The Sumerian King List Spans for Over 241,000 Years Before a Great Flood

originally posted by: RifRAAF
a reply to: Aedaeum

Yes I find it extremely hard to understand how anyone can interpret the bible literally. It actually pains me.

You trust a book translated thru 3 ot 4 languages (Aramaic or Hebrew, Greek, Latin then English) ....

While some of that went on, you are overstating the case. The vast majority of the Bible, especially the smaller canon of the Protestants, is translated directly from the original languages, and from text forms very close to the original texts. Other ancient translations are consulted when the original is obscure but, except for a few disputed books, they do not form the base of the translation.

Uh...

en.m.wikipedia.org...

You are completely wrong, but a for your conviction.

a reply to: HomerinNC

Excellent post. This is what I was taught as well.

a reply to: ElohimJD

originally posted by: TheLegend
a reply to: Amagnon

Jupiter once a red dwarf star?

The smallest known red dwarf star is 80x the mass of Jupiter and if Jupiter once was a red dwarf, but changed, then it would likely be a white or black dwarf by now.

Jupiter and Saturn cannot be stars because Sol is draining most of the available plasma, so they dont have enough voltage to go into plasma glow, or plasma arc - so they remain planets.

Mass is not relevant when considering a star, what is relevant is how strong the current is - thats determined by available plasma, and the current density. Measurements of stellar masses by modern methods will always be wrong because gravity is misunderstood.

Estimates of how long a year was prior to the flood difficult to even theorize about - some estimate it was around 24hrs - this is due to comparison of the rotational period of Mars and Earth - personally I think it was longer than that.

originally posted by: Astyanax
THE SOLUTION TO THIS MYSTERY HAS ALREADY BEEN POSTED TWICE IN THE THREAD. WHY IS EVERYONE IGNORING IT?

This is simply using normalcy bias to try and alter evidence as it appears - this is dismissive of the historical record. It also ignores so many other pieces of evidence, and hangs the entire conclusion on a single premise.

There is a great deal of information that indicates that conditions on earth were extremely different in the time before the flood - geology and paleontology both show us that the earth was a vastly different place in the past. it is only normalcy bias that continues to drive the narrative that the solar system is constant and always has been.

The changing of the rising sun from east to west, the change in the length of a day, month and year are recorded worldwide in many ancient texts - celestial events occurred many times - and the 'stars went out of their courses' is a statement repeated by peoples in very different locations.

If we have a look at the calendars used by ancient peoples, we find a great variation - people who show advanced math and techniques to determine things accurately seemingly make terrible errors in determining the length of a year, or even a month - these were not errors, the earth was moving around as a result of contacts with Venus and Mars.

Before these things occurred, the earth circled Saturn - most often referred to as the 'Superior Sun' - or the 'Greater Sun' - represented by a cross, or celestial wheel. We often see the image of the sun represented as a wheel, or cross - but it certainly doesnt look that way today. These were faithful representations of what the 'sun' (Saturn) actually looked like - the great spokes were plumes of plasma. This was the Golden Age - the time before the flood, when the earth revolved around Saturn - Chronus the time keeper, the superior sun.

This was why so much effort was put into ancient astronomy, and places like Stone Henge - because they had to work out the length of days, seasons and locations all over again - because everything had changed.

a reply to: Harte

What exactly does Anunna translate to? Again the first thing I come across in the net is what I ran into previously, but whichever is the very first word is important.

A recent and comprehensive study of the term Anunna is still lacking; such a study is made more difficult by the term having slightly different meanings in different time periods.

Remember this is all about who the first gods were, it appears Anunna were the highest gods, but we want to know how the gods got there. I wouldn't be questioning this if we didn't have places like Gobekli Tepe, Lake Titcaca, Easter Island, and all of the sunken underwater monuments on earth, yet I wouldn't even be questioning it if these monuments weren't mysterious.

Right away we run into our first contradiction. So they were the highest gods yet they were not worshiped that much. We have too much physical evidence to not realize that something is missing to the puzzle of tablets, something big.

The suggestion that in the Sumerian textual corpus, Anunna are only mentioned in literary texts and that there is no evidence for their worship (Falkenstein 1965)

a reply to: RifRAAF

"anythingally" ... really? I'm going to assume you're a bit juvenile to even be debating what you want to claim to be your "peoples" belief. Also, stating that you speak on behalf of "your" people, is of more insult to them then anything I have said regarding my own personal beliefs. What I believe does not impact the Jewish people and therefore cannot offend.

I actually feel sorry for you, that you take an ideology as a personal offense to your own preconceived notions of your faith. Seeing how all faith is wrought out of personal deduction through experience, no one has a claim over any specific ideology; they are nothing more then concepts. Being offended by a product of the mind, which has no influence over you in any way, is inconceivable by its very nature.

originally posted by: greyer
a reply to: Harte

What exactly does Anunna translate to? Again the first thing I come across in the net is what I ran into previously, but whichever is the very first word is important.

A recent and comprehensive study of the term Anunna is still lacking; such a study is made more difficult by the term having slightly different meanings in different time periods.

The problem with translating the term is that it was used in obviously different ways over time. A literal translation would be something like "offspring of Anu" or "Children of Anu," or "family of Anu."

The Anunna (as well as the Anunnaki) were not the same group of gods throughout Mesopotamian history. The term was used in place of Igigi sometimes, and it was also applied to specific places (The Anunna of Uruk versus the Anunna of Gish or whatever.)

The accepted translation is just "of princely blood," referring to divine princely descendency.

originally posted by: greyer
Remember this is all about who the first gods were, it appears Anunna were the highest gods, but we want to know how the gods got there.

The main gods were here before the Earth was created (they created it) and the others were considered born here later, as children of those first gods.

It's obvious why the Annuna are the "first gods." They are the gods of the first people to develop written language so they are the earliest we can know anything about. Obviously, there were other gods before - the mother goddess comes to mind.

originally posted by: greyerI wouldn't be questioning this if we didn't have places like Gobekli Tepe, Lake Titcaca, Easter Island, and all of the sunken underwater monuments on earth, yet I wouldn't even be questioning it if these monuments weren't mysterious.

Gobekli Tepe is an example of what appears to be an entirely different theology from the Mesopotamian, what with all the animal carvings there.
Cultures around Titicaca post date Sumer by thousands of years so I don't get your reference. Easter Island as well.

originally posted by: greyerRight away we run into our first contradiction. So they were the highest gods yet they were not worshiped that much. We have too much physical evidence to not realize that something is missing to the puzzle of tablets, something big.

The Anunna gods were worshipped for four thousand freakin years, man. What the heck are you on about here?

originally posted by: greyer

The suggestion that in the Sumerian textual corpus, Anunna are only mentioned in literary texts and that there is no evidence for their worship (Falkenstein 1965)

The Annuna represent a collection of gods. The individual gods were worshipped but the term Anunna was the collective. No, the group as a whole was not worshipped, they were never even named in a list. Likely because the term itself was a collective and they didn't worship collectives, only individuals.

Harte

a reply to: Harte

WTF??? When did you get 31,150,000 stars? I remember you had like a few thousand and at 3k posts a year ago. I recall you said you joined before stars were given (which is why I remember the puny amount). You have barely any topics to tally up that high and I just took random samples from your posts this year and it averages out to 2 stars a post.

I'm calling conspiracy here. Either system error, hack, or you turned shill.

5,700 stars per post is what you should have. That's not even possible.

Tell me the secret brother so I might share in the spoils.

ETA: Thanks for answer below, Zazz. Harte has a good heart indeed.

a reply to: TheLegend

There is a glitch in the system that I emailed Bill on, ive noticed the same, its not Hartes fault, its to do with starring pre 2004 or 06 posts.

originally posted by: TheLegend
a reply to: Harte



WTF??? When did you get 31,150,000 stars? I remember you had like a few thousand and at 3k posts a year ago. I even recall you said that you joined before stars were given (which is why I remember you had a puny amount). You have barely any topics to tally up that high and I just took random samples from your posts this year and it averages out to 2 stars a post.



I'm calling conspiracy here. Either system error, hack, or you turned shill.



5,700 stars per post is what you should have. That's not even possible.



Tell me the secret brother so I might share in the spoils.

LOL!!

What, you expected me to complain?

I believe, but I've not looked into it, that the stars are points in the old point system here.

I had a lot of points - I wrote an entry or two for the old wiki page here (Tinwiki) and got gobs of them for that. That's my theory.

If you draw any more attention to it and the admins take them away, then I'll hack in and steal some back from you!

Harte

originally posted by: zazzafrazz
a reply to: TheLegend

There is a glitch in the system that I emailed Bill on, ive noticed the same, its not Hartes fault, its to do with starring pre 2004 or 06 posts.

Thanks a lot. Now you've sucked the nice right out of me.

And, as you know, I was already running dangerously low!

Harte

a reply to: Harte
oh i emailed him weeks ago! not because of you

a reply to: Amagnon

I find a lot of these claims extremely interesting (the Earth spinning on it's axis in a different direction, orbiting Saturn instead of the sun, Mars and Venus impacting).

Could you possibly link some sources to those claims? I would like to read about them.

a reply to: Amagnon

You mean, you don't like my interpretation because it deflates your mysticograndilosuperfragilisticulous fantasies.

originally posted by: eriktheawful
a reply to: Amagnon

I find a lot of these claims extremely interesting (the Earth spinning on it's axis in a different direction, orbiting Saturn instead of the sun, Mars and Venus impacting).

Could you possibly link some sources to those claims? I would like to read about them.

The best starting source is Immanuel Velikovky's book - "Worlds in Collision" - he does not discuss the ET angle, and assumes that the gods of men were the celestial bodies. Velikovsky's work is superlatively annotated - with hundreds of references - this is a scholarly work of high standard.

Velikovsky lacked a theoretical basis for explaining the movements and behaviors of these bodies, as their behavior conflicted with the understanding of gravity, stellar formation and so on - since then the Electric Universe Theory, which is based on observations of the behavior of plasma's has been steadily breaking down the physics behind the myth.

Zacharia Sitchin is also worth reading, though you might wish to go straight to the original texts as translated into English.

If you want a scientific understanding of cosmology involved, then I suggest becoming acquainted with Electric Universe Theory - a theory which is steady crushing the standard model - one observation at a time. There is a team of them working on reconstructing the early solar system, especially with regard to the entry of Saturn into the solar system - though at this time I do not believe they are considering Jupiter, and there is no mention of Annunaki or ET's in their work.

I believe that the celestial objects were named by the Annunaki after their commanders - and that this caused conflicts in mythology where some tales are regarding the actual beings, and other tales are related to celestial objects. the people who wrote them may have been very clear and aware of whether they were talking about an actual being or a celestial object - but because they bore the same names, later generations confused and conflated some of these myths and legends.

The ancient gods, were indeed gods (compared to men) - and although i think the years they recorded were much shorter than today - these were effectively immortal beings.

originally posted by: Astyanax
THE SOLUTION TO THIS MYSTERY HAS ALREADY BEEN POSTED TWICE IN THE THREAD. WHY IS EVERYONE IGNORING IT?

Nice find here. Sumerian dietys are becoming to intresting to dismiss. this could be the explanation for how the tru gods were beaten and decieved by the true betrayer who spun the history books into this lovely christianity story. think about it. the snake in the garden was good for trying to give us knowledge, whilst the true devil wanted us to remain subserviant and remain slave to their toils. until reading this i always dismissed claims of a massive religious cover up, but i this sparks some thought. i dont know if i actually believe any of this. but i always love provoking different thoughts

a reply to: soul44

More likely its a astrological age for deities which then spanned 36000 years, now 25,920 years. So kings may be more so king of man, rather than human kings.

originally posted by: Amagnon
There is a great deal of information that indicates that conditions on earth were extremely different in the time before the flood - geology and paleontology both show us that the earth was a vastly different place in the past. it is only normalcy bias that continues to drive the narrative that the solar system is constant and always has been.

There is a great deal of information that indicates that there never was any great flood.

The Mesopotamian flood is rather obviously a river flood.

originally posted by: Amagnon
The changing of the rising sun from east to west, the change in the length of a day, month and year are recorded worldwide in many ancient texts - celestial events occurred many times - and the 'stars went out of their courses' is a statement repeated by peoples in very different locations.

If you get your orbital mechanics info from Velikovski, you should understand that the man had no knowledge of orbital mechanics and, thus, neither do you.

originally posted by: Amagnon
If we have a look at the calendars used by ancient peoples, we find a great variation - people who show advanced math and techniques to determine things accurately seemingly make terrible errors in determining the length of a year, or even a month - these were not errors, the earth was moving around as a result of contacts with Venus and Mars.

Absurd and insane. What calendars are you talking about? Please provide references to these ancient calendars that show such things.

This should be good.

originally posted by: Amagnon
Before these things occurred, the earth circled Saturn - most often referred to as the 'Superior Sun' - or the 'Greater Sun' - represented by a cross, or celestial wheel. We often see the image of the sun represented as a wheel, or cross - but it certainly doesnt look that way today. These were faithful representations of what the 'sun' (Saturn) actually looked like - the great spokes were plumes of plasma. This was the Golden Age - the time before the flood, when the earth revolved around Saturn - Chronus the time keeper, the superior sun.

There was no flood and the Earth never circled Saturn.

originally posted by: AmagnonThis was why so much effort was put into ancient astronomy, and places like Stone Henge - because they had to work out the length of days, seasons and locations all over again - because everything had changed.

So, where is the evidence that there was some different calendar prior to Stonehenge et al.?

Harte