Why "osiris" Didn't Exist Before The 5th Dynasty.

[Kenemet]

4 hours ago, cladking said:

https://www.religiousforums.com/proxy.php?image=https%3A%2F%2Fimages.newscientist.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F11%2Fmg30990701.jpg%3Fwidth%3D800&hash=390104d99a5ae76da34032f8bf5c982d

 

Not only do ancient texts specifically say there was one language but the exact same "language" is inscribed in caves all over the world.  

I would like to see some proof of that. 

Such things have been loosely proposed as an "idea generating hypothesis" (see Cave art & the origin of language (bradshawfoundation.com)) but even the founders admit that it's a very weak idea and don't seem to have a reasonable explanation of the process.  Given the large number of animal species that also have some form of language, it makes little sense to think that hominims existed in a communications vacuum and suddenly developed language about 70,000 years ago.

As for the religious texts saying there was one language, they are far too recent and far too biased in proving that THEIR own deity/deities gave language to humans.  The one you favor is one of the newer religions on the globe and clearly is quite wrong about things like the Tower of Babel.

[Thanos5150]

5 hours ago, Kenemet said:

You're not quite up to date on the historical material on writing and its forms.

"The oldest tablets date from the reign of Gudea of Lagash (2144-2124 B.C.). Other tablets appear to belong to the Ur III period, late 3rd millennium to early 2nd millennium B.C., including some tablets inscribed with dates ranging from 2063 to 2031 B.C "https://www.loc.gov/collections/cuneiform-tablets/about-this-collection/#:~:text=The oldest tablets date from,from 2063 to 2031 B.C.

"Ivory tags from tomb U-j. , one of the most ancient cities of Upper Egypt, 300 miles south of Cairo, have been dated between 3320 and 3150 BCE, making them the oldest known examples of Egyptian writing."https://www.historyofinformation.com/detail.php?id=3428#:~:text=Ivory tags from tomb U-j.&text=%2C one of the most ancient,known examples of Egyptian writing.

"The earliest known writing was invented there around 3400 B.C. in an area called Sumer near the Persian Gulf. The development of a Sumerian script was influenced by local materials: clay for tablets and reeds for styluses (writing tools)" https://www.getty.edu/news/where-did-writing-come-from/#:~:text=The earliest known writing was,for styluses (writing tools).

This was all pointed out to him 10yrs ago. 

His response: 

Thanks for all the info.

I'm simply stunned. I'm not sure I'm stunned more by my ignorance or by the fact that no one has pointed this out before on a dozen websites even after I said that such things don't exist. Sometimes it seems most of us are lost in our own little world and very little comes in or out.

Two weeks later he was repeating the same nonsense on another forum as if it never happened and never stops no matter how many times he is beaten down. Same thing, 2016

There are several examples older than Gudea, for example the Kesh Temple Hymn. Not to mention many examples of DE writing that not only well predates his 2000BC gobbledygook but contemporaneous with pyramid building of the OK like the Tomb of Debhen of the 4th Dynasty and Autobiography of Weni, 6th Dynasty. Which he knows full well. As an aside, both of which we note refer to pyramid building.  

This has been said for years and years now. He does not care. He is a fraud through and through and he knows it. He is a sad lonely person who wants nothing else than to bloviate his nonsense which he learned several years ago when he was getting ignored by both fringe and ortho alike the trick was to infuriate people by repeating the same moronic dishonest rhetoric over and over and over again to make people mad enough they could not help themselves. Cue @Hanslune. Turn away-you cannot defeat a man that does not have hope. 

“Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.”

He has no equal.     

Edited October 27, 2023 by Thanos5150

[cladking]

1 hour ago, Thanos5150 said:

This was all pointed out to him 10yrs ago. 

  

As typical your post is simply incredible!  ...all of it; incredible.  But this is exactly what I have come to expect from you.  

Yes, I responded with "thank you" because way back then I had assumed I could take what you posted at face value.  I assumed you put some real effort into citing material that was relevant to what I was saying and that you were wholly sincere.  

If you were being really honest you would have quoted the rest of my post where I explained why your links weren't relevant.  I spent an entire day researching every link I could find deriving from your links and found nothing at all relevant.  It was exactly 24 hours later that I posted and then you just -snipped- every relevant p[art of my post r4exactly as you -snip- all the facts, logic, and evidence that doesn't agree with you.  Do you or your buddy spend 24 hours looking into my posts.  NO.  Usually I get -snipped- and insulted, demeaned, and berated in mere moments.  Sometimes I am insulted within moments of entering a long post that you couldn't even have read far less researched. 

This is what I'm dealing with.  This low road behavior persists not just in the amateurs in Egyptology but the professionals as well.  There is simply doctrine and heresy and God help the heretics.  

Of course I don't expect any readers to go back and look and see that I am the one telling the truth here.  I don't expect anyone to question why once again people aren't responding on topic.  I don't expect anyone to see I'm right about osiris or the "w3s-sceptre".  I don't expect anyone to care about facts, logic, and evidence because none of this fits in with doctrine.  

 

17 years ago I believed that every reasonable person was more interested in truth than opinion.  Now I know why science changes one funeral at a time.  People are incapable of even entertaining different beliefs.  

Unfortunately the odds are my funeral will occur before I get to see science change.  But it will change because it is wrong.  It will change because the facts, logic, and evidence do not support current beliefs.  

 

[cladking]

1 hour ago, Kenemet said:

I would like to see some proof of that. 

Such things have been loosely proposed as an "idea generating hypothesis" (see Cave art & the origin of language (bradshawfoundation.com)) but even the founders admit that it's a very weak idea and don't seem to have a reasonable explanation of the process.  Given the large number of animal species that also have some form of language, it makes little sense to think that hominims existed in a communications vacuum and suddenly developed language about 70,000 years ago.

As for the religious texts saying there was one language, they are far too recent and far too biased in proving that THEIR own deity/deities gave language to humans.  The one you favor is one of the newer religions on the globe and clearly is quite wrong about things like the Tower of Babel.

Well, my heart isn't in it.  

This link says from 1800 BC that all men prayed in the same tongue in the past;

https://www.google.com/books/edition/I_Studied_Inscriptions_from_Before_the_F/g5MGVP6gAPkC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=The+Babel+of+Tongues:+A+Sumerian+Version&pg=PA278&printsec=frontcover

Of course there are numerous versions of the tower of babel.

The main reason I believe in it is logic but the last time I started a discussion about this I was harassed, insulted, and badgered until the thread was closed. 

Why reopen old wounds.  I've actually found a lot more good reasons to believe that there was one universal language in these intervening years.  I'd have added them to the thread.  

 

 

[Kenemet]

3 hours ago, cladking said:

Well, my heart isn't in it.  

This link says from 1800 BC that all men prayed in the same tongue in the past;

https://www.google.com/books/edition/I_Studied_Inscriptions_from_Before_the_F/g5MGVP6gAPkC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=The+Babel+of+Tongues:+A+Sumerian+Version&pg=PA278&printsec=frontcover

And I have an even older document that says fish and birds spoke to each other and had an argument: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate_between_bird_and_fish as well as a very famous document (still older than yours) that talks about a kingdom ruled by a kindly giant snake: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tale_of_the_Shipwrecked_Sailor

Are we really going to believe that the ancients didn't know how to craft a piece of fiction?

Waving a book that you claim is holy and saying "this is proof" isn't proof.  We know that people spoke different languages before 3000 BC and the differences in those languages means they diverged far in the past.  To find a universal language you have to go back to a time before humans left Africa.  That means that a common language among all humans would have existed at the time of our greatest genetic bottleneck, which is estimated to be about 900,000 years ago (https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abq7487#:~:text=Results showed that human ancestors,human ancestors close to extinction.)  With fewer than 3,000 humans, everyone would have had the same language.  But once they move away from that population center for a few generations and encounter new environments, the language changes (compare Spanish and Latin, both of which arose in the past 3,000 years.)

[cladking]

7 hours ago, Kenemet said:

And I have an even older document that says fish and birds spoke to each other and had an argument: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate_between_bird_and_fish as well as a very famous document (still older than yours) that talks about a kingdom ruled by a kindly giant snake: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tale_of_the_Shipwrecked_Sailor

Are we really going to believe that the ancients didn't know how to craft a piece of fiction?

There are those who are retranslating and reinterpreting Sumerian as well. I have no knowledge to be certain they are on the right path or not but many of their retranslations fit well with my theory.  Much more importantly though is that pidgin languages began arising as early as 3200 BC because more and more people could not master Ancient Language.  Imagine how complex a bird's song must be to describe quantum mechanics!!!! Birds can communicate accurate descriptions of individual humans with their existing languages but highly complex abstractions and experiment we are to assume are far beyond the ability of their language.  This is what happened to Ancient Language.  At first it was just a few dolts who couldn't master the language but as time went on more and more individuals were left adrift and pidgin languages arose naturally.  These shared the same vocabulary but were formatted like ours; we simply say what we mean rather than tie it to human knowledge, define the perspective, and follow a grammar that is logical and metaphysical.  Our language must be parsed but AL would lose its meaning when parsed.  Word  order and syntax made the words  powerful and contained knowledge making them the "Words of Theory" which we mistranslate as "the words of the gods".  

Writing was invented to communicate with those who couldn't use AL.  By 2100 BC this included most people, almost everyone including many very intelligent and capable people.  They used writing for many purposes.  

But the states simply couldn't maintain systems because too few people could speak Ancient Language.  Apparently even Merrer, a boat captain, in 2750 BC couldn't speak the language so imagine how difficult it was to have or capture enough AL speakers to operate the state by 2000 BC!!!  They had no choice but to change the language of state. 

It's quite apparent that G1 was a sort of time capsule to tell the future about human origins.  They wanted it to be found so they put it on a hill as a giant "X that marks the spot".  This was no holy site; it was the most important crossroads in all human history where ancient human species, proto-humans, and humans with complex language left Africa to attempt to colonize the world.  It was an oasis and the most important location in history and one of relatively few places that a great pyramid could be built.  

7 hours ago, Kenemet said:

We know that people spoke different languages before 3000 BC and the differences in those languages means they diverged far in the past. 

This is not true.  I maintain there were many mutually intelligible dialects of Ancient Language.  Then as pidgin languages arose these changed very quickly even over short times. 

7 hours ago, Kenemet said:

But once they move away from that population center for a few generations and encounter new environments, the language changes (compare Spanish and Latin, both of which arose in the past 3,000 years.)

Our languages are not tied to science and human knowledge.  Ancient Language was tied to the logic which is nature and this constituted a different type of science than what we use.  AL did not change whatsoever in its nature or formatting from the time "humans" arose 2 1/2 million years ago until it collapsed like a bird song.  The biggest change was when it became complex because of a mutation in a single individual about 40,000 years ago.  Reality didn't change and how people understood reality didn't change so Ancient Language didn't change and it was taken to every corner of the earth that man conquered.  

Edited October 27, 2023 by cladking

[Thanos5150]

8 hours ago, Kenemet said:

And I have an even older document that says fish and birds spoke to each other and had an argument: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate_between_bird_and_fish 

Part of the Sumerian literature theme of literary debate known as "disputations" of which several have been found dating to the mid/late 3rd millennium. 

Disputation Literature in the Near East and Beyond

There are tens of thousands of cuneiform tablets found dating to the 3rd millennium which contain various forms of literature. One of my favorites is the ENMERKAR AND THE LORD OF ARATTA. 

The earliest copies date to c. 2100BC, a few passages that may interest some: 

My sister, let Aratta fashion gold and silver skilfully on my behalf for Unug. Let them cut the flawless lapis lazuli from the blocks, let them ...... the translucence of the flawless lapis lazuli ....... ...... build a holy mountain in Unug. Let Aratta build a temple brought down from heaven -- your place of worship, the Shrine E-ana; let Aratta skillfully fashion the interior of the holy jipar, your abode; may I, the radiant youth, may I be embraced there by you. Let Aratta submit beneath the yoke for Unug on my behalf..."

...Enki, the lord of abundance and of steadfast decisions, the wise and knowing lord of the Land, the expert of the gods, chosen for wisdom, the lord of Eridug, shall change the speech in their mouths, as many as he had placed there, and so the speech of mankind is truly one."

Sound familiar? Like most Biblical stories the origins are found in the tales of other cultures, namely Mesopotamia and in at least one instance Egypt, well predating not only the Hebrew tales but the existence of the Hebrews themselves. No doubt it was not lost on later Hebrew scribes, probably common knowledge, that the "holy mountain/temple" was most certainly a ziggurat, i.e. "Tower of Babylon".

Quote

Are we really going to believe that the ancients didn't know how to craft a piece of fiction?

The Earth is not flat either. 

[Spiros]

On 10/24/2023 at 6:40 PM, Kenemet said:

"In the Late Period, probably under Mesopotamian influence, the sequence of the planets as well as their religious associations could change; at least one source links Saturn with the Sun god, Mars with Miysis, Mercury with Thot, Venus with Horus, son of Isis, and Jupiter with Amun, arranging the planets with those considered negative in astrology first, separated from the positive ones by the vacillating Mercury" 

from Planets in Ancient Egypt | Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Planetary Science

 

Yes but when I refer to the Egyptians I am referring to either the IV dynasty Egyptians or the Egyptians around the V dynasty when the first pyramid texts were formulated. Later due to external influences different ideas seem to have arose. My understanding is that Saturn did not represent the Sun, Saturn was called the Midnight Sun. Of the planets known to AE, Saturn is the farthest and is the one most probable to be seen around midnight or during the Night, not early morning or late afternoon. In the modern encoding that I have documented in my webpage, Saturn has that role, being close to the Meridian around Midnight. Miysis was an Egyptian god who having the form of a lion would easily be related to the god of was Ares and to the color red of Mars via blood. It is no mystery. The planet Mercury is similar, both in surface appearance and composition and also size. Thoth in Hellenic actually gives us the orbital period of Mercury.

 

ΘΟΘ = 9+70+9 = 88

orbital period of Mercury =  87.9691 days

 

Amun was the god of Thebes and the pyramids of Giza were planned based on Hellenic Thebes. Zeus - Jupiter was the king of the gods and this planet being the largest one and very bright could only be related to a god worshiped in Thebes which was then the capital of Egypt. Associating Venus with Horus on the other hand does not make a lot of sense.  

Edited October 27, 2023 by Spiros

[Wepwawet]

14 minutes ago, Spiros said:

My understanding is that Saturn did not represent the Sun, Saturn was called the Midnight Sun.

 

The "Sun" at night was the Moon, usually with the name of Iah, and sometimes referred to as the Silver Aten. The Moon was also probably the morning star to the AE as well, but this is not 100% clear.

Edited October 27, 2023 by Wepwawet

[Kenemet]

7 hours ago, Spiros said:

My understanding is that Saturn did not represent the Sun, Saturn was called the Midnight Sun.

Not in any source I've ever seen.

Quote

Miysis was an Egyptian god who having the form of a lion would easily be related to the god of was Ares and to the color red of Mars via blood. 

There's no color associated with Miysis.  Red was associated with Set - and Amun isn't Ares.

[Kenemet]

10 hours ago, cladking said:

There are those who are retranslating and reinterpreting Sumerian as well. I have no knowledge to be certain they are on the right path or not but many of their retranslations fit well with my theory. 

Are we taking bets on this?

Quote

Much more importantly though is that pidgin languages began arising as early as 3200 BC because more and more people could not master Ancient Language.

You don't get languages diverging that much in a mere 6,000 years.  And in order to have a pidgin language (which develops over multiple generations but is clearly associated with its primary sources), you have to have two unrelated languages.  You aren't going to find a pidgin language developing from American English and British English.

Quote

 Imagine how complex a bird's song must be to describe quantum mechanics!!!! Birds can communicate accurate descriptions of individual humans with their existing languages but highly complex abstractions and experiment we are to assume are far beyond the ability of their language.

They can't relay that information in song (and songs aren't THAT varied.  If you're talking about crows recognizing people, it's because they yell at their families to "come hither" and then show them the human and yell at (or about) the human to their flock.

Quote

  This is what happened to Ancient Language.  At first it was just a few dolts who couldn't master the language but as time went on more and more individuals were left adrift and pidgin languages arose naturally.  These shared the same vocabulary but were formatted like ours; we simply say what we mean rather than tie it to human knowledge, define the perspective, and follow a grammar that is logical and metaphysical.  Our language must be parsed but AL would lose its meaning when parsed.  Word  order and syntax made the words  powerful and contained knowledge making them the "Words of Theory" which we mistranslate as "the words of the gods".  

Writing was invented to communicate with those who couldn't use AL.  By 2100 BC this included most people, almost everyone including many very intelligent and capable people.  They used writing for many purposes.  

 

And this, like the rest of your idea, simply doesn't work.

[Spiros]

26 minutes ago, Kenemet said:

Not in any source I've ever seen.

There's no color associated with Miysis.  Red was associated with Set - and Amun isn't Ares.

https://www.ub.edu/ipoa/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/20132AuOrVanderSluijs.pdf

Saturn as the “Sun of Night” in Ancient Near Eastern Tradition - Marinus Anthony van der Sluijs – Seongna Peter James

 

This idea doesn't seem to have originated in Egypt but might have spread there later on. Saturn in Egypt was called Horus the Bull of Heaven. Even though Red was associated with Set this doesn't mean that a color can only be associated with one god. None the less as noted all these associations relate to external influences on Egyptian religion. I didn't understand your reference to Amun, I never said Amun had anything to do with Ares.  

 

 

[cladking]

45 minutes ago, Kenemet said:

Are we taking bets on this?

This is Madeleine Daines.  I really don't understand her work that well since I know very little Sumerian even in a translated form.  But there are numerous concordances with my work and similarities of meaning.  I strongly suspect at least some of her insights are spot on.  I think she may have solved the language directly where my work is much more indirect.  

50 minutes ago, Kenemet said:

You don't get languages diverging that much in a mere 6,000 years.  And in order to have a pidgin language (which develops over multiple generations but is clearly associated with its primary sources), you have to have two unrelated languages. 

I use the word "pidgin" for lack of a better word.  There was one single language and it was spoken everywhere.  Dialects existed but are irrelevant because they were each mutually intelligible.  

What happened with Ancient Language is that it became overly complex.  If we don't understand our own language we can just use little words and use them wrong and it doesn't matter too much.  But if you didn't keep up with science in Ancient Language the use of even one single wrong word or a tiny error in grammar rendered the sentence wholly intelligible. Listeners heard word soup.  Those who couldn't understand/ speak AL were at a severe disadvantage everywhere but still needed to communicate with one another and the state needed to communicate with all people.  This gave rise starting in 3200 BC to a cobbled language that was formatted just like English but used the same vocabulary as AL.  Communication would have been exceedingly poor for centuries only in part because the first speakers were dolts and slower individuals.  It was the lack of vocabulary that really put a wrench into communications.  This problem eased as the centuries went by and more abstractions were invented.  The splintering of language in the early centuries would have been extreme even after the dissolution of Ancient Language in 2000 BC.  At this time there was such a severe shortage of AL speakers governments had no choice but to change the official world language to the pidgin languages that were used locally.  

Languages continue to splinter and evolve and nowhere is there an effort to prevent it. This is probably because language remains a mess and more changes are required to communicate properly.  You can take my word on it, nobody ever hears quite what you say.  Everyone hears something different and no one ever takes your meaning exactly no matter how carefully, precisely, and accurately you craft a sentence.  It's just not going to happen.

1 hour ago, Kenemet said:

If you're talking about crows recognizing people, it's because they yell at their families to "come hither" and then show them the human and yell at (or about) the human to their flock.

I am told that this isn't true:  That they separate crows to be sure it's not mere pointing.  I don't know.  I know I got "murdered" once by crows.  I had done absolutely nothing to any of them but I had been draining a swamp so I suspect it was a case of mistaken identity.  Be that as it may birds can demonstrate remarkable intelligence and ability to communicate.  

 

[Wepwawet]

6 hours ago, Spiros said:

https://www.ub.edu/ipoa/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/20132AuOrVanderSluijs.pdf

Saturn as the “Sun of Night” in Ancient Near Eastern Tradition - Marinus Anthony van der Sluijs – Seongna Peter James

 

This idea doesn't seem to have originated in Egypt but might have spread there later on. Saturn in Egypt was called Horus the Bull of Heaven. Even though Red was associated with Set this doesn't mean that a color can only be associated with one god. None the less as noted all these associations relate to external influences on Egyptian religion. I didn't understand your reference to Amun, I never said Amun had anything to do with Ares.  

 

 

In the paper, as well as refering to Saturn as "Horus the Bull of Heaven", they make one reference, in a note, seemingly equating Saturn to the Sun:

"Ḥr-pɜ-kɜ pɜ siw pɜ-R‘, ‘Horus the Bull, that is the star of the Sun"

At face value this does indeed look like they are equating Saturn with the Sun, but if this were really meant, then the last part of the text would read as jtn, not R‘ as jtn or Aten as we know it, is the actual Sun, Ra, while being part of the conglomerate that is the Sungod, has a separate existance from the physical Sun, the Aten, so the text is about equating Saturn with Ra the god and not the actual Sun. I know, it sounds like splitting hairs and semantics, but really it's not.

[Wepwawet]

6 hours ago, cladking said:

I am told that this isn't true:  That they separate crows to be sure it's not mere pointing.  I don't know.  I know I got "murdered" once by crows.  I had done absolutely nothing to any of them but I had been draining a swamp so I suspect it was a case of mistaken identity.  Be that as it may birds can demonstrate remarkable intelligence and ability to communicate.  

 

John Marzluff of the University of Washington would strongly disagree with you. Marzluff is one of the pre-eminent experts on corvids, particularly crows, and it was he and his students who conducted the first experiments at Seattle that showed that crows could recognize faces and pass this information on to other crows. The video is a very short part of a much longer one, and, for further information I recommend his book "Gifts of the Crow", also "Mind of the Raven" by Bernd Heinrich.

 

[Thanos5150]

13 hours ago, cladking said:

This is Madeleine Daines.  I really don't understand her work that well since I know very little Sumerian even in a translated form. 

Madeleine absolutely loathes you (as most everyone else) and cringes at the thought of your support made even worse by the fact you are just about the only person that does. You do not understand any of what she is saying and the only reason you say the nonsense you do is because in your mind "like you" she is "re-translating" a language and therefore are "kindred spirits". 

Quote

But there are numerous concordances with my work and similarities of meaning.

There are absolutely none which she would be the first to tell you and probably has. 

Quote

  I strongly suspect at least some of her insights are spot on. 

So far as I can see none are and far from it, but how TF would you know? You do not understand or even check her work let alone know one whit about cuneiform- you just divine this to be true, again, for no other reason than you think she is "like you" reinterpreting a language which nothing could be farther from the truth. 

Quote

I think she may have solved the language directly where my work is much more indirect. 

This is so stupid and dishonest. She has solved nothing which if there were one thing you two do have in common is that her "work" has been rejected by anyone who understands it which obviously excludes you.

More direct you say? To her credit at least, she looks at the cuneiform words, their root words, and meanings in the ETSL and picks whatever to make a narrative. You, the indirect one, do not look at anything other than the English translations which if it could not get any dumber you say are all wrong anyways. 

For some Daines flavor, an exchange between her and myself:

> Now let's address the important part: the
> scepticism to my method. I think we can both agree
> that you know strictly zilch about Sumerian apart
> from the academic translations that you have read
> like everyone else.

And neither do you as you cannot read the language and rely on English translations found in a dictionary-just like everyone else. How bizarre you think this gives you some kind of special consideration or expertise. But unlike me, you have the extra bonus of being completely clueless as to their actual history hence why you feel qualified to re-imagine it however you see fit regardless of reality....

[snip]

I am not interested. Your "work" is summarily ignored and/or rejected by laymen and professionals alike and yet you place the blame of no one accepting your tortured genius at the feet of everyone else but yourself. Again, no wonder Cladking finds you such a kindred spirit.
 

A sample of her "work": 

You:
By day, the deluge. That distant day, the deluge. By night, the deluge. That endless night, the
deluge. In that age, the deluge. That bygone age, the deluge.

Traditional translation:
In those days, in those far remote days, in those nights, in those faraway nights, in those years, in those far remote years, at that time the wise one who knew how to speak in elaborate words lived in the Land; Curuppag, the wise one, who knew how to speak with elaborate words lived in the Land.
 

More upon request. 

Edited October 28, 2023 by Thanos5150

[Spiros]

7 hours ago, Wepwawet said:

In the paper, as well as refering to Saturn as "Horus the Bull of Heaven", they make one reference, in a note, seemingly equating Saturn to the Sun:

"Ḥr-pɜ-kɜ pɜ siw pɜ-R‘, ‘Horus the Bull, that is the star of the Sun"

At face value this does indeed look like they are equating Saturn with the Sun, but if this were really meant, then the last part of the text would read as jtn, not R‘ as jtn or Aten as we know it, is the actual Sun, Ra, while being part of the conglomerate that is the Sungod, has a separate existance from the physical Sun, the Aten, so the text is about equating Saturn with Ra the god and not the actual Sun. I know, it sounds like splitting hairs and semantics, but really it's not.

The meaning of aten in Egyptian was disk. That is why we also find the Moon called silver Aten. But how can a disk relate to a star which is a shiny point in the sky. A star, observationally is not a disk. On the other hand Ra refers specifically to the Sun at Noon. This way if we take the opposite, this would have to be a star at Midnight. A star(a point) is the "opposite" of a disk. What is the best wandering star for this? Saturn. I think this was the way they were thinking about it.   

[cladking]

1 hour ago, Thanos5150 said:

Madeleine absolutely loathes you (as most everyone else) and cringes at the thought of your support made even worse by the fact you are just about the only person that does. You do not understand any of what she is saying and the only reason you say the nonsense you do is because in your mind "like you" she is "re-translating" a language and therefore are "kindred spirits". 

Some of what you say is true but wholly irrelevant.  

I'm the only person supports her because her work supports mine.  I am well aware my support helps her not at all.  But I'm also well aware that no one will support her with or without my support.  

1 hour ago, Thanos5150 said:

There are absolutely none which she would be the first to tell you and probably has. 

You're wrong on both counts.  

1 hour ago, Thanos5150 said:

So far as I can see none are and far from it, but how TF would you know? You do not understand or even check her work let alone know one whit about cuneiform- you just divine this to be true, again, for no other reason than you think she is "like you" reinterpreting a language which nothing could be farther from the truth. 

I read her work.  As I said I don't understand a lot of it and she hasn't delineated the specific deductions or inductions she has made to my knowledge.  

It is ONLY the results of her work I support because I do not understand her methodology. 

I fully and completely understand Egyptological methodology and it is illogical, non sequitur, and assumptive. Good methodology can not assure correct results but bad methodology virtually demands bad results.  Egyptology has bad results.  Osiris arose suddenly not because ancient superstitions arose suddenly but because the water source named "osiris" disappeared suddenly. No amount of comparing the words to the book of the dead can affect these equations.  

There simply is no defense for the methods employed by Egyptology NOR for their refusal to employ modern science to determining the nature of the artefacts.  NO DEFENSE.  It is anti-science anti-reason and anti-human.

1 hour ago, Thanos5150 said:

her "work" has been rejected by anyone who understands it which obviously excludes you.

Yes.  I do not understand her methodology nor her source material.  I believe she is essentially correct and Egyptologists are wrong about every single thing.  

1 hour ago, Thanos5150 said:

And neither do you as you cannot read the language and rely on English translations found in a dictionary-just like everyone else.

You are wrong.  I have begun "translating" the language.  If you ever read I wrote you'd know that I've said many times that it is IMPOSSIBLE to translate Ancient Language.  This will always be true even during those times I don't say it and until long after I'm gone.  It can't be translated. I have interpreted the meaning in ways that allows me to make predictions like the thermal anomaly I predicted years before it was found and then campaigned to get them to look for it.  In this very thread I predicted the side striped jackal is represented by the w3s-sceptre which controlled the howling of the djed. This is the first time in 4000 years this has been known. You can now argue about the meaning of the word "known" but the fact is if and when I'm shown to be right it will still have been first shown right here in 2023. 

Egyptologists who believe they know the meaning of superstition don't even know what the "ankh" represents!  It's the most important symbol that means "life" (itself) and they don't know how it originated.  I DO!  I know what quite a bit about what a few of the logograms represent but importantly I can interpret the meaning of the language which, remember, can never be translated.  

I suspect that Sumerian is exactly the same; it can not be translated merely interpreted.  Indeed, it is probably just a different dialect of the exact same language.  This would explain its remarkable similarities of meaning to Egyptian per Daines.  

1 hour ago, Thanos5150 said:

I am not interested. Your "work" is summarily ignored and/or rejected by laymen and professionals alike and yet you place the blame of no one accepting your tortured genius at the feet of everyone else but yourself. Again, no wonder Cladking finds you such a kindred spirit.

It is wholly unfair to her to compare her work or methodology to mine.  She could be entirely right while I'm entirely wrong.  The only thing we have in common is that I believe her results are correct.  

 

 

You want it to seem like it's only Daines and myself reinterpreting everything but you don't notice there are others such as Morrow. 

Ironically you also don't notice that Egyptologists also completely revolutionize the translation every generation!   Now days the most respected translator doesn't even translate into English but rather something that looks a lot like English.  

What we need is some genius who can translate Allen into English but I'd wager this will always be impossible too.  

Jeesh!

Edited October 28, 2023 by cladking

[Wepwawet]

1 hour ago, Spiros said:

The meaning of aten in Egyptian was disk. That is why we also find the Moon called silver Aten. But how can a disk relate to a star which is a shiny point in the sky. A star, observationally is not a disk. On the other hand Ra refers specifically to the Sun at Noon. This way if we take the opposite, this would have to be a star at Midnight. A star(a point) is the "opposite" of a disk. What is the best wandering star for this? Saturn. I think this was the way they were thinking about it.   

Yes it's true that aten is disc, but in the context of heavenly bodies it is the Sun, or Moon at night. My thinking is that if they saw Saturn as a form of the Sun as a heavenly body irrespective of it being at night, then they would have called it Aten, maybe with a determinitive. So to me, equating Saturn with Ra implies they are seeing it not as a heavenly body in the way that the Sun and Moon are, but as a manfestation of Ra, with a stronger emphasis on Horus. So I don't see them equating Saturn with the Sun, also because they saw the stars as akhs essentially existing in the Duat in the heavens, and the Sun at night, not the Moon, is seen as the corpse of Ra traveling through the Duat. If anything, a fixed point in the night opposite the noon Sun would be Osiris halfway through the night, not Ra, though he is with Osiris at that point, but the text is not about the Solar Osirian Unity.

Edited October 28, 2023 by Wepwawet
syntax

[jmccr8]

40 minutes ago, cladking said:

Some of what you say is true but wholly irrelevant.  

I'm the only person supports her because her work supports mine.  I am well aware my support helps her not at all.  But I'm also well aware that no one will support her with or without my support.  

You're wrong on both counts.  

I read her work.  As I said I don't understand a lot of it and she hasn't delineated the specific deductions or inductions she has made to my knowledge.  

It is ONLY the results of her work I support because I do not understand her methodology. 

I fully and completely understand Egyptological methodology and it is illogical, non sequitur, and assumptive. Good methodology can not assure correct results but bad methodology virtually demands bad results.  Egyptology has bad results.  Osiris arose suddenly not because ancient superstitions arose suddenly but because the water source named "osiris" disappeared suddenly. No amount of comparing the words to the book of the dead can affect these equations.  

There simply is no defense for the methods employed by Egyptology NOR for their refusal to employ modern science to determining the nature of the artefacts.  NO DEFENSE.  It is anti-science anti-reason and anti-human.

Yes.  I do not understand her methodology nor her source material.  I believe she is essentially correct and Egyptologists are wrong about every single thing.  

You are wrong.  I have begun "translating" the language.  If you ever read I wrote you'd know that I've said many times that it is IMPOSSIBLE to translate Ancient Language.  This will always be true even during those times I don't say it and until long after I'm gone.  It can't be translated. I have interpreted the meaning in ways that allows me to make predictions like the thermal anomaly I predicted years before it was found and then campaigned to get them to look for it.  In this very thread I predicted the side striped jackal is represented by the w3s-sceptre which controlled the howling of the djed. This is the first time in 4000 years this has been known. You can now argue about the meaning of the word "known" but the fact is if and when I'm shown to be right it will still have been first shown right here in 2023. 

Egyptologists who believe they know the meaning of superstition don't even know what the "ankh" represents!  It's the most important symbol that means "life" (itself) and they don't know how it originated.  I DO!  I know what quite a bit about what a few of the logograms represent but importantly I can interpret the meaning of the language which, remember, can never be translated.  

I suspect that Sumerian is exactly the same; it can not be translated merely interpreted.  Indeed, it is probably just a different dialect of the exact same language.  This would explain its remarkable similarities of meaning to Egyptian per Daines.  

It is wholly unfair to her to compare her work or methodology to mine.  She could be entirely right while I'm entirely wrong.  The only thing we have in common is that I believe her results are correct.  

 

 

You want it to seem like it's only Daines and myself reinterpreting everything but you don't notice there are others such as Morrow. 

Ironically you also don't notice that Egyptologists also completely revolutionize the translation every generation!   Now days the most respected translator doesn't even translate into English but rather something that looks a lot like English.  

What we need is some genius who can translate Allen into English but I'd wager this will always be impossible too.  

Jeesh!

Hi Clad

Awful lot of words to say you don't know what she is talking about to compliment that you don't know what you are taking about.

[Antigonos]

8 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Clad

Awful lot of words to say you don't know what she is talking about to compliment that you don't know what you are taking about.

That’s him in a nutshell.

[cladking]

28 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Clad

Awful lot of words to say you don't know what she is talking about to compliment that you don't know what you are taking about.

Then how did I predict the thermal anomaly?

How can I explain the tiny inlet on the Khentkawes cistern?

How can I explain all the physical evidence?

Why does the literal meaning of the PT support my theory?

How can all those typos and grammatical errors Egyptologists see chiseled into stone just disappear in my interpretation? 

How can I keep making progress over such a short time while Egyptological beliefs are unchanged in 200 years? 

How can I know the sceptres and icons while Egyptology still believes they are based on magic because of a book of incantation translated and interpreted from an highly anachronistic source?

 

 

 

Edited October 28, 2023 by cladking

[cladking]

1 minute ago, cladking said:

How can I keep making progress over such a short time while Egyptological beliefs are unchanged in 200 years? 

My theory has evolved from walls built around a water source with crude sleds going up and down rough 52 degree surfaces to a water source at 81' 3" used to lift stones on 70 degree surfaces one step at a time.

Meanwhile Egyptological theory has gone from they mustta used ramps to they mustta used ramps; hey, do any Egyptologists have any clue why we found these hot spots.  

 

Egyptology can never make progress with their backs turned to the pyramids while parsing a book of incantation.  This is patently obvious!!! Egyptological methodology is an insult to science and reason. If they had been using science and reason in the 20th century rather than prestidigitation and ouija boards we wouldn't be having this conversation because we'd have answers instead of mysteries.  Oh imagine, what new mysteries might arise if we only knew how and why the pyramids were built!!!

[jmccr8]

7 minutes ago, cladking said:

Then how did I predict the thermal anomaly?

How can I explain the tiny inlet on the Khentkawes cistern?

How can I explain all the physical evidence?

Why does the literal meaning of the PT support my theory?

How can all those typos and grammatical errors Egyptologists see chiseled into stone just disappear in my interpretation? 

How can I keep making progress over such a short time while Egyptological beliefs are unchanged in 200 years? 

How can I know the sceptres and icons while Egyptology still believes they are based on magic because of a book of incantation translated and interpreted from an highly anachronistic source?

 

 

 

Hi Clad

Seeing as you are your own and all alone peer review you can be anything you imagine. Now if only you could get someone to agree with you even in the fringe circles would be intetesting.

[cladking]

Just now, jmccr8 said:

Now if only you could get someone to agree with you even in the fringe circles would be intetesting.

You do realize that if I'm right someday even an Egyptologist will find proof of it.  It could be anything as "insignificant" as hot spots where I predicted them to the discovery of carbonated water in the Osiris Shaft.  Eventually something will be found that can't just be ignored.  They recently found the "Nurse Canal" I predicted behind the chevrons for instance.  How will they explain away the quartz sand of 1 to 100 microns of partially rounded grains contaminated with vaterite which is only found in geysers when they finally do science here in a century or two?  This sand is the reason that the north side shows regions of high density.  There is also a calcium carbonate stuck everywhere such as between stones causing high density.  There are entrances to the pyramid mentioned in the ancient literature that are very detailed as to their locations outside Zahi's wall.  Egyptology will change whether it comes from within or without.  There are many many fields from which this can arise because as I say everything is connected to everything else.  

I no longer expect to get any support until I am proven correct but that day gets closer all the time.  

It's not just physical evidence that can blow the lid off this.  There is also logic and seemingly unrelated experiment.  

My theory makes countless thousands of easily tested predictions and the news will continue to cast doubt on Egyptological opinions while supporting mine.  

 

Since everyone forgot I'll remind them that the Nurse Canal is the first section of the winding watercourse in the M3.t-wt.t-Cow where the firepan burned summoning those with ready hands. Much of the rest of the winding watercourse survives and will leave evidence for hot spots, copper hydroxide, and calcium carbonate deposition as well as some of the most interesting substances on earth. We know nothing at all about much of anything at all.  The Great Pyramid builders were highly knowledgeable about some subjects that are wholly unknown to us.