The Great Pyramid of Giza is finally cracked!

[VastLand]

kmt_sesh

You may have that Opinion (Opinion: a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.), and I am not claiming that your Judgement does not have it's basis on fact or knowledge, as it sounds as though you do, but what I will say is this: There, to this day, are many truths and lies said about that man "Sitchin" which he can not defend or deny in body at this time. I try to understand a person's situation, and as I see it, Sitchin was qualified in Hebrew and some Cuneiform, and he has students to attest this, as the link suggests, also I already forementioned that my Perspective is not necessarily based upon Sitchin's works, and I most certainly have cross referenced in my own research and have concluded from Hebrew to Akkadian, from Cuneiform to Pictograms of the latter, every story confirms many of the claims that are inside of his work, and therefore there is even the tiniest degree to reason there is some validity in what he wrote. I am not saying all of his beliefs, or his interpretations, or even Harmonization of several tablets are absolutely correct. However, I am saying, Yes they do seem to be confirmed semi-legitimate when viewing other sources, such as the "Book of Jubilee" or Akkadian "Adam and Eve". 

As for Bosnian Pyramids, there is documented footage and analysis of the pyramid, I just linked it. If you knew much about Michael Tellinger you would find that both subjects actually have some validity, especially pertaining to how pyramids work. There is the Healthy skeptic who doubts all the right things, because they do not resonate with truth, but there is the unhealthy skeptic also. We must imagine for ourselves and live also, rather than only read books. Blessings to you.

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

A minor correction - he taught himself Sumerian Cuniform. I could, just as easily, teach myself Linnear A.

he also makes claims as to the imoportance of Sumerian to other languages, except other linguists say that Sumerian amounts to a linguistical dead end, it grows into no other language.

he claims that sumerians counts 12 planets and considered the sun and the moon to be planets - except others tell us that Sumerian cosmology involved 5 planets, the ones easily visible from Earth.

 

Furthermore and most damning of all I don’t just challenge you to prove that there is a planet stalking wildly through the solar system but I demand that you do. Show me one shred of evidence, one tiny iota of mystery that could be intercepted as Nibiru. 

[kmt_sesh]

29 minutes ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

A minor correction - he taught himself Sumerian Cuniform. I could, just as easily, teach myself Linnear A.

This claim of his right here is utter nonsense. You're unlikely ever to "teach" yourself Sumerian cuneiform. One of the museums where I work is one of a handful of places in the world that does teach Sumerian, and it takes a high level of linguistic training by real professionals. All this claim reveals of Sitchin is that he was either dishonest or delusional.

Quote

he also makes claims as to the imoportance of Sumerian to other languages, except other linguists say that Sumerian amounts to a linguistical dead end, it grows into no other language.

That's correct. Sumerian is a language isolate, To this day no one knows with certainty where this language comes from. although there are theories that it's related to prehistoric Indic languages. Sumerian has not even been fully deciphered, and specialist linguists are still wrestling with it. Other cuneiform scripts such as Akkadian and Babylonian, are much better understood.

Quote

he claims that sumerians counts 12 planets and considered the sun and the moon to be planets - except others tell us that Sumerian cosmology involved 5 planets, the ones easily visible from Earth.

This particular theme of Sitchin's comes from a cylinder seal designated VA243. It's a beautiful piece that Sitchin botched every step of the way, not to mention his comically wrong interpretations of the seal. This is one of the strongest pieces of evidence that reveals Sitchin didn't really know much at all about the ancient cultures about which he was writing.

Quote

Furthermore and most damning of all I don’t just challenge you to prove that there is a planet stalking wildly through the solar system but I demand that you do. Show me one shred of evidence, one tiny iota of mystery that could be intercepted as Nibiru. 

This is an appropriate challenge.

[cormac mac airt]

41 minutes ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

A minor correction - he taught himself Sumerian Cuniform. I could, just as easily, teach myself Linnear A.

he also makes claims as to the imoportance of Sumerian to other languages, except other linguists say that Sumerian amounts to a linguistical dead end, it grows into no other language.

he claims that sumerians counts 12 planets and considered the sun and the moon to be planets - except others tell us that Sumerian cosmology involved 5 planets, the ones easily visible from Earth.

 

Furthermore and most damning of all I don’t just challenge you to prove that there is a planet stalking wildly through the solar system but I demand that you do. Show me one shred of evidence, one tiny iota of mystery that could be intercepted as Nibiru. 

I would add to that that Blaye Otanka should be able to show Sitchin correct using The Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature which contains text that Sitchin would have to have proved said what he claimed. 

http://etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk/edition2/etcslbycat.php

To Blaye Otanka, good luck with that. 

cormac

[kmt_sesh]

As we've seen here at UM, certain people will make up their own versions of inscriptions but, in every case, will flee from any request to prove themselves. Sitchin did exactly that. It's like they think presenting obviously fraudulent material will never be questioned.

Believe it or not, most of us have brains.

[kmt_sesh]

1 hour ago, Blaye Otanka said:

kmt_sesh

You may have that Opinion (Opinion: a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.), and I am not claiming that your Judgement does not have it's basis on fact or knowledge, as it sounds as though you do, but what I will say is this:...

I've studied ancient Near Eastern cultures for well over 30 years, When I write about these cultures, I state facts that are known through proper research and are accepted by the wider academic world. If I am writing something based on my personal opinion, you will know so because I'll plainly state it's my opinion.

I won't lie like Sitchin did and say I know Sumerian cuneiform. I don't.My training is in Egyptian hieroglyphs. I am honest, and it's good to stick to that. As we've all seen with a lot of fringies, they're often plainly dishonest because they don't have the requisite knowledge to support their wild claims. Sitchin was very much like that. Look at all the glaring errors he made about ancient Egypt. Sitchin cannot be trusted, period. I will not lie to you.

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

43 minutes ago, kmt_sesh said:

As we've seen here at UM, certain people will make up their own versions of inscriptions but, in every case, will flee from any request to prove themselves. Sitchin did exactly that. It's like they think presenting obviously fraudulent material will never be questioned.

Believe it or not, most of us have brains.

Indeed, Kmt’s is in a lovely Canopic jar on my desk.

[kmt_sesh]

2 minutes ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

Indeed, Kmt’s is in a lovely Canopic jar on my desk.

Ha! I know you're not telling the truth. When they mummified, the brain came out through the nose and was destroyed in the process. Like so many others, my brain was discarded. That's okay. I don't need it.

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

7 minutes ago, kmt_sesh said:

Ha! I know you're not telling the truth. When they mummified, the brain came out through the nose and was destroyed in the process. Like so many others, my brain was discarded. That's okay. I don't need it.

When Harte sold it to me, he said “it’s what men think with”, what else would it be but a brain?

[Windowpane]

6 hours ago, kmt_sesh said:

... Sitchin was a world-class crank. This is not opinion but fact. It seems he might have had a modicum of talent in ancient Hebrew, but with certainty he could not read cuneiform. That is understood. Sitchin was challenged numerous times by a legitimate historian of the Near East named Michael Heiser, and Sitchin always fled from the challenge. If you're relying on Sitchin to learn things, you can guarantee that what you learned is flat-out wrong. I'm not exaggerating.

Here is Heiser's website: click here. Give it a good read. You will see quite quickly how comically wrong Sitchin was on pretty much everything.

 

Piotr Michalowski (George G. Cameron Professor of Ancient Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor) takes a comparable view of Sitchin's treatment of Sumerian-Akkadian terms.

[Windowpane]

6 hours ago, Blaye Otanka said:

...

As for Bosnian Pyramids, there is documented footage and analysis of the pyramid, I just linked it. 

...

 

The Bosnian "pyramids" don't exist: they're just geological formations.

[Piney]

8 hours ago, Blaye Otanka said:

kmt_sesh

As for Bosnian Pyramids, there is documented footage and analysis of the pyramid, I just linked it. If you knew much about Michael Tellinger you would find that both subjects actually have some validity, especially pertaining to how pyramids work. There is the Healthy skeptic who doubts all the right things, because they do not resonate with truth, but there is the unhealthy skeptic also. We must imagine for ourselves and live also, rather than only read books. Blessings to you.

Little Brother you are hurting yourself here. I work alongside museums and archaeologists as a Yuwipi Wicasa. @kmt_sesh is a scholar of the highest caliber. When he tells you something is bullcrap. It's bullcrap.

[Windowpane]

11 hours ago, kmt_sesh said:

...

You're unlikely ever to "teach" yourself Sumerian cuneiform. One of the museums where I work is one of a handful of places in the world that does teach Sumerian, and it takes a high level of linguistic training by real professionals ...  Sumerian is a language isolate, To this day no one knows with certainty where this language comes from. although there are theories that it's related to prehistoric Indic languages. Sumerian has not even been fully deciphered, and specialist linguists are still wrestling with it. Other cuneiform scripts such as Akkadian and Babylonian, are much better understood.

A helpful workshop coming up for people interested in cuneiform studies.

[Harte]

13 hours ago, Blaye Otanka said:

kmt_sesh

You may have that Opinion (Opinion: a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.), and I am not claiming that your Judgement does not have it's basis on fact or knowledge, as it sounds as though you do, but what I will say is this: There, to this day, are many truths and lies said about that man "Sitchin" which he can not defend or deny in body at this time. I try to understand a person's situation, and as I see it, Sitchin was qualified in Hebrew and some Cuneiform, and he has students to attest this, as the link suggests, also I already forementioned that my Perspective is not necessarily based upon Sitchin's works, and I most certainly have cross referenced in my own research and have concluded from Hebrew to Akkadian, from Cuneiform to Pictograms of the latter, every story confirms many of the claims that are inside of his work, and therefore there is even the tiniest degree to reason there is some validity in what he wrote. I am not saying all of his beliefs, or his interpretations, or even Harmonization of several tablets are absolutely correct. However, I am saying, Yes they do seem to be confirmed semi-legitimate when viewing other sources, such as the "Book of Jubilee" or Akkadian "Adam and Eve". 

As for Bosnian Pyramids, there is documented footage and analysis of the pyramid, I just linked it. If you knew much about Michael Tellinger you would find that both subjects actually have some validity, especially pertaining to how pyramids work. There is the Healthy skeptic who doubts all the right things, because they do not resonate with truth, but there is the unhealthy skeptic also. We must imagine for ourselves and live also, rather than only read books. Blessings to you.

Sitchin had every opportunity to defend himself from legitimate arguments against his bogus crapola when he was alive, but was unable to do so because he has no knowledge of the things he wrote about, other than the parts he made up - and saying "I made that part up" isn't a good defense.

So now that the man is dead (finally,) suddenly there's a new pro-Sitchin argument: "He's dead and can't defend himself!!!" 

Harte

[Wistman]

I'm posting this here not because it follows the current course of the thread (fascinating as that may be) but because some pages back the subject of the Pyramid Texts was a point of discussion.  So here's a paper on the semiotics and philological aspects of AE language as exemplified in the Pyramid Texts, which may interest some.  From the Journal of Ancient Interconnections, hosted by University of Arizona.  author: Dr. Francesca Iannelli:  "Write to Dominate Reality: Graphic Alteration of Anthropomorphic Signs in the Pyramid Texts"   PDF file only:

https://journals.uair.arizona.edu/index.php/jaei/article/download/22028/21393

[Piney]

1 hour ago, Harte said:

Sitchin had every opportunity to defend himself from legitimate arguments against his bogus crapola when he was alive, but was unable to do so because he has no knowledge of the things he wrote about, other than the parts he made up - and saying "I made that part up" isn't a good defense.

So now that the man is dead (finally,) suddenly there's a new pro-Sitchin argument: "He's dead and can't defend himself!!!" 

Harte

The Indian brain is wired to believe everything thrown into it. It's why my woo works so well with them. I just shake my head in shame and think to myself "It must be the English".

[Kenemet]

On 3/19/2018 at 5:06 PM, kborissov said:

...And you wrong here again... It appears you are confused here with the properties of different metals having different ionic state. Yes, those metals placed in the acid create the voltage potential and electrolysis even without adding electric power. Google this, as this is the common knowledge. What I said the voltage between terminals is created by electrons passing through the base to the king chamber (I even posed electric circuit for you). You do not need to have electrons of different metals for that.

And yes, it will work with rocks which have magnesium content especially at high frequency. For you saying in general "no rocks" are conductors is silly, some do conduct depending on what they are made of... 

You appear to be confusing electrolysis with the function of a battery, and then appear to not understand your electric circuit diagram.  Electrolysis (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrolysis) requires some sort of power (your third sentence is clearly incorrect here).  And your last sentence ("You do not need to have electrons of different metals for that.") is also incorrect.

• Electrolysis moves atoms of one metal onto another surface.  This requires two different metals... in the case of a salt being used, one of the elements of that compound will be a metal (e.g. the sodium of "sodium chloride).
• Batteries require two different kinds of metals in order to function.
• "magnesium content especially at high frequency" is ambiguous... I am going to assume you mean "has a lot of magnesium (e.g., magnesium ore)" because the other interpretations don't make a lick of sense.  Magnesium isn't going to be a great conductor of electricity - its commercial ores (the ones where it's high enough in magnesium to make extracting the mineral commercially profitable) are insulators, as you can see in this article from a company on its magnesium ores and refined magnesium ores: https://www.azom.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=1343

I would like to see proof (in terms of having a company's MSDS or some other evidence) that rocks conduct electricity.  I would not take Youtube videos as evidence, nor would I take a non-commercial website (but I would accept Wikipedia after checking to see if the article had been recently changed.)

 

[Kenemet]

23 hours ago, Blaye Otanka said:

kmt_sesh

You may have that Opinion (Opinion: a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.), and I am not claiming that your Judgement does not have it's basis on fact or knowledge, as it sounds as though you do, but what I will say is this: There, to this day, are many truths and lies said about that man "Sitchin" which he can not defend or deny in body at this time. I try to understand a person's situation, and as I see it, Sitchin was qualified in Hebrew and some Cuneiform, and he has students to attest this, as the link suggests, also I already forementioned that my Perspective is not necessarily based upon Sitchin's works, and I most certainly have cross referenced in my own research and have concluded from Hebrew to Akkadian, from Cuneiform to Pictograms of the latter, every story confirms many of the claims that are inside of his work, and therefore there is even the tiniest degree to reason there is some validity in what he wrote. I am not saying all of his beliefs, or his interpretations, or even Harmonization of several tablets are absolutely correct. However, I am saying, Yes they do seem to be confirmed semi-legitimate when viewing other sources, such as the "Book of Jubilee" or Akkadian "Adam and Eve". 

As for Bosnian Pyramids, there is documented footage and analysis of the pyramid, I just linked it. If you knew much about Michael Tellinger you would find that both subjects actually have some validity, especially pertaining to how pyramids work. There is the Healthy skeptic who doubts all the right things, because they do not resonate with truth, but there is the unhealthy skeptic also. We must imagine for ourselves and live also, rather than only read books. Blessings to you.

Not only is Sitchin contradicted by scholars... he's contradicted by the ancient people of that time who were writing things down in their own languages.  For example - his concept of the fall of Ur being caused by nuclear weapons - the Elamites, Akkadians, Egyptians, and others (who were literate and writing during that time period) don't mention aliens or atomic bombs or even nuclear blasts or anything like it.    U235 (the material for atomic bombs) has a half life of 703.8 million years - so the site would still be extremely radioactive and everyone on the planet would know it.

 

[Harte]

20 minutes ago, Kenemet said:

Not only is Sitchin contradicted by scholars... he's contradicted by the ancient people of that time who were writing things down in their own languages.  For example - his concept of the fall of Ur being caused by nuclear weapons - the Elamites, Akkadians, Egyptians, and others (who were literate and writing during that time period) don't mention aliens or atomic bombs or even nuclear blasts or anything like it.    U235 (the material for atomic bombs) has a half life of 703.8 million years - so the site would still be extremely radioactive and everyone on the planet would know it.

 

Only if someone spread around a bunch of U235.

It's not a product of a nuclear explosion. It's the fuel for one.

You're good to go five years later in the worst cases.

Of course, any nuclear blast leaves behind evidence, just not radiation so much. Not like a nuclear plant.

Harte

[stereologist]

A major problem for Sitchin is also physics. He gives his fictional planet properties that are not possible. A planet is a highly eccentric orbit interacts with the Sun just like the Moon interacts with the Earth and the Earth interacts with the Sun. There is a transfer of momentum that makes the orbit less eccentric. Within a few hundred million years of the formation of the solar system this fictional planet would no longer have an eccentric orbit. In addition, telescopes that perform whole sky surveys would have detected such a planet. A planet  large as Sitchin pretends exists would have been discovered by project PAN-STARRS or WISE or IRAS.

There is no planet such as the fictional planet Sitchin pretended about.

[Kenemet]

2 minutes ago, Harte said:

Only if someone spread around a bunch of U235.

It's not a product of a nuclear explosion. It's the fuel for one.

You're good to go five years later in the worst cases.

Of course, any nuclear blast leaves behind evidence, just not radiation so much. Not like a nuclear plant.

Hmm.  Articles I found (such as this one: http://articles.latimes.com/2009/nov/13/nation/na-radiation-nevada13 ) seem to indicate that the effects are long-lasting.  Sitchin hypothesized more than one bomb (as at Nevada) and I thought that traces would linger for quite a long while afterwards; on the order of thousands of years.

[cormac mac airt]

21 minutes ago, stereologist said:

A major problem for Sitchin is also physics. He gives his fictional planet properties that are not possible. A planet is a highly eccentric orbit interacts with the Sun just like the Moon interacts with the Earth and the Earth interacts with the Sun. There is a transfer of momentum that makes the orbit less eccentric. Within a few hundred million years of the formation of the solar system this fictional planet would no longer have an eccentric orbit. In addition, telescopes that perform whole sky surveys would have detected such a planet. A planet  large as Sitchin pretends exists would have been discovered by project PAN-STARRS or WISE or IRAS.

There is no planet such as the fictional planet Sitchin pretended about.

It should be pointed out that if an object like the dwarf planet Sedna, with an elliptical orbit of 11,400 years and a dimension of @ 1000 km, can be detected then the fictional Nibiru should have already been detected. It never has. 

cormac

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

2 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

It should be pointed out that if an object like the dwarf planet Sedna, with an elliptical orbit of 11,400 years and a dimension of @ 1000 km, can be detected then the fictional Nibiru should have already been detected. It never has. 

cormac

well DURR because it’s cloaked.

[stereologist]

2 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

It should be pointed out that if an object like the dwarf planet Sedna, with an elliptical orbit of 11,400 years and a dimension of @ 1000 km, can be detected then the fictional Nibiru should have already been detected. It never has. 

cormac

Correct. I looked it up and Sedna is out 86AU. An Earth sized planet can be detected by Pan-STARRS out to 230AU, or nearly 3 times further than Sedna. Sitchin's fairy tale planet is supposed to be bigger than Earth. A Jupiter sized planet would be detected at 2100AU. Of course, the project has been upgraded with new sensors so it is possible that the detection is even further out than the figures I stated.

 

[stereologist]

2 minutes ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

well DURR because it’s cloaked.

But IRAS and WISE would detect it by its IR output.