Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Orestes_3113

Göbleki Tepe ‘decoded’

949 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

cormac mac airt
3 minutes ago, Orestes_3113 said:

Free Chart 100%

Maybe this helps.

Not really since calculating across the AD/BC boundry apparently eludes you. “If”, as in math, there were a year “0” then 1543 BC would be 1544 years before 1AD, hence the one year difference, but since the calendar system DOES NOT follow normal math then 1543 BC is 1543 years prior to 1AD. 
 

cormac

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Orestes_3113
22 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

"Genealogy tells us that his birth was in 1946 A.M. and that it was 290 years after the supposed flood"

Geneaology isn't actually telling you that. Its just names and dates in a book. AM is also a fake number as was the fake flood number. So with all these fake numbers why do you think you are getting usable data? Again you are basing your idea that the Bible contains accurate information. By any measure it doesn't.

You are looking at it from the wrong angle... These years are fixed and the story is fixed. Who determines of the information is accurate? You? No!

Until there is a method to verify the dates the jury is out. I propose a method by which we can verify the dates and to me they check out!

Does this means anything special happened on these dates? No. It simply means these dates were logged for whatever reason.

 

At t his moment in time you have been shown too little to be honest, only when you see the chapters of Genesis in combination with the stars will you see it I guess... 

Edited by Orestes_3113
  • Confused 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Wearer of Hats
21 minutes ago, Orestes_3113 said:

You are looking at it from the wrong angle... These years are fixed and the story is fixed. Who determines of the information is accurate? You? No!

Until there is a method to verify the dates the jury is out. I propose a method by which we can verify the dates and to me they check out!

Does this means anything special happened on these dates? No. It simply means these dates were logged for whatever reason.

 

At t his moment in time you have been shown too little to be honest, only when you see the chapters of Genesis in combination with the stars will you see it I guess... 

So, stop me when I get this wrong - we cannot verify the dates of Biblical/Torahnic events using the timescale presented within those documents, nor can we use physical historical record on the grounds there is no physical historical record of those events beyond the Bible/Torah/Quran. 
Upon this we all agree. 
However, you propose that the Torah and parts of the Old Testament (the Pentuarch) are astronomical records couched in mythologised terminology. That’s going to ruffle a few feathers, to say the least.
Your evidence for this is the date of Abraham’s birth correlating with an astronomical alignment. Except the date of his birth you propose is different to that presented anywhere else because it has to align with that alignment or your entire premise doesn’t work. So you prove your premise through an alignment that only aligns because of your premise.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Orestes_3113
20 minutes ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

So, stop me when I get this wrong - we cannot verify the dates of Biblical/Torahnic events using the timescale presented within those documents, nor can we use physical historical record on the grounds there is no physical historical record of those events beyond the Bible/Torah/Quran. 
Upon this we all agree. 

But we can use the fixed years presented. So many years until... first month of... or any indication of a celestial phenomena.

20 minutes ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

However, you propose that the Torah and parts of the Old Testament (the Pentuarch) are astronomical records couched in mythologised terminology. That’s going to ruffle a few feathers, to say the least.

Correct.

20 minutes ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

Your evidence for this is the date of Abraham’s birth correlating with an astronomical alignment. Except the date of his birth you propose is different to that presented anywhere else because it has to align with that alignment or your entire premise doesn’t work. So you prove your premise through an alignment that only aligns because of your premise.

The correlation is a key to unlock scripture. It seems like an arbitrary choice but it is more like an educated guess due to its quality of being extremely rare. This in itself is not a proof but an anchor point to run the program so to speak. Luckily the description in the book of Jasher does have similarites to the phenomena that could have been observed.

Now when you treat 1953 BCE as axiomatic then certain years can be logically concluded. Further investigation of said years in combination with scripture must remain correlated beyond any reasonable doubt so as to say that they are indeed connected. This I will demonstrate.

Edited by Orestes_3113
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Wearer of Hats

I can see how some Pentuarch texts correlate to astronomical phenomena, Sodom and Gomorrah being “skyfall” situations (the angels early debris, the city killer a larger rock) but what of the Great Flood? Lots of meteoroid activity? Mass solar flares extending the aura down to the tropics?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Orestes_3113
33 minutes ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

I can see how some Pentuarch texts correlate to astronomical phenomena, Sodom and Gomorrah being “skyfall” situations (the angels early debris, the city killer a larger rock) but what of the Great Flood? Lots of meteoroid activity? Mass solar flares extending the aura down to the tropics?

The flood story follows the moon over a period of 394 days. Nothing much happens other then there must have been a 13th month in that year.

The story of Lot and his older and younger daughters actually take place during an old/new moon. Where the two phases of the moon are the two different daughters.

When it comes to exodus that is another lunar eclipse (full eclipse/blood moon) in 1448 BCE. At the gate between scorpio and libra (opposite of taurus/aries). Thus a ram was slain and we have blood on the door. You can check this out April 16th Julian, (-1447) 1448 BCE 0:27 am Egypt.

stellarium-074.png

Free Chart 100%

This year is consistent with Abraham etc etc

https://www.oxfordbiblechurch.co.uk/index.php/books/the-keys-of-time-bible-chronology/759-chapter-6-from-abraham-to-the-exodus

505 years from Abraham to Exodus. Now we have this blood moon during Exodus in 1448 BCE and the rare 1953 BCE quintuple conjunction for Abraham. See how this works?

pg-24-pope-francis-getty.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Edited by Orestes_3113

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cormac mac airt
3 hours ago, Orestes_3113 said:

Free Chart 100%

Maybe this helps:

image.png.eaf583862c537f4a50fadcae84765d9a.png 

Your Julian date is irrelevant to the discussion as 1) we’re under the Gregorian Calendar and 2) the Julian calendar is irrelevant to any date prior to its origin and 3) you need to show the actual converter/calculations used to show the Julian date is really off by an entire year (365 days) and NOT an unevidenced copy-n-paste job like you usually do. 
 

cormac

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
2 hours ago, Orestes_3113 said:

The flood story follows the moon over a period of 394 days. Nothing much happens other then there must have been a 13th month in that year.

The story of Lot and his older and younger daughters actually take place during an old/new moon. Where the two phases of the moon are the two different daughters.

When it comes to exodus that is another lunar eclipse (full eclipse/blood moon) in 1448 BCE. At the gate between scorpio and libra (opposite of taurus/aries). Thus a ram was slain and we have blood on the door. You can check this out April 16th Julian, (-1447) 1448 BCE 0:27 am Egypt.

This year is consistent with Abraham etc etc

https://www.oxfordbiblechurch.co.uk/index.php/books/the-keys-of-time-bible-chronology/759-chapter-6-from-abraham-to-the-exodus

505 years from Abraham to Exodus. Now we have this blood moon during Exodus in 1448 BCE and the rare 1953 BCE quintuple conjunction for Abraham. See how this works?

 

Unhappy-Pope-Francis-Square-Pic.jpg?resi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChrLzs

Orestes, please explain, precisely, with all mathematics (and quotes if required) how you determined Abraham's birthdate, and also give the error range (if any) that applies.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Orestes_3113
2 hours ago, ChrLzs said:

Orestes, please explain, precisely, with all mathematics (and quotes if required) how you determined Abraham's birthdate, and also give the error range (if any) that applies.

The range is determined by each successive conjunction within the quintuplet. I simply observe by projection what happened. And if you do then the 27th is the closest. Very easy to see. You should recreate the sky using stellarium it answers many questions.

Again the match itself is an educated guess. But once treated as axiomatic then many scenes make sense. My understanding of the Pentateuch is significant enough to find my way in it.

All this is not rocket science, one simply needs to emulate and perceive.

6 hours ago, cormac mac airt said:

Your Julian date is irrelevant to the discussion as 1) we’re under the Gregorian Calendar and 2) the Julian calendar is irrelevant to any date prior to its origin and 3) you need to show the actual converter/calculations used to show the Julian date is really off by an entire year (365 days) and NOT an unevidenced copy-n-paste job like you usually do. 
 

cormac

You are really searching and stretching.  Any date after 1582 CE follows the Gregorian calendar, dates before 1582 CE follow the Julian calendar.

1953 BCE is before 1582 CE therefor dates are given in Julian. I can convert them to Gregorian if you want to but this is not how it is usually done.

Screenshot_20200924-121424_Chrome.thumb.jpg.3d0598d27ae052c614ff7ad7bf8d00e1.jpg

 

Edited by Orestes_3113

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Windowpane
On 9/23/2020 at 10:14 AM, Orestes_3113 said:

It is never about examining, questioning of material... it is about pushing a preconceived notion. If you really want to examine why not start with post #463, if you make the slightest of efforts I will open up and show more. As of yet there has been no one who has taken it upon themselves to investigate and ask a legitimate question, all are standing idly by until I present something, and if that is the case then I determine the pace, simple as that.

This is one legitimate question based on the material in #463.

Given that you are so sure of your arguments and evidence, why do you find it necessary to use at least two insulting forms of address to your interlocutor?

The foundation legend of Romulus and Remus is a legend, that cannot safely be tied to a particular date, despite the 753 BC date associated with it by the Romans.  (The motif of two brothers, one of whom dies, together with a nurturing animal, most often a cow, is widely found.  It has been suggested that the Roman animal was originally a cow, but, as that wasn't macho enough for the Roman image, it was at some point changed into a wolf).

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Orestes_3113
1 hour ago, Windowpane said:

This is one legitimate question based on the material in #463.

Given that you are so sure of your arguments and evidence, why do you find it necessary to use at least two insulting forms of address to your interlocutor?

The foundation legend of Romulus and Remus is a legend, that cannot safely be tied to a particular date, despite the 753 BC date associated with it by the Romans.  (The motif of two brothers, one of whom dies, together with a nurturing animal, most often a cow, is widely found.  It has been suggested that the Roman animal was originally a cow, but, as that wasn't macho enough for the Roman image, it was at some point changed into a wolf).

The story of Romulus and Remus is not merely about a single lunar eclipse. It involves multiple dates birth, suckling and death. Myth often gives multiple angles to a story each carrying its own truth. Different accounts may lead to different stories entirely yet still both be true.

That said Romulus (Mard) and Remus (Mercury) were suckled near the constellation Lupus (wolf) from Sep 1st to Sep 19th 769 BCE, this is a scene across the sky, not an instant. Their birth Sept 10th, 771 BCE (Mars/Mercury conjunct in Virgo during a new moon). On both accounts against the setting sun.

Edited by Orestes_3113
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cormac mac airt
5 hours ago, Orestes_3113 said:

The range is determined by each successive conjunction within the quintuplet. I simply observe by projection what happened. And if you do then the 27th is the closest. Very easy to see. You should recreate the sky using stellarium it answers many questions.

Again the match itself is an educated guess. But once treated as axiomatic then many scenes make sense. My understanding of the Pentateuch is significant enough to find my way in it.

All this is not rocket science, one simply needs to emulate and perceive.

You are really searching and stretching.  Any date after 1582 CE follows the Gregorian calendar, dates before 1582 CE follow the Julian calendar.

1953 BCE is before 1582 CE therefor dates are given in Julian. I can convert them to Gregorian if you want to but this is not how it is usually done.

Screenshot_20200924-121424_Chrome.thumb.jpg.3d0598d27ae052c614ff7ad7bf8d00e1.jpg

 

You’re an idiot, there is no Julian calendar before Julius Caesar, it didn’t exist which makes it irrelevant to the discussion as well as any claim of a 13th month as you’ve made. The Gregorian Calendar is used as it’s the most accurate to date. Even this latest post shows you’ve lied about the Julian calendar being off by a year, there’s only a 17 day difference. You’re all over the board with your specific date claims. 
 

cormac

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Orestes_3113
2 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

You’re an idiot, there is no Julian calendar before Julius Caesar, it didn’t exist which makes it irrelevant to the discussion as well as any claim of a 13th month as you’ve made. The Gregorian Calendar is used as it’s the most accurate to date. Even this latest post shows you’ve lied about the Julian calendar being off by a year, there’s only a 17 day difference. You’re all over the board with your specific date claims. 
 

cormac

I'll let you figure out the nonsense you are spewing, I'm not going to waste my time with this anymore but I will provide you with this link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomical_year_numbering

You are going back on the ignore. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cormac mac airt
14 minutes ago, Orestes_3113 said:

I'll let you figure out the nonsense you are spewing, I'm not going to waste my time with this anymore but I will provide you with this link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomical_year_numbering

You are going back on the ignore. 

So basically you’re an idiot following the ignorant as Cassini himself who is credited with originating the year zero said: 

 

Quote

 

“The year 0 is that in which one supposes that Jesus Christ was born, which several chronologists mark 1 before the birth of Jesus Christ and which we marked 0, so that the sum of the years before and after Jesus Christ gives the interval which is between these years, and where numbers divisible by 4 mark the leap years as so many before or after Jesus Christ.”

— Jacques Cassini

 

 
Cassini was understandably ignorant as he couldn’t have known Jesus’ birth was at least 4 years off from the calendar, YOU on the other hand have no such excuse and accept his and other such astronomers ignorance as fact. Truly the blind leading the blind. And you STILL don't get that your latest 17 day difference makes for an unacceptable variation to the discussion. 
 
cormac

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Orestes_3113
2 hours ago, cormac mac airt said:

So basically you’re an idiot following the ignorant as Cassini himself who is credited with originating the year zero said: 

 

 
Cassini was understandably ignorant as he couldn’t have known Jesus’ birth was at least 4 years off from the calendar, YOU on the other hand have no such excuse and accept his and other such astronomers ignorance as fact. Truly the blind leading the blind. And you STILL don't get that your latest 17 day difference makes for an unacceptable variation to the discussion. 
 
cormac

 

What does this have to do with anything? Meh can't help myself and will reply once more... <_< 

"Astronomical year numbering is based on AD/CE year numbering, but follows normal decimal integer numbering more strictly. Thus, it has a year 0; the years before that are designated with negative numbers and the years after that are designated with positive numbers."

Astronomical year numbering is used on basically all platforms like astro.com or the Stellarium software as does the Harvard article cited by Hanslune. I even made a screenshot of this, I'll post it again...

image.png

This is the date of the new moon following the quintuplet conjunction of Feb 27th 1953 BCE (-1952)

Note that the year is 1953 BCE and -1952 by astronomical year numbering, they refer to the same year!

The 17 day difference is the difference between the Gregorian and Julian calendar. The referenced Feb 27th date on wikipedia was noted in Julian (which is standard). If the referenced date would have been in Gregorian then the astronomical date would be 15th Mar -1952. This date is not fit for any conjunction point...

The date is:

Feb 27th 1953 BCE (Julian)

Feb 27th -1952 (astronomical numbering/Julian)

Feb 10th 1953 BCE (Gregorian) 

Feb 10th -1952 (astronomical numbering/Gregorian)
 

Doesn't matter what you choose, they refer to the same day, you can use  web based converters.

Edited by Orestes_3113

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cormac mac airt
Quote

What does this have to do with anything? Meh can't help myself and will reply once more...  

Because it's WRONG, it doesn't matter if astronomers accept or use it, wrong is wrong. BY FOUR+ YEARS. That's the ONLY reason to use a "year 0", to celebrate a man's birth who was already at least 4 years old. And your own Feb 27, 1953 BC Julian conversion from previously STILL shows a Gregorian year of 1953 BC. Same year, not remotely 1 year apart. 

And that's not the least of your problems as Abraham's alleged birth, according to you, is completely unevidenced in all of history. Which leaves you having created a fantasy. 

cormac

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Orestes_3113
48 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

Because it's WRONG, it doesn't matter if astronomers accept or use it, wrong is wrong. BY FOUR+ YEARS. That's the ONLY reason to use a "year 0", to celebrate a man's birth who was already at least 4 years old. And your own Feb 27, 1953 BC Julian conversion from previously STILL shows a Gregorian year of 1953 BC. Same year, not remotely 1 year apart. 

And that's not the least of your problems as Abraham's alleged birth, according to you, is completely unevidenced in all of history. Which leaves you having created a fantasy. 

cormac

You are comparing apples with oranges. Astronomical numbering is simply an agreed upon way of dating. 1953 BCE == (-1952) by definition!

1 == 1 CE

0 = =1 BCE

-1 == -2 BCE

...

-1952 == 1953 BCE

 

Quote

The prefix AD and the suffixes CE, BC or BCE (Common Era, Before Christ or Before Common Era) are dropped. The year 1 BC/BCE is numbered 0, the year 2 BC is numbered −1, and in general the year n BC/BCE is numbered "−(n − 1)" (a negative number equal to 1 − n). The numbers of AD/CE years are not changed and are written with either no sign or a positive sign; thus in general n AD/CE is simply n or +n. For normal calculation a number zero is often needed, here most notably when calculating the number of years in a period that spans the epoch; the end years need only be subtracted from each other.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomical_year_numbering

Edited by Orestes_3113

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cormac mac airt
26 minutes ago, Orestes_3113 said:

You are comparing apples with oranges. Astronomical numbering is simply an agreed upon way of dating. 1953 BCE == (-1952) by definition!

1 == 1 CE

0 = =1 BCE

-1 == -2 BCE

...

-1952 == 1953 BCE

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomical_year_numbering

Nope, I know bullscheisse when I read it and you spew it by the bucketloads. The Julian calendar is irrelevant to ancient history and the inclusion of a designated year “0” makes that year what is otherwise known as 1 BC, which is asinine as both the Julian and Gregorian calendars are centered on the incorrect date of Jesus’ birth. And thats not even getting into the fantasy of Abraham’s birth year. 
 

cormac

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Orestes_3113
6 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

Nope, I know bullscheisse when I read it and you spew it by the bucketloads. The Julian calendar is irrelevant to ancient history and the inclusion of a designated year “0” makes that year what is otherwise known as 1 BC, which is asinine as both the Julian and Gregorian calendars are centered on the incorrect date of Jesus’ birth. And thats not even getting into the fantasy of Abraham’s birth year. 
 

cormac

Oh my... we are not dealing with ancient history here but with astronomy... this is why we use astronomical numbering. The funny thing is, which I will deal with sometime later, is that the birth of Christ is actually Sep 3rd 1 BCE (0) jul. astronomically.

Edited by Orestes_3113

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanos5150
5 hours ago, cormac mac airt said:

You’re an idiot,.... 

Would this be considered an "insulting form of address to your interlocutor"? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChrLzs
10 hours ago, Orestes_3113 said:

The range is determined by each successive conjunction within the quintuplet. I simply observe by projection what happened. And if you do then the 27th is the closest. Very easy to see. You should recreate the sky using stellarium it answers many questions.

Again the match itself is an educated guess.

So you've admitted you are simply making them match on no basis whatsoever.    Go away.  This is pure bullmanure, absolutely baseless, absolutely ridiculous.

Let me be quite specific - your conjunction only lasts for a week or two at most before the planets drift away, and now you have admitted you can't pin the day down for the event AND you've already shown you cherry picked it anyway...  This would be hilarious if not so sad that you have invested time on it.

:td:

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cormac mac airt
24 minutes ago, Orestes_3113 said:

Oh my... we are not dealing with ancient history here but with astronomy... this is why we use astronomical numbering. The funny thing is, which I will deal with sometime later, is that the birth of Christ is actually Sep 3rd 1 BCE (0) jul. astronomically.

1953 BC IS ancient history, regardless of its use. And since Jesus was born at least 4 years BEFORE the AD/BC boundary there is no way Sept 3, 1 BC applies.

cormac 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Wearer of Hats

How can dates before Julius Caesar’s birth use a calendar he himself designed/had designed and implemented across the Roman world? 
surely it’d make sense to use the Jewish calendar, it’s a lunar one for starters.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Orestes_3113
2 minutes ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

How can dates before Julius Caesar’s birth use a calendar he himself designed/had designed and implemented across the Roman world? 
surely it’d make sense to use the Jewish calendar, it’s a lunar one for starters.

They used myths, we use computers (using Julian Days).

So what year was it again? Well it was "when the Moon is in the 7th House & Jupiter aligns With Mars..."

It is only because we recreate their skies that we impose our calendar.

23 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

So you've admitted you are simply making them match on no basis whatsoever.    Go away.  This is pure bullmanure, absolutely baseless, absolutely ridiculous.

Let me be quite specific - your conjunction only lasts for a week or two at most before the planets drift away, and now you have admitted you can't pin the day down for the event AND you've already shown you cherry picked it anyway...  This would be hilarious if not so sad that you have invested time on it.

:td:

Do you even read? +1 for the ignore

23 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

1953 BC IS ancient history, regardless of its use. And since Jesus was born at least 4 years BEFORE the AD/BC boundary there is no way Sept 3, 1 BC applies.

cormac 

cormac mac airt I am sorry to say that you have no clue what you are talking about, you are talking from a completely different paradigm trying to enforce concepts that do not apply. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.