Who's right - Zecharia Sitchin or Michael Heiser?

[str8thinker]

Zecharia Sitchin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zecharia_Sitchin)
(Wikipedia) Zecharia Sitchin (January 11, 1920 – October 9, 2010) was an Azeri-born American author of books promoting an explanation for human origins involving ancient astronauts. Sitchin attributes the creation of the ancient Sumerian culture to the Anunnaki, which he states was a race of extra-terrestrials from a planet beyond Neptune called Nibiru. He believed this hypothetical planet of Nibiru to be in an elongated, elliptical orbit in the Earth's own Solar System, asserting that Sumerian mythology reflects this view. Sitchin's books have sold millions of copies worldwide and have been translated into more than 25 languages.

Sitchin's theories are not accepted by scientists and academics who dismiss his work as pseudohistory and pseudoscience. Sitchin's work has been criticized for flawed methodology and mistranslations of ancient texts as well as for incorrect astronomical and scientific claims.

According to Sitchin's interpretation of Mesopotamian iconography and symbology, outlined in his 1976 book The 12th Planet and its sequels, there is an undiscovered planet beyond Neptune that follows a long, elliptical orbit, reaching the inner solar system roughly every 3,600 years. This planet is called Nibiru. According to Sitchin, Nibiru collided catastrophically with Tiamat, which he considers to be another planet once located between Mars and Jupiter. This collision supposedly formed the planet Earth, the asteroid belt, and the comets. Sitchin states that when struck by one of planet Nibiru's moons, Tiamat split in two, and then on a second pass Nibiru itself struck the broken fragments and one half of Tiamat became the asteroid belt. The second half, struck again by one of Nibiru's moons, was pushed into a new orbit and became today's planet Earth.

Website (http://www.sitchin.com/)

History Timeline According to Sitchin (http://www.world-mysteries.com/pex_2.htm)

Earth Chronicles
Book 1 - The Twelfth Planet [1976]
Book 2 - The Stairway to Heaven [1980]
Book 3 - The Wars of God And Men [1985]
Book 4 - The Lost Realms [1990]
Book 5 - When Time Began [1993]
Book 6 - The Cosmic Code [1998]
Book 7 - The End of Days [2007]

Companion Books
Divine Encounters [2002]
Genesis Revisited [1990]
The Lost Book of Enki [2004]
There Were Giants Upon The Earth [2010]

(YouTube) 2012. Will The Anunnaki Return.By Zecharia Sitchin (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3RZVMHHzzM)


Michael S. Heiser (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Heiser)
Websites:
http://www.michaelsheiser.com/
http://www.sitchiniswrong.com

Mike Heiser earned an M.A. (1998) and Ph.D. (2004) in Hebrew Bible and Ancient Semitic Languages from the University of Wisconsin-Madison. His dissertation was entitled, "The Divine Council in Late Canonical and Non-Canonical Second Temple Jewish Literature" (English translation: the dissertation dealt with the presence of a pantheon in the Hebrew Bible and the binitarian nature of ancient Israelite religion and Judaism, a backdrop for the the belief in the deity of Christ in the New Testament). Before going to the UW-Madison, Mike also earned an M.A. in Ancient History from the University of Pennsylvania (1992; major fields, Ancient Syria-Palestine and Egyptology). Mike can do translation work in roughly a dozen ancient languages, among them Biblical Hebrew, Biblical Greek, Aramaic, Syriac, Egyptian hieroglyphs, Phoenician, Moabite, and Ugaritic cuneiform. He has also studied Akkadian and Sumerian independently.

From Open Letter (http://www.sitchiniswrong.com/letter/letter.htm)


Dear Ancient Astronaut Enthusiast:

The intent of this letter is in the interest of research, not confrontation. In no way do I intend to impugn anyone's character. What I ask is that you provide answers and data to support your theories. Here are my questions / requests.

1. Can you please provide transcripts of Zecharia Sitchin's academic ancient language work? I would like to post this information on my website, and would gladly do so.

2. Can you explain why Sitchin's work on Genesis 1:26-27 overlooks so many obvious grammatical indications that the word elohim in that passage refers to a single deity (as demonstrated on this website)?

3. Can you explain why Zecharia Sitchin (or you in turn) have not included the comparative linguistic material from the Amarna texts that shows the Akkadian language also uses the plural word for "gods" to refer to a single deity or person (which of course undermines the argument that elohim must refer to a plurality of gods)?

4. Can you explain how the interpretation of the word "nephilim" as referring to "people of the fiery rockets" is at all viable in light of the rules of Hebrew morphology? In other words, can you bring forth a single ancient text where naphal has such a meaning?

5. Can you produce a single text that says the Anunnaki come from the planet Nibiru - or that Nibiru is a planet beyond Pluto? I assert that there are no such texts, and challenge you and your readers to study the occurrences of "Anunnaki" right here on this website. Here is a video where I show readers how to conduct a search online at the Electronic Corpus of Sumerian Literature website. There are 182 occurrences of the divine name Anunnaki. Please show me any evidence from the Sumerian texts themselves that the Anunnaki have any connection to Nibiru or a 12th planet (or any planet).

6. Can you explain why the alleged sun symbol on cylinder seal VA 243 is not the normal sun symbol or the symbol for the sun god Shamash?

7. Can you explain why your god = planet equivalencies do not match the listings of such matching in cuneiform astronomical texts? I recently blogged on this issue and provided a recent scholarly article on the planets in Mesopotamian literature by experts in cuneiform as proof that Sitchin erred in this regard.

8. Can you explain why many of Sitchin's word meanings / translations of Sumerian and Mesopotamian words are not consistent with Mesopotamian cuneiform bilingual dictionaries, produced by Akkadian scribes?

Thank you for taking the time to respond. I will of course post any responses on this site.



Michael S. Heiser, Ph.D. - Zecharia Sitchin is a FRAUD!
D6MdV2h-eIA

AOD 2004 Michael S Heiser, Challenge to Zechariah Sitchin (http://sureynot.com/v/190/aod-2004-michael-s-heiser,-challenge-to-zechariah-sitchin.html)

(Antimatter Radio) Sitchin Lies, Nephilm, Astrology, Alien Abduction - 6 parts (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yen-Jgk3uzY)

2012Hoax.org - Nibiru (http://www.2012hoax.org/nibiru)

Michael Heiser Is Incorrect With His Analysis Of Elohim & Nephilim (http://www.rense.com/general28/eneph.htm)

Michael Heiser's reply (http://www.sitchiniswrong.com/DiscipleErikParker.htm)

--------

That should be enough to get you started. So, who do you believe is right? :)

[mrmalco]

Heiser
Sitchen doesn't even realise that the sun is always shown with heat waves as well a light rays in their iconography. This isn't even a point Heiser makes - though he too (and with far more knowledge than me) knows that Sitchen is an inventor.

It's very difficult to say the emperor has no clothes about Sitchen. He's so well known it's simply assumed that he knows what he's talking about. The awful truth is that Sitchen is an exploiter on a subject he thought he could get away with.

My own work in ancient Mesopotamian geometry and number absolutely confirms Heiser's competence.

[romina]

I went to the website Heiser is referring to (Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature) and searched for Anunnaki and found Anunna instead. Probably Sitchin used the word "Ki" which if I remember well means Earth and added it to the term Annuna gods. That made me look for more and found many of the translations from Sitchin's books in there so it's not all a lie. However, I did not find any Nibiru but Nibru as the city and not the planet.
Imo they both are wrong and the truth is as always somewhere in between. I don't have the knowledge needed to get to the bottom of this.

[Zook]

I think Heiser is more credible. There's something about Stitchin and his research that just rings hollow with me. I watched the above Heiser video about a year ago; he makes clear verifiable arguments, IMHO.

:smow::typing:

[truthseekerdan]

Ditto that, Zook! :)

[Lefty Dave]

Sitchen spent his life trying to find a truth...and gave us the best he could offer....he allowed that others have other opinions...he didn't call them names...he didn't try to discredit anyone...he gave his views, documented his research and left it to the reader to form their own conclusions.

When someone name calls , insults, accuses...but supplies no evidence or proof...well.....they are what they are...

[Marcelo Mendes]

Hi fellows.

Sorry. Michael Who? The guy that is directly related to the church and the jesuits? What are his works??? If someone send me an open letter attacking me, there are few things to consider:

a) first, it doesn´t mean that you are right;
b) second, it doesn´t mean that I´m wrong;
c) third, it does mean that something related to me disturbs you;
d) forth, depending who you are and whow strong is your attack, that may mean that I am eventually right;
e) at the end, it doesn´t mean that i have to answer any attack against me, because it may mean that it is exactly what you want in order to create a controversy against me.

I respect Sitchin exactly because what Lefty Dave said, but it doesn´t necessarily means that he is right.

My point is, I don´t like free attacks against anybody, without respect these one, no matter who he is or have done. If someone approach the word with respect, has to be respected too, to be fought. Out of this, we are talking about violence. And appart the fact that jesuits and catholic church were violents in the past (and I particularly don´t have any reason to believe that they have really stopped acting this way), when someone related to them attacks someone in this way, I give me the right to feel unconfortable.

Namaste

MM

[HURRITT ENYETO]

My opinion is that i respect Sitchen for the fact that he brought attention to these subjects and brought them into greater public consciousness, but his translation is flawed to say the least and is definitely embellished. Many people not just Mike Heiser have found fundamental flaws in Sitchens work but i have respect for him non the less.

[mrmalco]

Thanks for pulling me up on my over-harsh posting Lefty Dave, Marcello and Hurritt. I don't really have evidence that Sitchin was deliberately duping people and should not have said that about him. Though I certainly believe him wrong on the evidence. What concerns me is that some alternative authors give our topics a bad name by basing stuff on really weak scholarship.

I used to love Sitchin's stuff myself, in fact he stimulated my first interest in the Sumerians with his first book. On going deeper, to do with Mesopotamian mathematics and geometry, bearing upon my own field over the last quarter century, I inevitably got some familiarity with dictionaries, translations of stellae, and readings of symbols. It was a disappointment to find that Sitchin's work seems utterly groundless. (And, yes, it was difficult to believe that he himself did not realise this.)

What I like about Heiser is that, while knowing from his study that Sitchin was wrong, he does not discount the entire field. I guess Heiser's harshness comes from that notoriously 'snappy' attitude that is one of the nastiest habits of academia; also from his exasperation at challenging Sitchin to a discussion over some years with no result. One does get suspicious of people who won't discuss with their peers.

I don't think Heiser should be rejected just because of some Church affiliations, now or on the past. We all know, and some of us have suffered directly from, the enormities of the Church and the reputation of the Jesuits but many on this site have, or have has, such affiliations and they're genuine people too - as indeed are many Catholics I still know. One of our weaknesses in the alternative community is our tendency to assume guilt-by-association. I knew a few Jesuits in Cambridge who were genuine scholars unafraid of following their studies where they truly led. I've also known of - but not known personally - a few who, by all accounts, were intellectually dishonest. The philosophical society in which I have had a 40 year long interest has suffered plagiarism and distorted reports at the hands of Jesuits.
However a great intellectual hero of mine was Teilhard de Chardin (SJ) ...

Anyway - thanks to all.

[irmensul13]

Absolutely Sitchin is right,Heiser is just offensively & appallingly ignorant..I am going to elucidate on this after I've swotted up a bit to refresh my memory
It does not matter if Sitchin translated certain words wrong,the meaning is the same whatever translation you read & the Sumerians did say we were created by these 'anunna'(heavenly ones) via genetic engineering..
After Heiser has finished trying to demolish Sitchins reputation & trying to make his own name off the back of Sitchin,what is he offering us instead? a load of old cobblers about fallen angels & other nonsense! great..I am not buying what this man is selling.Sitchin is the subject of deliberate attacks now,because of what he told us..(similar to how the whole nibiru thing has deen the subject of ridicule & disinformation).We owe the man a huge debt.

[Wings]

Sitchin's theories are not accepted by scientists and academics who dismiss his work as pseudohistory and pseudoscience. Sitchin's work has been criticized for flawed methodology and mistranslations of ancient texts as well as for incorrect astronomical and scientific claims.

Does the Istambul rocket fit under this banner? http://ancientaliens.wordpress.com/2010/12/

I am not familiar with Heiser to comment on 'his work', but I would not so readily dismiss Sitchin's work (which I do think is valuable).

[Timreh]

Without saying either party is right or wrong I do have some relevant info.
There are countless literary referances to the Anunnaki from books dated at the end of the 19th and early 20th century, generally referred to as being 'Great Gods', also 'high priests' and 'Belonging to the Earth'.
Without direct quoting I have provided a list of some of the books.

Babylonian Magic and Sorcery. L W King, 1896
The Cambridge Ancient History, Vol 1; Egypt and Babylonia. 1928
Materials for a Sumerian Lexicon. J D Prince, 1908
Publications of the Babylonian Section, Vol 10, No 2;
The religion of Babylonia and Assyria. M Jastrow, 1898
Some Sumerian-Babylonian Hymns of the Berlin Collection. M I Hussey, 1907
Sumerian Liturgical Texts. S Langdon, 1917

[Tarka the Duck]

Hello - I am way out of depth here and have not a huge amount of reading on this subject, but I would like to throw in my tuppenceworth!
A friend of mine, who is a respected (so I believe) Sanskrit scholar and is currently teaching and conducting research in Kathmandu, does not regard Sitchin's work at all - "I don't know if you take the 'scientific' writings of Sichin seriously, but for me personally they are just phantasy [sic]. The contents of the Old Testaments is nothing but tales, and the fact that some of these legends can be tracked to the Sumerian mythology does not prove that the aliens ever visited our planet. "
Please don't have a go at me for this! I am only the messenger...
Best wishes
Tarka

[Carmen]

You would have to read the books and decide for yourself Tarka. They are a huge volume of work but very intriguing. Sitchin sort of sets out the evidence and lets you decide for yourself. I found them very valuable. It certainly expands ones thinking. In some ways, the more a writer is attacked, the more they are on to something of truth. We live in a funny world.

[DNA]

I understand the Sitchen books are disturbing.
They are paradigm changing.
Paradigms are very uncomfortable things to change.

Personally, I look past the archeological translation data and look at the evolutionary data.



My ultra-conservative Pentecostal Christian relatives told me that evolution did not work because of a missing link.
At ten years old I was led to believe that Darwin and his contemporary cronies used imagination to bridge the gap between chimpanzees and our selves.

Then in sixth grade I saw the classic depiction of bipedal evolution leading from chimpanzee to austroprolithicus to homo-erectus to Cro-magnum man and then to us. There were even actual fossils depicted and scientists like the Leakey's shown proudly holding bones and rock, like proud treasure finders.

I was satisfied that every thing was known and concluded, until anthropology 101 in college.
In ASB 101, I learned that the fossil tree had dead ends, and the most famous of these dead ends was the Neanderthal.

The more I learned of the Neanderthal, the more in disbelief I felt. Neanderthals predate humans by at least 200,000 years, and further, coexisted with humans for at least 50,000 years. Neanderthals look so much like us; it bothered me greatly to learn that we were not supposed to be descended from them, but homo-erectus instead.

To grasp with all this was difficult, but then I was supposed to go completely against the grain of common sense and make a jump of faith. That's right, Anthropology (the science) was asking me to believe something without being able to prove it.

They were asking me to take homo-erectus which for all entensive purposes looks like big foot and say he miraculously turned into modern man.

And here we have inserted that little devil the missing link, which my christian relatives had exaggerated about, but, had not created because the missing link actually was a problem in the archeological data.

One common tree branch, Homo-Erectus is the foundation from which Neanderthals and Homo-Sapiens are to have sprouted independently from one another. Ninety plus percent of scientists are of the opinion that Homo-Sapiens evolved from Homo-Erectus in the same manner that Neanderthals did, but the problem with all this; there is no gradual change from Homo-Erectus into Homo-Sapien, no gradual mutation from Homo-Erectus into Homo-Sapien.

Just one day, we have a very monkey looking up right walking handsome chimpanzee and the next day we have basically us, which is Cro-Magnum man. Then we have the successful proliferation of these Cro-Magnum men all over the earth, and in record speed, we outflank our predecessor and co-evolved sister race the Neanderthal, and co-exist with them in France and the Middle-East for at least 50,000 years, and then poof, no more Neanderthal.

Zecharia Sitchen's Sumerian creation myth instantly seemed more plausible, and it at least deserved a little looking into. As of now, there is no missing link and, until one is found, maybe the data is all wrong. The missing link may never be found, because there may have been a sudden jump. The Anunnaki would have used a Neanderthal for the hybrid project in which their own genes were introduced to form Cro-Magnum men, Homo Sapiens.

I know it is all a bit overwhelming, but, there you go.
By the way, Wings, you have the best avatar ever. :)

[Carmen]

Yup, the books answered many of my questions too. There would have to be inaccuracies but the basic idea to me was sound and has been backed up by other sources.

Ps Whats with the little writing! Had to get my magnifying glass out.!!

[Fred Steeves]

Here are two of the questions from the gentleman of Sitchins:

2. Can you explain why Sitchin's work on Genesis 1:26-27 overlooks so many obvious grammatical indications that the word elohim in that passage refers to a single deity (as demonstrated on this website)?

3. Can you explain why Zecharia Sitchin (or you in turn) have not included the comparative linguistic material from the Amarna texts that shows the Akkadian language also uses the plural word for "gods" to refer to a single deity or person (which of course undermines the argument that elohim must refer to a plurality of gods)?


Now, I am no ancient scholar, (LOL) but I do happen to have me trusty "New International Version" of the Bible, all full of juicy highlighted tidbits. One of these it would seem has no arguement with Sitchens:

Genesis 1:26- Then God said: "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness,and let them rule over" and yada, yada, yada.

Maybe Heiser needs to go after the Bible translators also...I'm just sayin...


Cheers,
Fred

[Operator]

Ps Whats with the little writing! Had to get my magnifying glass out.!!

No need for magnifying glasses, works in almost all browsers I know: press the control button and roll the scroll wheel of your mouse
to zoom in or out. The zoom function can also be found from the View menu on top.

[Tane Mahuta]

Hi strthinker, good post, lots of research done here. IMHO there's no "who's right" or "who's wrong"........only what resonates within. Both have devoted their entire lives to their relative subjects.


nuff said TM

[cellardoor]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4paOl2xqO2o&feature=related
Remember this?

[krsanna]

As I recall, Sitchin began publishing the Earth Chronicles AFTER he retired. He told his wife he was going to write what he really believed after retiring. I don't fault Sitchin one iota for not responding to Michael Heiser for an academic firefight. I have my issues with many of Sitchin's interpretations, but he made important contributions. Scholarly debate is part and parcel of academia, and I don't see that Heiser published work that seriously challenged Sitchin. Maybe Heiser just took a few potshots in a video? It's hard to take Heiser very seriously in the absence of published work capable of standing up to Sitchin.

My own issue with Sitchin is that he interprets virtually everything that moved, walked, or hinted like an ET on this planet to Nibiru. Some evidence suggests the Aldebarans were on this planet long before Sitchin claimed the Nibiruans were present. In a UFO contact in Germany, UFO-related humans who claimed origins on Aldebaran reported they had first contacted this planet 780,000 years ago -- a good 350,000 years before Sitchin's claims for Nibiru. According to the contact report, the Aldebarans had created a species of workers then left. When they returned the workers had rebelled. They subsequently elected to work with the workers most like themselves, who are among the modern Germans. Boskop skulls that strongly approximate modern human skulls, dated at 700,000 years, lend support to the Aldebaran claim. A small difference in brain capacity between Boskop skulls and modern humans distinguishes them. The Boskop skulls were intially thought to be entirely comparable to moderns. The string to Aldebaran leads to long, complex intrigue.

Sitchin missed the Aldebaran story completely, because he wrote what he really believed in his own field of Semitic literature after retiring. He interpreted the entire pre-history of the Earth through the Semitic lens. He was not a true ancient astronaut researcher. He was a Semitic scholar.

Sitchin often drew conclusions from his own theories extrapolated from earlier tiers of research that had not been well proven and debated. He ended up with something akin to his own Tower of Babel built upon an untested foundation of his own making. In terms of long-term viability, he probably would have been better off to respond to critics; but, Sitchin was human with all the human foibles, had already made his career as a scholar, and didn't depend on academia for his livelihood. He could afford to do what he dang well pleased, and that's what he did.

Some of Sitchin's accounts of Native America absolutely defy what Native Americans say about themselves. But, dismissing native histories in favor of preferred bias was / is common in the presently dominant culture in which Sitchin thrived and sold the Earth Chronicles.

Sitchin was a man of the times, and his work was a sign of the times. He opened many doors that can be pursued by subsequent generations of scholars of many disciplines. I thoroughly enjoyed his books but didn't accept every word as absolute truth.

[Foxie Loxie]

Thanks for the "steer", Bill. I can never forget that in one of the videos I watched by a female whistleblower who had been trained in the blood sacrifice thing for the Royals, claimed that Sitchen was present in one that she remembers. I think that would explain one aspect of how his writings went "mainstream". It would have been part of the planned project for humanity. Since none of us can read or understand ancient languages, how can we judge whether his writings were correct, or not?! Now, Mauro Biglino might have some idea!!! :bigsmile:

[Bill Ryan]

Bill Ryan stated that Zacharia Sitchin was channeling some of his information (Bill actually said Jordan Maxwell said that if i am remembering it right).

Just a confirmation: yes, that's correct. It wasn't like Sitchin's books were all downloaded, as it were, but he channeled guidance, of some kind, when he was working on his translations.

That's the prime reason that academic critics like Michael Heiser (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tr9f0FpDs7o) disagree with his translations and interpretations. Sitchin deviated substantially in some cases from the accepted academic meaning of the Sumerian cuneiform.

[Valerie Villars]

Well, my uneducated but gut instinct is with the guy who knows language; Heiser.

[soluslobo]

I have seen videos of him in a secret meeting, drawing of him being in some funeral of the illuminati. I have seen a video of him doing the illuminati hand shake. There is a book called Project Human Extinction that disagrees with Sitchin and that book is banned in the USA. That author has also disappeared. https://cdli.ucla.edu that website has many translations and says nothing of what Sitchin "translated" nothing about us being slaves and nothing of gold being used to rebuild the atmosphere of Niburu. Also in that site theyre called as the Anunna not the Anunnaki. Yes Enlil, An and Enki the other Sumerian gods are there but I tried my best to find what Sitchin said how they created us. Only thing I found was that we came out of the Earth. Would be great to know what other people believe. I have also read the truth is in the Akashic Records. In the bible Jeremiah speaks of Xmas being a pagan holiday and this was before Christ.. People have said the Bible is of the evil god Enlil but why would he warn us about the mark of the beast aka the chip. Rothschild etc are descendants of RA and theyre the ones who killed Princess Diana with the help of the snake lizard family Queen Elizabeth.

[ZoSo925]

The ironic thing is I saw that same video a few years ago and some website was claiming Ron Paul was in the video. There was never any mention of Sitchin on the site or video.

There is some website called Sitchin is wrong - and there was some interview not long ago with the person who ran the site. I'm certain it was on Youtube but was few months ago and not sure If I have it in my history and will check.

I bought 12th Planet book few years ago but found it very hard to read. It was almost like poetry in a way and hard for me to concentrate and read.

Edit: Here is the video currently going around as Sitchin, but the video I saw was longer and never did that rewind to Sitchin or any mention..

At the 35 second mark is supposedly Ron Paul as he is the last person to cover his face. You see his baby blue eyes peek out too and looks like him. I'm not sure where the longer video is

1wWxqXashBo

[ZoSo925]

Actually I did not read 12th Planet yet. I had bought it along with Lost Book Of Enki, and that was the one that was kinda hard to read

[soluslobo]

The ironic thing is I saw that same video a few years ago and some website was claiming Ron Paul was in the video. There was never any mention of Sitchin on the site or video.

There is some website called Sitchin is wrong - and there was some interview not long ago with the person who ran the site. I'm certain it was on Youtube but was few months ago and not sure If I have it in my history and will check.

I bought 12th Planet book few years ago but found it very hard to read. It was almost like poetry in a way and hard for me to concentrate and read.

Edit: Here is the video currently going around as Sitchin, but the video I saw was longer and never did that rewind to Sitchin or any mention..

At the 35 second mark is supposedly Ron Paul as he is the last person to cover his face. You see his baby blue eyes peek out too and looks like him. I'm not sure where the longer video is

1wWxqXashBo

https://cdli.ucla.edu/search/ put the word gold in translation I see nothing of what Sitchin "translated" put in Enlil and Enki I dont see anything about how they created us through gene splicing.

In the book Project Human Extinction it says he channeled it in and couldve been lied to. Many people believe now that Enlil is bad and Enki is good. But look at the evil leaders who run this world. Theyre the descendants of RA (Marduk son of Enki). Theyre also serpents that love kidnapping children and eating them. Enki "was a serpent" if that was true then why do all the serpents treat us like ****, protect the rich and famous and **** us over with wars and injecting **** into our food. I read Book of Enoch and of Jasher. Yes that god is very mean and can be very kind. But it also mentions of things that are going now. The mark of the beast (chip) Jeremiah spoke of a tree being cut down and nailed to hold still and having ornaments on top of it. This was before Christ. Another prophet Zoraster spoke of a god that can do no evil but wants us to be righteous. Anyway lol my point is that how do we know for sure if Enki is a serpent. He couldve been the righteous god and Enlil couldve been the god that punishes those who are wicked. "satan" couldve been a subordinate who hated the brothers and was the serpent but made it seem like Enki is the satan.

its tough to say whos right or wrong as we cant read the old language. but what i do know is men has been at war with each other and every time there is a calamity its to get rid of the evil ones. Serpents run the world right now and they murdered Princess Diana. She talks about them before she died to her best friend and described in a way that they looked like those lizards in ancient civilizations. "if the serpent was really good'' they wouldnt be polluting us now with chemtrails n such. Also we wouldve looked like a serpent but Enki created us in their image which im sure was the order of Enlil.

In that website it says Enlil was the god of the blackheaded people. Sitchin said Noah was white as snow and blue eyed... sounds more like he wants people to believe that theyre the supreme beings (like hitler, even in ancestry dot org commercial says blue eyes are our ancestors LOL ). I dont see anything of us being used to mine gold in that site. Dont really believe in Sitchin anymore.

I did not know he denied the history of Natives or the other race that came 750,000 years before. The author of the book Project Human Extinction talks about the Akashic Records. So idk but none of the words that Sitchin translated are in the site. That same author of Project Human Extinction has vanished, I believe the illuminati killed him after that book. Its banned in America and possibly only found on ebay or amazon or in europe.

That site has a lot of translators none talk about what he has written. Lost Book of Enki talks about Enoch and how he wrote down what was told by Enki... but why is that everything Enki said to Enoch not in Book of Enoch... so seems like Sitchin channeled it in and was guided by the real "Satan" to fulfill his lies about Serpents being good. Even in Egyptian history it talks about the war with God vs Satan. His name is Mastema, same in the book of Jasher and same in Zorasters teaching as the one who does the evil.

[Leonard]

I will believe Sitchin at the moment. Well, he might get a bit of error here and there in translation but ultimately he get the idea across. It actually links all the pictures together. I don't believe in violent people, because part of their cconsciousness are controlled by lower energy entites.

[Foxie Loxie]

Can't remember exactly where I posted this before, but I did see a video here about a woman who had been trained to participate in the blood rites for the royals & she remembers seeing Sitchen at one of the happenings. If that is true....that says a whole lot!

[Watching from Cyprus]

Exactly mate, Zionist bull****.. let's call these indoctrination spoon-fed idiots what they are.
Stand up and dont be afraid as no-one and nothing can harm you people.
Eternal love to all loving souls.

[onawah]

However much Sitchin may have got wrong, his assertions that there was a lot of gold mining going on in Africa was verified after the fact by Michael Tellinger's discoveries in Africa of ancient mines and the remains of settlements there where the slave/miners lived.
That most definitely needs to be taken into consideration in any discussion of Sitchin's works.
(Though I haven't seen that done here on Avalon very much.)
3UuHOcLAkGM