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

Abramelin

Orestes, I saw (and I thought it was in this thread, but can't find it right now) that you posted astrological charts.

By what method did you calculate them? Siderial or tropical?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Abramelin
39 minutes ago, Abramelin said:

Orestes, I saw (and I thought it was in this thread, but can't find it right now) that you posted astrological charts.

By what method did you calculate them? Siderial or tropical?

Ah, I see: they are gone:

LINK

Share this post


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

Basically. Provide context and legitimacy from within a set of constraints as to not "break" the overall theme, which goal it is to teach how the God(s) rule.

So why use mythologised astronomical events to do that, when any old story would suffice?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tom1200

C'mon guys'n'gals - it really isn't hard to follow Orestes' logic:

  1. Some of the Old Testament is historical fact.  Oh, no it isn't!  It's all made up.  Apart from the bits that aren't.
  2. The made-up bits are based on solar eclipses.  If a biblical story can be matched to a solar eclipse it must be made up.
  3. Every biblical story can be matched to an eclipse.  Therefore all biblical stories are made up.  Apart from the bits that aren't.
  4. Some eclipses are good, others are bad.  That is important.
  5. Charts that show stars and eclipses are a way to show stars and eclipses.  Therefore we have charts.  Lots and lots of charts.
  6. People named in the Bible are made up.  All 3000 of them.  Apart from the ones for whom there is corroborating archaeological evidence.  Which is fake, because everyone in the Bible is made up.
  7. Each person is a planet or star.  Or maybe a comet or UFO.  Constellations are places or events.  Or another person, or Noah's ark, or the Ark of the Covenant, or probably something else.
  8. Everything follows cycles.  There are myriad cycles, perhaps infinite.  If something doesn't fit one cycle invent another one - it cannot be wrong.
  9. At no point may any explanation of these rules make sense.
  10. I don't like odd-numbered lists.

In fact the only mystery remaining is - why didn't Orestes just explain all this right at the start?

Edited by Tom1200
  • Haha 4

Share this post


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

Ah, I see: they are gone:

LINK

Right that image was simply to show that the 0 year is not counted and so -1952 = 1953 BCE. I used an astro chart to show how that is noted. 1953 BC(-1952 Jul). 

2 hours ago, Abramelin said:

Orestes, I saw (and I thought it was in this thread, but can't find it right now) that you posted astrological charts.

By what method did you calculate them? Siderial or tropical?

When projecting all is siderial. Unless we come futher to the present time then there are instances that I think tropical might be at play by simply using the months.

1 hour ago, President Wearer of Hats said:

So why use mythologised astronomical events to do that, when any old story would suffice?

The whole point is that this story has the pattern, not some other story. THIS story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Orestes_3113
3 minutes ago, Tom1200 said:

Some of the Old Testament is historical fact.  Oh, no it isn't!  It's all made up.  Apart from the bits that aren't.

I only follow the pattern.

3 minutes ago, Tom1200 said:

The made-up bits are based on solar eclipses.  If a biblical story can be matched to a solar eclipse it must be made up.

Could be both but then we are talking astrology and magical thinking. I'd like to keep it grounded. Most like made up.

4 minutes ago, Tom1200 said:

Every biblical story can be matched to an eclipse.  Therefore all biblical stories are made up.  Apart from the bits that aren't.

No, the antediluvian genealogy is made of eclipses, the stories of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob for instance are not.

5 minutes ago, Tom1200 said:

Some eclipses are good, others are bad.  That is important.

If I were to pick flower, would I pick the whole field? Some flowers were chosen others were not. Why? Ask them, I am only showing that they did.

6 minutes ago, Tom1200 said:

Charts that show stars and eclipses are a way to show stars and eclipses.  Therefore we have charts.  Lots and lots of charts.

And many more to come.

7 minutes ago, Tom1200 said:

People named in the Bible are made up.  All 3000 of them.  Apart from the ones for whom there is corroborating archaeological evidence.  Which is fake, because everyone in the Bible is made up.

If there is archaeological evidence is there a body? or is it like a shrine type of deal? simply people honoring a story...

8 minutes ago, Tom1200 said:

Each person is a planet or star.  Or maybe a comet or UFO.  Constellations are places or events.  Or another person, or Noah's ark, or the Ark of the Covenant, or probably something else.

All depends on the story indeed B). Important is the structure of the story and the unlikely hood of the matches to simply be random or coincidental.

9 minutes ago, Tom1200 said:

Everything follows cycles.  There are myriad cycles, perhaps infinite.  If something doesn't fit one cycle invent another one - it cannot be wrong.

True.dat

10 minutes ago, Tom1200 said:

I don't like odd-numbered lists.

And you love decans

11 minutes ago, Tom1200 said:

In fact the only mystery remaining is - why didn't Orestes just explain all this right at the start?

What? I learn as I go, partially because of you guy's feedback. Right now I have the whole antediluvian timeline mapped out births and deaths. From Adam until even Arphaxad, it happened to be that from Shem to Arphaxad (102 years) was another eclips cycle 102/9.3=11. Expect more charts tomorrow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Abramelin
14 minutes ago, Orestes_3113 said:

When projecting all is siderial. Unless we come futher to the present time then there are instances that I think tropical might be at play by simply using the months.

 

Tropical and sidereal projections were about the same at the time of Ptolemy ("Tetrabiblos").

The further we approach modern times, the more these 2 projections are apart.

That's like 24° nowadays.

 

Edited by Abramelin
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Orestes_3113
Just now, Abramelin said:

Tropical and sidereal projections were about the same at the time of Ptolemy ("Tetrabiblos").

The further we approach modern times, the more these 2 projections are apart.

I know. The problem would be 1st millennium BCE. The Bible doesnt continue after say 480 BCE until Jesus and some prophecies of Daniel. I would need to revisit my earlier findings at a later time. Best to simply use sidereal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Abramelin

It is.

Share this post


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

 

The whole point is that this story has the pattern, not some other story. THIS story.

So what’s the point of the story? “OHH LOOK STARS!”??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jmccr8

Hi Orestes

I have something a little closer to our current time frame for you to work out and an be verified.

A distant relative of mine was the first premier of BC (there is some speculation the he was a scoundrel and a rouge) but he did drive in the last spike of the railroad that joined east and western Canada so it is kind of a big deal for those days. Knowing how much railroaders and Irishmen drink there may have been some discrepancy as to which day it actually happened seeing as some like to celebrate before during and after a celebration that is how my dad got his name changed without gramma's consent. So my question to you is can you work out the right time with the information I have given you?

I know he was baptized and pretty sure that was the end of his religious career but theoretically he was a Christian so still within your parameters.

jmccr8

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tom1200
20 minutes ago, Orestes_3113 said:

No, the antediluvian genealogy is made of eclipses, the stories of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob for instance are not.

So the story of Abraham isn't made up?  But I have on good authority - 

On 1/29/2021 at 12:08 PM, Orestes_3113 said:

Abraham never existed. Only as a fictional character how often do I need to state this?

MAKE YOUR BLOODY MIND UP.  It's your theory / fantasy - at least be consistently crazy.

24 minutes ago, Orestes_3113 said:

If I were to pick flower, would I pick the whole field? Some flowers were chosen others were not. Why? Ask them, I am only showing that they did.

Ask the flowers that got picked, or the ones that didn't?  

When this thread started I believed you earnestly thought you were on to something.  Now I just think you're on something.

28 minutes ago, Orestes_3113 said:

Expect more charts tomorrow.

Please - no.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Kenemet
3 hours ago, Orestes_3113 said:

Not relevant when you calculate from say 300 BCE and are at a random place on the earth. All that matters are the eclipse years.

You've really knocked holes in your idea right there.

If they couldn't see the eclipse (if it was over North America, which they didn't know existed or over the southern Pacific Ocean), then they couldn't have know there was an eclipse and they couldn't have calculated an eclipse table.  Hence it couldn't be encoded in anyone's mythology.

And if you're trying to prove astrology, that's been thoroughly debunked.  There wasn't just ONE person born during those vague swatches of time you're claiming...there were millions of people from many religions.

And none of this, by the way, links to the topic of this thread.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Orestes_3113
1 hour ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Orestes

I have something a little closer to our current time frame for you to work out and an be verified.

A distant relative of mine was the first premier of BC (there is some speculation the he was a scoundrel and a rouge) but he did drive in the last spike of the railroad that joined east and western Canada so it is kind of a big deal for those days. Knowing how much railroaders and Irishmen drink there may have been some discrepancy as to which day it actually happened seeing as some like to celebrate before during and after a celebration that is how my dad got his name changed without gramma's consent. So my question to you is can you work out the right time with the information I have given you?

I know he was baptized and pretty sure that was the end of his religious career but theoretically he was a Christian so still within your parameters.

jmccr8

No. Because this story was not setup in this fashion. You are mixed up with astrology.

1 hour ago, Tom1200 said:

So the story of Abraham isn't made up?  But I have on good authority - 

It doesnt revolve around eclipses but more complicated, visible events.

1 hour ago, Tom1200 said:

MAKE YOUR BLOODY MIND UP.  It's your theory / fantasy - at least be consistently crazy.

I am consistent you are simply putting words in my mouth.

1 hour ago, Tom1200 said:

Ask the flowers that got picked, or the ones that didn't?  

When this thread started I believed you earnestly thought you were on to something.  Now I just think you're on something.

Your loss.

1 hour ago, Tom1200 said:

Please - no.

Assuredly.

1 hour ago, Kenemet said:

You've really knocked holes in your idea right there.

If they couldn't see the eclipse (if it was over North America, which they didn't know existed or over the southern Pacific Ocean), then they couldn't have know there was an eclipse and they couldn't have calculated an eclipse table.  Hence it couldn't be encoded in anyone's mythology.

And if you're trying to prove astrology, that's been thoroughly debunked.  There wasn't just ONE person born during those vague swatches of time you're claiming...there were millions of people from many religions.

And none of this, by the way, links to the topic of this thread.

You are mixing things up.

1 you only need to understand cycles to work out the antediluvian timeline. No need for witnesses, you could do it from a monistary in the arctic. Any arbitrary time. Simply do math.

I am not proving astrology, i am proving astrotheology. Big difference. Astrotheology is more of a tool for timekeeping. It has no magical thinking. Basically it is science the term theology simply throws you of because God and stuff...

Agreed topic is drifting. But as of right now let's stick to this thread or I would need to create a new one simply 'astrotheology' but i donnu seems like we have a chat here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jmccr8
1 hour ago, Orestes_3113 said:

No. Because this story was not setup in this fashion.

Hi Orestes

Why not there must have been something in the sky that day how is it any less significant than when Adam was molded?

jmccr8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Trelane

He's tried to slap together some new age astrology "stuff" to connect Gobekli Tepe to other more recent ancient civilizations through the old testament. Of course this ignores sister sites to GT  and other, newer sites that have initially shown to be older. It's all nonsense from my point of view that has no bearing after reasonable examination.

Edited by Trelane
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kenemet
7 hours ago, Orestes_3113 said:

I am not proving astrology, i am proving astrotheology. Big difference. Astrotheology is more of a tool for timekeeping. It has no magical thinking. Basically it is science the term theology simply throws you of because God and stuff...

Except you haven't proven it.

These patterns do repeat.  They're patterns for the entire world and not just for one people. 

If they were true then this same event with local variations would be taking place all over the world.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ShadowSot

*peeks in thread*

*takes another shot of whiskey*

*closes thread*

  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Orestes_3113
5 hours ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Orestes

Why not there must have been something in the sky that day how is it any less significant than when Adam was molded?

jmccr8

If i write a story today, a record, based on data, and then reverse engineer the story to retreivd the data. THAT would work.

What you are proposing is astrology.

4 hours ago, Trelane said:

He's tried to slap together some new age astrology "stuff" to connect Gobekli Tepe to other more recent ancient civilizations through the old testament. Of course this ignores sister sites to GT  and other, newer sites that have initially shown to be older. It's all nonsense from my point of view that has no bearing after reasonable examination.

Opinions... opinions everyone has one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Orestes_3113
47 minutes ago, Kenemet said:

Except you haven't proven it.

These patterns do repeat.  They're patterns for the entire world and not just for one people. 

If they were true then this same event with local variations would be taking place all over the world.

You are talking astrology. I am talking construction. If I write here. Does it mean a certain person would write elsewhere?

Is not my creation unique? As an artist...

If I were to write a story set in the 70's. Integrate 70's eclipse seasons. Then spread the story far and wide. Would this story then become reality with time? How does that make any sense?

However no matter how much time has passed the story can be deconstructed to find the 70's eclipse seasons.

I might not have been born at the time of the story's setting... I might not be in the story  my name would never be known. Simply an unknown artist.

Did I then from a future perspective not exist? What would archaeology find? Evidence of me or the fictitious story? Would it date the 70's or the 20's? 

What then is more real? Or significant... The art or the artist?

Edited by Orestes_3113
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tom1200
2 hours ago, Orestes_3113 said:

You are talking astrology. I am talking construction. If I write here. Does it mean a certain person would write elsewhere?

Is not my creation unique? As an artist...

...

What then is more real? Or significant... The art or the artist?

Except you're not an artist.  You're an author of fiction.

So why not capitalize on this?  Trying writing an historical fiction set in ancient Judaea.  A great disaster is threatening the ancient Judaeans - famine, Philistines, farting frogs, anything - and the leaders need to invent a story to inspire the plebs.  So they summon together all the priests, astronomers, astrologers, astrotheologians, afrotheologians, gastroenterologists, magicians and wise women; to hammer out a good 'un.

They discover in the oral traditions there's a big gap where nothing much happens between Nabal 'knowing' Abigail, and Gandalf slaying the Balrog.  So they decide to insert a tale there based on the repetitive cycle of eclipses and stuff.  (This is where your extensive knowledge of bull$hit comes into its own - you can devote whole chapters to your crazy theories and maybe - just maybe - someone will believe it's real.)

I see this as a comedy.  Rather slapstick, with loads of gratuitous nudity thrown in.  But with a serious message carefully explained by Prince Orestes: the Cassandra of his time - always right but fated to be ridiculed and ignored.

In fact - hands off!  I'M gonna write it.  With LOADS of gratuitous nudity.  And NO boring sodding star charts, just more boobs.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Harte
1 hour ago, Tom1200 said:

In fact - hands off!  I'M gonna write it.  With LOADS of gratuitous nudity.  And NO boring sodding star charts, just more boobs.

Pics or it didn't happen.

Harte

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Orestes_3113

I am moving to a new thread, abandon ship...

See you there

 

  • Thanks 2

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.