africa,

Haplogroup J from The Arabian Peninsula and the Middle East,

Haplogroup L from the Indian sub-continent,

Haplogroup D from Central South Asia,

Haplogroup R1a (The Altaians) from Central Asia, and

Haplogroup O (The Chinese) from East Asia.

The two groups that had the most influence on the cultural, religious, technical and social evolution of humankind in the post-2193 BC era were the R1b group from Western Europe and the R1a group from Central Asia respectively. Outside of their native lands they were, quantitatively speaking, never major groups but their influence shaped our world dramatically as we shall see in this book.

In this chapter we tried to compare the 2193 BC claims of the Oera Linda Book to other ancient scribes as well as compare these with modern scientific discoveries. While a number of other hereto unknown and startling historical facts will be dealt with in this book, it is hoped that the reader will already start to gain an appreciation for the authenticity and importance of the Oera Linda Book. Without fear of contradiction it can be stated that the book is a treasure trove of information for historians,

[TheSearcher]

I've started reading your post and no I'm not done yet, but here a few first things I do have to say. And I try to keep the volume smaller, so I just show the points of interrest, I hope you don't mind. It makes the admins happy

.....

Prof Harvey Weiss, professor of Near Eastern Archaeology at Yale University in New Haven, Connecticut, has been involved for many years in the archaeological work at Tell Leilan, a city of the Bronze Age Akkadian Empire on the Habur Plains of Northern Mesopotamia in modern-day Syria. He concluded that the city was suddenly abandoned in 2193 BC – exactly the same year in which the Oera Linda Book claims that the old Frisian civilization in Western Europe was destroyed.

.....

Where does Prof Harvey Weiss actually mention the exact year 2193 BC? I'm quite aware of hisTell Leilan Project, I've even managed to get my hands on a few of his publications about it. He sets the time frame between 2200 CB and 1900 BC, I've never read him giving that specific year.

The Prophecy of Neferti

The Prophecy of Neferti was written some 200 to 300 years (ca 1992-1786 BC) after the demise of the Old Kingdom and is therefore not a prophecy but rather a description of actual events. Whether this claim of prophecy was only a way of justifying subsequent political developments in Egypt or propaganda would be speculation. The account is one of dejection albeit not as graphic as that of Ipuwer.

...

Taken out of context, the parts you mention, could indeed mean what you say. But when you read the text in it's entirety, the Prophecy of Neferti predicts the coming of a savior for Egypt. It is a classic piece of Egyptian royal propaganda, written after the event, justifying a non-royal seizing the throne, it predicts the coming of Amenemhat I.

Which is about all I had time to read so far. But there will be more

[Leonardo]

3. After 4200 years (bear with me) the dunes are still 200 meters high.

4. Drs. Dallas Abbott and Bruce Macey appears to agree that the chevron dunes on Madagascar consist of cosmic impact debris and Deep Ocean Sediments. How could wind deposit "deep ocean sediments" on land - let alone "cosmic impact debris"?

Dr Abbott investigated chevron dunes on the island of Madagascar in 2005 . The same phenomenon was observed on the west coast of Australia. She postulated that the 200-metre-high dunes might have been caused by an asteroid or comet which struck earth some 4500 years ago. The chevrons consist of deep ocean sediments and cosmic impact debris.

FIGURE

Figure 1: Fenambosy Chevron, Madagascar

The Fenambosy chevron, one of four, is 200 metres high and five kilometres from the ocean. (Photo: With acknowledgement to The New York Times: November 14, 2006)

By projecting the direction and distance of the possible source of the dunes and with the assistance of satellite imagery, she located the Burckle impact crater at a depth of more than 3500 metres on the bottom of the Indian Ocean, some 1500 km south-east of Madagascar. The event has already been dubbed the Flood Comet.

There is no doubt that an impact which may have caused deep ocean sediments to be deposited 200 metres high some 1500 km away and from such a depth, would have caused mega tsunamis hundreds, if not thousands of metres high. The force of the impact would have been the equivalent of several million nuclear bombs exploding in quick succession. Such tsunamis preceded by massive shockwaves would have raced up the red sea to the Nile Delta and up the Gulf of Aqaba via the Wadi al-Jayb rift valley to the Dead Sea in Palestine. At the same time the tsunami would also have advanced at almost the speed of sound via the Persian Gulf into Mesopotamia and created the disaster as described.

It must also be pointed out that the chevron dunes on Madagascar are still 200 metres high after more than 4000 years of erosion. Initially they would have been much higher. It must also be borne in mind that the dunes would have been deposited by the initial impact. Subsequent waves from the disturbance would have reduced the height of the dunes very shortly afterwards.

So as to focus on one aspect of your post at a time, Alewyn, I have extracted the parts relevant to the chevron dunes on Madagascar.

You have stated several times, that these dunes are a result of an impact event - supported by academic investigation which found the dunes contain a high proportion of deep sea sediment.

I am not disputing the Burckle impact may have resulted in the depositing of deep sea sediment over a large area, but that is not any indication that these dunes are a direct result of the impact. Neither is the fact they contain deep sea sediment an indication they were a direct result of the impact.

It is eminently possible that they are aeolian in origin, and their composition is only a result of the type of sediments available for the wind to build them from. This would suggest they are more recent than the Burckle impact.

As with sedimentary rock, dating a feature created from sediment using the sediment it is created from is extremely speculative.

The conclusion these dunes were a direct result of the impact based solely on their composition being partly the deep ocean sediment disturbed by that impact is unreliable.

[Abramelin]

Abe:

Tiinis wilde

thrvch thju str^te fon tha middels6 vmbe to f&,rane ikv

tha rika kfi,ning fon Egiptalandum, lik hi wel 6r den

hede, men Inka s^ide, that-i sin nocht hede fon al et

Eindas folk.

Teunis wished to sail

through the straits to the Mediterranean Sea, and enter the

service of the rich Egyptian king, as he had done before,

but Inka said he had had enough of all those Finda's

people.

Firstly, Egiptalandum sounds alot like Egypt since it mentions rich king...so although there is an Egypte in Friesland it might not be the same Egiptalandum mentioned here in the context of this sentence.

I think it's important to distingush that an alphabet evolved of an Indo-European language from a Semitic people, the Phoencians may have actually been Indo-Europeans to start with who arrived in an area of Semitic speaking people so they probably learnt to speak it too, but retained the style of their alphabet which developed into IE Greek alphabet.

Kadik means dyke, ok, the Phoencians apparently named it Gadeira (or close), a Ph. tongue then in Latin we get Cadiz, which is where he says it is..what if the Phoenician word was the same and from what I know it translates to walled stronghold in Ph. - what is a dyke but a walled stronghold?

Can you show that the word used for the naming of this place by the Phoenicians did not come from the word dyke?

Thought you had me on the Mediterranean but a deeper look shows us this:

The name Mediterranean is derived from the Latin mediterraneus, meaning "inland" or "in the middle of the earth" (from medius, "middle" and terra, "earth").

See ---- a Middle Sea. Oh my.

Oh my again.............In Modern Hebrew, it has been called Hayam Hatikhon (הַיָּם הַתִּיכוֹן), "the middle sea", a literal adaptation of the German equivalent Mittelmeer

I'll be back.

Look, it's kind of hard to discuss the OLB with people who are only dependent on the english translations, and with people who know nothing about the Dutch topography.

The OLB doesnt talk about the Mediterranean, it says "middel.se" ("se" pronounced as 'say'= sea). The stupid thing is, I have the Overwijn version of the OLB for 20 something years, but I mainly focussed on the translation in Dutch by Overwijn (and Ottema). But a day ago, I wanted to see the word the OLB actually uses for what Overwijn and Ottema translate as "Mediterranean", and it's "middel,se".

Tnen I suddenly remembered, "Hmm, where have I heard this before..". And no, I wasn't thinking about the German "Mittel Meer", I was a 100 % sure there was a Dutch 'middle sea'... just to find out it was an ancient (now dry, reclaimed) southern branch of the Norh Sea that cut deep into Frisian territory.

Then just for fun, I googled "Friesland" together with "Egypte" (Dutch for Egypt), and I came to a district with the name "Egypte", part of Ooststellingwerf.

Well, if you have the image I posted of that 'Middelzee' in front of your mind's eye, and then overlay it with the map of the presnt province of Friesland, you will see that Ooststellingwerf was on the EASTERN border of that sea, and thus that area that's called 'Egypte'...

But that's not all... the small river the Over de Lindes got their name from (="De Linde") has it's source in Ooststellingwerf.

Then Kadijk (is Dutch spelling for Kadik or Kadyk)) is a very common (Frisian) name, and stems from some form of dike and kade ("Kade" is the stone wall of a harbour). Google it, "Kadijk" with "Nederland" to see for yourself.

A dyke/dike (or 'dijk' in Dutch) is a (then) earthen defence against sea/river water, it's not some stronghold like a castle or something. Why you want me to show the Phoenician Gadeira/Gadiz didn't come from dyke? Can YOU show me what the -eira/-iz part stands for??

You people think in too large a scale, and you are excused because you have no knowledge of the Dutch country side and place names and language.

Think small, like in VERY local, and you will be able to discover some very funny and revealing coincidences. Think LOCAL, like in the surroundings people like Verwijs, Haverschmidt and all the others lived in, or where they grew up.

Edited July 12, 2010 by Abramelin

[Qoais]

The reason I became upset is that, thanks to Abramelin, I am now the only participant on this website who is not anonymous

How could you have been anonymous, when in the very first post, your friend Riaan told us who you were and the name of your book? Then, when you joined, you told us yourself.

Anyway, I was wondering about the Med. being in West just like Puzzler, and I did ask you some time ago about it in a private e-mail, but you deigned not to respond. Have you a theory about that? Why they said West, or would that be a mis-translation?

Edited July 12, 2010 by Qoais

[Alewyn]

The conclusion these dunes were a direct result of the impact based solely on their composition being partly the deep ocean sediment disturbed by that impact is unreliable.

Leonardo,

I agree that the individual pieces of evidence at this stage is not conclusive. I doubt that we shall ever be able to say that there is absolutely no doubt involved. If we,however, try to establish the absolute proof on every single fact, we will never make any progress. What I am trying to establish is the balance of probabilities and then to move on. At the end of the treatise one then looks back and try to express an opinion as to whether the picture makes sense and what is the most likely scenario. You can then test other or newer evidence against your hypothesis. I am hoping that in the process someone more knowledgeable on a specific topic will either say that they have supporting evidence or prove beyond any reasonable doubt that it is outright impossible. At this stage I am accepting that persons such as Drs Abbott and Massey must have had some fairly convincing evidence and confidence to have given a presentation to very knowledgable people both on an approximate date and a likely cause of the Chevron Dunes on Madagascar. Remember, they projected the possible source of the dunes into the vast Indian ocean and then found the crater apparently where the projections led them to. Statistically speaking, what are the chances of the dunes and the crater tying up exactly? (If indeed it is "exactly")

[Alewyn]

How could you have been anonymous, when in the very first post, your friend Riaan told us who you were and the name of your book? Then, when you joined, you told us yourself.

Anyway, I was wondering about the Med. being in West just like Puzzler, and I did ask you some time ago about it in a private e-mail, but you deigned not to respond. Have you a theory about that? Why they said West, or would that be a mis-translation?

As far as I recall I have answered all your private e-mails in detail. You may consider the possibility that it was an oversight and not because I deliberately chose to ignore the question.

I believe the word "west" crept in a previous incorrect transcription and should read "south".

[Leonardo]

Leonardo,

I agree that the individual pieces of evidence at this stage is not conclusive. I doubt that we shall ever be able to say that there is absolutely no doubt involved. If we,however, try to establish the absolute proof on every single fact, we will never make any progress. What I am trying to establish is the balance of probabilities and then to move on. At the end of the treatise one then looks back and try to express an opinion as to whether the picture makes sense and what is the most likely scenario. You can then test other or newer evidence against your hypothesis. I am hoping that in the process someone more knowledgeable on a specific topic will either say that they have supporting evidence or prove beyond any reasonable doubt that it is outright impossible. At this stage I am accepting that persons such as Drs Abbott and Massey must have had some fairly convincing evidence and confidence to have given a presentation to very knowledgable people both on an approximate date and a likely cause of the Chevron Dunes on Madagascar. Remember, they projected the possible source of the dunes into the vast Indian ocean and then found the crater apparently where the projections led them to. Statistically speaking, what are the chances of the dunes and the crater tying up exactly? (If indeed it is "exactly")

I accept that you wish to construct a framework for your hypothesis, however constructing it from unreliable conclusions/sources would suggest the framework is unreliable.

Further to 'individual pieces of evidence'. You mention the effect of this impact causing devastation throughout the area surrounding the Red Sea, including the southern Mesopotamian area of the fertile crescent?

There are, of course, flood myths from Mesopotamia - the most well-known being from the Epic of Gilgamesh and involves Utnapishtum building a boat under orders from his deity. This myth dates from around 2000BCE - which, given the issues with dating, would roughly coincide with the period you wish to put the Burckle impact in.

However, it is very likely the flood story in that Epic is a retelling of a much earlier flood myth in the Eridu Genesis, which dates from around 2800BCE. In this myth the protagonist - Ziusudra - also constructs a boat under orders from his deity (Enki, rather than Ea in the Epic of Gilgamesh). Many other story elements are also remarkably similar.

This multiple incidence of a flood myth does not indicate multiple floods, and placing the catastrophic flood which inspired the mythology at the earlier time of 2800BCE does not allow for the event to coincide with the other catastrophes (i.e. the fall of Egypt's Old Kingdom) you wish to 'marry up' in your hypothesis.

We then either have to allow the Burckle impact catastrophe to have affected ancient Mesopotamia, but not Egypt (around 2800BCE) or allow it to affect ancient Egypt, but not Mesopotamia (around 2100-2000BCE). The former is obviously far more likely and this would imply the Burckle impact (if, indeed, it turns out to be an impact feature) having a serious regional effect, but nowhere near global or semi-global as your hypothesis would suggest.

Edited July 12, 2010 by Leonardo

[Alewyn]

Where does Prof Harvey Weiss actually mention the exact year 2193 BC? I'm quite aware of hisTell Leilan Project, I've even managed to get my hands on a few of his publications about it. He sets the time frame between 2200 CB and 1900 BC, I've never read him giving that specific year.

I am working through my files and will come back on this one asap.

Taken out of context, the parts you mention, could indeed mean what you say. But when you read the text in it's entirety, the Prophecy of Neferti predicts the coming of a savior for Egypt. It is a classic piece of Egyptian royal propaganda, written after the event, justifying a non-royal seizing the throne, it predicts the coming of Amenemhat I.

I am afraid Neferti are just too close to the others to be called "out of context". Any views on Ipuwer and Akkad?

[The Puzzler]

Alewyn, I just try to focus on the OLB, and that's just because I have the book by Overwijn (the second translator, after Ottema) and because I am Dutch and know a thing or two about my own country. I think people like Kmt_sesh, who studied Egyptology, can add better founded comments on the things you say about ancient Egypt.

OK, so you said in your first post of today that the dates in the OLB are accurate.

So I started with the first date mentioned in the OLB:

OKKE MY SON—

You must preserve these books with body and soul. They contain the history of all our people, as well as of our forefathers. Last year I saved them in the flood, as well as you and your mother; but they got wet, and therefore began to perish. In order not to lose them, I copied them on foreign paper.

In case you inherit them, you must copy them likewise, and your children must do so too, so that they may never be lost.

Written at Liuwert, in the three thousand four hundred and forty-ninth year after Atland was submerged—that is, according to the Christian reckoning, the year 1256. Hiddo, surnamed Over de Linda.—Watch.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/atl/olb/olb03.htm

What flood are they talking about in the beginning of the text? "Last year" must be 1256-1=1255 AD, so that's the date of that flood.

Well, there was a disasterous flood around that time, but that happened in 1282 and 1287...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zuiderzee#cite_note-0'>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zuiderzee#cite_note-0

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Lucia%27s_flood

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

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

Another one:

The "1st St. Marcellus flood" which drowned 36.000 men mainly in West Friesland and Groningen (today provinces in the north of the Netherlands) took place on the same day (January 16) in 1219.

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

And another one:

1248 20 November, 28 December, and 4 February 1249: The coastal dunes were breached (likely at Callantsoog), flooding parts of North Holland. Also flooding occurred in Friesland and Groningen.

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

I hope you realize that every flooding was recorded, and not only in Friesland.

So, if the dates in the OLB are correct, why does 1255 AD not correlate with the date of any known flooding?

.

Abe, I think you might be looking in the wrong place.

Scanning around and thinking alot I came up with the area of Helgoland in the German Bight because of major changes to it around 1250AD.

Now, it appears this is the area of many Frisians and could be where the flooding spoken of is in 1255AD.

I will repeat this really has nothing to do with Dutch. It is Anglo-Saxon based and also Norse Gods and Germany is where the Frisians were.

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

In addition to German, the local population, who are ethnic Frisians, speak the Heligolandic dialect of the North Frisian language called Halunder. Heligoland was formerly called Heyligeland, or "holy land," possibly due to the island's long association with the god Forseti.

In 697, Radbod, the last Frisian king, retreated to the then-single island after his defeat by the Franks - so it is written in the Life of Willebrord by Alcuin. By 1231, the island was listed as the property of the Danish king Valdemar II.

Forseti (Old Norse "the presiding one," actually "president" in Modern Icelandic and Faroese) is an Æsir god of justice and reconciliation in Norse mythology. He is generally identified with Fosite, a god of the Frisians. Jacob Grimm noted that if, as Adam of Bremen states, Fosite's sacred island was Heligoland, that would make him an ideal candidate for a deity known to both Frisians and Scandinavians, but that it is surprising he is never mentioned by Saxo Grammaticus

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

Info on Helgoland c 1250AD http://www.springerlink.com/content/2643aeqdq393m9qg/

A possibility is that the flood he speaks of (NOT the Atland one) in 1255AD is around the area of Helgoland and not in Holland.

Just because it was written in Liuwert does not mean that is where the flooding happened.

[cormac mac airt]

Figure 6: Proposed origins of Haplogroups

(After the 2193 BC disaster)

The 12 haplogroups in Figure 6 appear to have originated thus from the following areas:

Haplogroup C (The Buryats) from North Eastern Asia,

Haplogroup N (The Nenets) from North Western Asia,

Haplogroup I (The Saamis) from Scandinavia and Central Europe,

Haplogroup R1b from Western Europe and the British Isles,

Haplogroup E3b (Moroccans) from North Africa,

Haplogroup ExE3b from Central & West Africa,

Haplogroup A from Central West Africa,

Haplogroup J from The Arabian Peninsula and the Middle East,

Haplogroup L from the Indian sub-continent,

Haplogroup D from Central South Asia,

Haplogroup R1a (The Altaians) from Central Asia, and

Haplogroup O (The Chinese) from East Asia.

This would appear to be greatly in error (as to dating) as the following, unless otherwise specified, is in accordance with the Y Chromosomal Phylogenetic Tree 2008:

Haplogroup C: 60,000 BP

Haplogroup N: 20,000 BP

Haplogroup I: 22,000 BP

Haplogroup R1b: Table 2; New binary polymorphisms reshape and increase resolution of the human Y chromosomal haplogroup tree

……………………………. < 18,500 (12,500 - 25,700) BP, which dates R1

Haplogroup E3b: Revised from 2008 as E1b1b, 22,400 BP

Haplogroup ExE3b: No longer used as a designation

Haplogroup A: 75,000 BP

Haplogroup J: 30,000 BP

Haplogroup L: 30,000 BP

Haplogroup D: 60,000 BP

Haplogroup R1a: see R1b, above; < 18,500 (12,500 - 25,700) BP, which dates R1

Haplogroup O: 30,000 BP

cormac

Edited July 12, 2010 by cormac mac airt

[Abramelin]

Abe, I think you might be looking in the wrong place.

Scanning around and thinking alot I came up with the area of Helgoland in the German Bight because of major changes to it around 1250AD.

Now, it appears this is the area of many Frisians and could be where the flooding spoken of is in 1255AD.

I will repeat this really has nothing to do with Dutch. It is Anglo-Saxon based and also Norse Gods and Germany is where the Frisians were.

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

In addition to German, the local population, who are ethnic Frisians, speak the Heligolandic dialect of the North Frisian language called Halunder. Heligoland was formerly called Heyligeland, or "holy land," possibly due to the island's long association with the god Forseti.

In 697, Radbod, the last Frisian king, retreated to the then-single island after his defeat by the Franks - so it is written in the Life of Willebrord by Alcuin. By 1231, the island was listed as the property of the Danish king Valdemar II.

Forseti (Old Norse "the presiding one," actually "president" in Modern Icelandic and Faroese) is an Æsir god of justice and reconciliation in Norse mythology. He is generally identified with Fosite, a god of the Frisians. Jacob Grimm noted that if, as Adam of Bremen states, Fosite's sacred island was Heligoland, that would make him an ideal candidate for a deity known to both Frisians and Scandinavians, but that it is surprising he is never mentioned by Saxo Grammaticus

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

Info on Helgoland c 1250AD http://www.springerlink.com/content/2643aeqdq393m9qg/

A possibility is that the flood he speaks of (NOT the Atland one) in 1255AD is around the area of Helgoland and not in Holland.

Just because it was written in Liuwert does not mean that is where the flooding happened.

Puzz, EVERY large or minor flooding in the areas where the Frisians lived were recorded.

And, the OLB is very precise in its dates, so it's 1255 AD or nothing. And no flood of exactly 1255 AD has been recorded.

Now for something completely diferent, heh... Your Egypt and King of the Egyptians (hold on to something):

What people were considered to be coming from Egypt (though they did not)? The GYPSIES.

Many Gypsies here in The Netherlands came from Hungary (Magyarorsag).

In english they are called 'gypsies' (and in French 'gitanes) because it was long considered that they originally came form Egypt.

Your 'King of the Egyptians' may be nothing more than a 'gypsy king' who settled with his people in Ooststellingwerf...

"Volgens de geschiedenis van Oost-Friesland kwamen al omstreeks het jaar 1470 een aantal zigeunerfamilies vanuit Hongarije en vestigden zich in Oost-Friesland"

According to the history of East Friesland already around 1470 a number of Hungarian Gypsy families settled in East Friesland.

http://www.vandenberg.se/dalstra/Reunie2009.htm

Ridiculous to even think that, eh?

Well, now read this (although I know you can't, and you have no idea how frustrating it is to wander through a zillion Dutch websites and having to translate everything to get my point across):

http://genwiki.nl/limburg/index.php?title=Zigeuners

On this Dutch wiki page they talk about settlements of gypsies in Limburg (a southern province of The Netherlands and also a province on the other side of the border, in Belgium).

And lo and behold, they have a map on that site, and they talk about "hutten of the Egyptians" (Egyptian huts), and they mean no less than gypsy setlements(Aegyptiorum, from Egypte).

It's not to farfatched for me to think that that area in Ooststellingwerf in Friesland, "Egypte" was named that way because gypsies had settled there. I even read that some of these gypsy families were extremely rich (and no doubt was the cause of a lot of discrimination).

======

Recap:

>Middel.se was a branch of the North Sea that split the territory of the Frisians into half;

>Egypte was a district of Ooststellingwerf, and was on the eastern border of that Middel.se. ;

> Over De Linden was a family named after a small river, De Linde, it's source in Ooststellingwerf; Over De Linden means "on the other side of De Linde" ;

>"Egypte" was probably named after the gypsies who settled there (several areas in The Netherlands were called Egypt or something with Egypt because of the gypsies)

>That 'King of Egypt' was most probably no one else but a rich Gypsy king;

>Many gypsies in The Netherlands came from Hungary (Magyarorsag, land of the Magyar, your 'Magi').

.

Edited July 12, 2010 by Abramelin

[Qoais]

As far as I recall I have answered all your private e-mails in detail. You may consider the possibility that it was an oversight and not because I deliberately chose to ignore the question.

I believe the word "west" crept in a previous incorrect transcription and should read "south".

Thanks. I appreciate you taking the time from chatting with the intellectuals in the forum to answer my tiny question

Seriously, I totally admire the conversation that's going on and wish I was clever enough to participate. When you posted about the DNA, I was expecting Cormac at any moment, and he did not disappoint me! I'm hoping you can give a good response to his ages for the Haplogroups, because I would like to think your line of research is correct. Maybe holes can be poked in SOME of your evidence, but hopefully a lot of it will stand.

About the "flood" whereby the wife and son and papers were "saved". Could this have just been a severe storm where maybe their house or holdings were threatened with flooding water? It doesn't have to be a "recorded" flood of national proportions does it?

Edited July 12, 2010 by Qoais

[The Puzzler]

I accept that you wish to construct a framework for your hypothesis, however constructing it from unreliable conclusions/sources would suggest the framework is unreliable.

Further to 'individual pieces of evidence'. You mention the effect of this impact causing devastation throughout the area surrounding the Red Sea, including the southern Mesopotamian area of the fertile crescent?

There are, of course, flood myths from Mesopotamia - the most well-known being from the Epic of Gilgamesh and involves Utnapishtum building a boat under orders from his deity. This myth dates from around 2000BCE - which, given the issues with dating, would roughly coincide with the period you wish to put the Burckle impact in.

However, it is very likely the flood story in that Epic is a retelling of a much earlier flood myth in the Eridu Genesis, which dates from around 2800BCE. In this myth the protagonist - Ziusudra - also constructs a boat under orders from his deity (Enki, rather than Ea in the Epic of Gilgamesh). Many other story elements are also remarkably similar.

This multiple incidence of a flood myth does not indicate multiple floods, and placing the catastrophic flood which inspired the mythology at the earlier time of 2800BCE does not allow for the event to coincide with the other catastrophes (i.e. the fall of Egypt's Old Kingdom) you wish to 'marry up' in your hypothesis.

We then either have to allow the Burckle impact catastrophe to have affected ancient Mesopotamia, but not Egypt (around 2800BCE) or allow it to affect ancient Egypt, but not Mesopotamia (around 2100-2000BCE). The former is obviously far more likely and this would imply the Burckle impact (if, indeed, it turns out to be an impact feature) having a serious regional effect, but nowhere near global or semi-global as your hypothesis would suggest.

You might wish to read my own answers here on this subject as I think I covered it all. A local flood in 2800BC in Sumeria does not equate to a world wide flood even though it might have then tagged onto a later flood event. Why is Noah so old? Because the original event (of Gilgamesh) was probably the 2800BC flood of Sumer that had been recorded by the Sumerians so Noah had to be born then, then around 2193BC if another bigger flood occurred that co-incided with a meteor impact it would surely be noted as a bigger flood closer in time to what they knew so let's stick the Biblical description of it into there. Then Noah can be still around at that time, makes him pretty old though, doesn't it. You can only put a 600 year old memory into a 600 year old man. It would make more sense for a newer culture to use the later catastrophe over a base of an early smaller flood in Sumer told in the Gilgamesh story.

Believe me Leo, I have spent much time pondering this stuff.

The Old Kingdom and the Kindom of Akkad both fell c. 2193BC both affected by the 4.2 kiloyear event and the possible impact of the meteor imo.

Here's another thing, how correct is the Sumerian King List with their reigns of 1300 years and so forth.

Let's look who was King in 2193BC.

Man-ishtishu "the older brother of Rimush, the son of Sargon" 15 years ca. 2205–2191

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

Manishtushu was a king of the Akkadian Empire from 2276 to 2261 BCE.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man-ishtishu

Hmm.....

Check the King List yourself, if we come down 2 from Manishtushi (if his reign was the older 2276-2261 and the space of 2 Kings was 34 years each av.) we would actually be near to 2193BC and so at that time we would have this:

Shar-Kali-Sharri (Akk. = "King of all Kings") was a king of the Akkadian Empire. He was the son of Naram-sin and reigned for 25 years, around ca. 2100 BC. After his reign, there seems to have been a short period of chaos: The list of kings states:

Then who was king? Who was the king? Igigi, Imi, Nanum, Ilulu: four of them ruled for only 3 years

After this, king Dudu ascended, who reigned for 21 years.

Who was King? Who was King? Chaos.

[The Puzzler]

Look, it's kind of hard to discuss the OLB with people who are only dependent on the english translations, and with people who know nothing about the Dutch topography.

The OLB doesnt talk about the Mediterranean, it says "middel.se" ("se" pronounced as 'say'= sea). The stupid thing is, I have the Overwijn version of the OLB for 20 something years, but I mainly focussed on the translation in Dutch by Overwijn (and Ottema). But a day ago, I wanted to see the word the OLB actually uses for what Overwijn and Ottema translate as "Mediterranean", and it's "middel,se".

Tnen I suddenly remembered, "Hmm, where have I heard this before..". And no, I wasn't thinking about the German "Mittel Meer", I was a 100 % sure there was a Dutch 'middle sea'... just to find out it was an ancient (now dry, reclaimed) southern branch of the Norh Sea that cut deep into Frisian territory.

Then just for fun, I googled "Friesland" together with "Egypte" (Dutch for Egypt), and I came to a district with the name "Egypte", part of Ooststellingwerf.

Well, if you have the image I posted of that 'Middelzee' in front of your mind's eye, and then overlay it with the map of the presnt province of Friesland, you will see that Ooststellingwerf was on the EASTERN border of that sea, and thus that area that's called 'Egypte'...

But that's not all... the small river the Over de Lindes got their name from (="De Linde") has it's source in Ooststellingwerf.

Then Kadijk (is Dutch spelling for Kadik or Kadyk)) is a very common (Frisian) name, and stems from some form of dike and kade ("Kade" is the stone wall of a harbour). Google it, "Kadijk" with "Nederland" to see for yourself.

A dyke/dike (or 'dijk' in Dutch) is a (then) earthen defence against sea/river water, it's not some stronghold like a castle or something. Why you want me to show the Phoenician Gadeira/Gadiz didn't come from dyke? Can YOU show me what the -eira/-iz part stands for??

You people think in too large a scale, and you are excused because you have no knowledge of the Dutch country side and place names and language.

Think small, like in VERY local, and you will be able to discover some very funny and revealing coincidences. Think LOCAL, like in the surroundings people like Verwijs, Haverschmidt and all the others lived in, or where they grew up.

Yeah you told me all that (except elaborating on the Egypte bit) and i answered you back.

The name for the Mediterranean Sea is the MIDDLE SEA.

KADE = stone wall, stone wall is a strong hold. Dyke is a stronghold, I never said castle, I mean walled stronghold, that means a wall, like a dyke. Cadiz and Dyke mean the same thing basically.

You keep saying about the Dutch when you seem to no comprehende these people are not Dutch at the time this was first written. They are more German. The language is Anglo-Saxon.

Mate, I am thinking small.

I'll add to answer part of your Recap edit:

Maybe the Egyptians are actually named by the Magyar, the gypsies, the powerful Magi, who as an opener we are told kills the Yolksmoder. Apparently the priests of Egypt are just like the Magi and who instituted all this enormous amount of religion in Egypt anyway...the most famous devoted priests I know who apparently have countless years of astronomical knowledge are the Magi. I recall an ancient writer saying also that Belus sent a colony of priests to Chaldea from Egypt who beacame the Magi.

Edited July 12, 2010 by The Puzzler

[Abramelin]

Yeah you told me all that (except elaborating on the Egypte bit) and i answered you back.

The name for the Mediterranean Sea is the MIDDLE SEA.

KADE = stone wall, stone wall is a strong hold. Dyke is a stronghold, I never said castle, I mean walled stronghold, that means a wall, like a dyke. Cadiz and Dyke mean the same thing basically.

You keep saying about the Dutch when you seem to no comprehende these people are not Dutch at the time this was first written. They are more German. The language is not Dutch and the people are not Dutch. They live in a land that is Dutch and their language has taken on a Dutch form because of it.

Mate, I am thinking small.

Where you get the meaning of the name Cadiz from?

EDIT

I assume you got it from Wiki:

Gadir (in Phoenician: גדר), the original name given to the outpost established here by the Phoenicians, means "wall, compound", or, more generally, "walled stronghold". The Punic dialect lent this word, along with many others, to the Berber languages, where it was nativised as agadir meaning "wall" in Tamazight and "fortified granary" in Tashelhiyt; it appears as a common place name in North Africa.[2] The name of the Israeli town of Gedera has a similar etymology.

So to you, agadir/gedera/gadir.cadiz is the same as KADIK. Just change on letter, -k-, and voila? I won't hope you change "Oh my dear" according to that linguistic 'rule'? lol. But ok, yeah, there are some who think the Dutch and Frisians borrowed the word dyke from ancient Phoenician mariners, because it is known they sailed up and down the eastern Atlantic and probably also visited the North Sea. But that would mean the spread of the word went the other way round, from Phoenician to The Netherlands (which a Theo Vennemann supports, that Phoenicians gave us some of their language:

Punic, the Semitic language spoken in classical Carthage, is a superstratum of the Germanic languages. According to Vennemann, Carthaginians colonized the North Sea region between the 6th and 3rd centuries BC; this is evidenced by numerous Semitic loan words in the Germanic languages, as well as structural features such as strong verbs, and similarities between Norse religion and Semitic religion. This theory replaces his older theory of a superstratum of an unknown Semitic language called "Atlantic". WIKI )

I am Dutch, and I say that's important because the whole story is about an area in The Netherlands, "Friesland" and maybe also in n/w Germany and Denmark (once part of greater Friesland).

I say it's important to speak Dutch, because many documents that debunk the whole OLB are in Dutch.

I say it's important to speak Dutch, because then I will easily remember family names and place names that may be written a bit different after a century or so, but resemble words in the OLB so very much it's hilarious.

An example: I will bet you would never have thought of "Kadijk" when Googling for info about "Kadik", right? You would never have thought there was actually a Middle Sea in Friesland, right? And so on.

The language in the OLB is not Dutch, it's been called a Hollandized form of something ancient Frisian-ish, Dutch-Frisian, or in short, "Frutch", lol.

=

And Verwijs wasn't just a provincial librarian of Friesland... he had been, yes, but he knew and did a lot more:

http://www.dbnl.org/tekst/_jaa002188001_01/_jaa002188001_01_0017.php

-

EDIT:

You quote my edit (Rcap), and you tell me you do think 'small'.

No you don't, you gather info from about every place on the globe, but you are simply UNable to gather info about the small area I am talking about, because you can't read the info.

Edited July 12, 2010 by Abramelin

[The Puzzler]

OK, so you think this might be a telling of a local story Abe and as it has been translated worldly place names have been thought of when it really is local place names, I hear ya, I'll be back.

[The Puzzler]

The Athens references are getting me but I can see your point.

But, maybe there is an Athenian connection because it is there is really see a historic connection the most.

An interesting concept if so, a bit odd how all the place names seem to correlate with worldly ones, I do think Kreta is probably very Friesian.

Ya know, this could be the key to Atlantis and his story cause the one place he mentions also is Gades/Cadiz...hmmmm

[Abramelin]

The Athens references are getting me but I can see your point.

But, maybe there is an Athenian connection because it is there is really see a historic connection the most.

An interesting concept if so, a bit odd how all the place names seem to correlate with worldly ones, I do think Kreta is probably very Friesian.

Ya know, this could be the key to Atlantis and his story cause the one place he mentions also is Gades/Cadiz...hmmmm

Look at my edit where I mention Theo Vennemann, I think THAT's interesting. Though his theory is not being supported by other linguists, he does seem to know what he's talking about.

But that would also mean we here inherited from the Phoenicians, and not the other way round.

Puzz, it's not odd that many names in the OLB correlate with names all over the globe. I will bet you can do the same in Australia.

Kreta... so called because the inhabitants of the islands screamed to the sailors. "Kreet" = scream....

Yeah..

[The Puzzler]

Tha Nyhellenia * tham fon hira Sjn nfime Min-erva hete,

god seten was S,nd tha Krekalander t hja to met even h§,rde

minade as vs Sjn folk, tha kemon ther svme forsta &nd

prestera vppe-ra burch knd frejon Min-erva hwer of hjra

erva lejon. Nyhellenia andere, mina erva dreg ik om

in mina bosm, hw&t ik urven h&v is Ijafde vr wisdom,

rjucht §,nd frydom, h&v ik tham vrleren, alsa ben ik

elik an tha minniste jvvar slavonena. Nw jev ik red vm

nawet, men than skold ik vrk4pja tham, Tha hera gvngon

wei, &,nd hripon al lakande, jvwer heroga thjanra, wisa Hel-

lenia.

We can clearly see the name Min-erva and down lower Hellenia, I really cannot find any of this sort of reference apart from being about Greek Athena.

I'm still not totally in agreeance with this being a local story, yet.