Was Sitchin wrong?

[christian]

Posted by Omni connexae! (here)

...if you want to be perfectly clear, I suggest you point out exactly what prejudices I'm apparently defending.

The fact, that evolution is like a dogma is undeniable, where do you see fundings for mainstream investigators in the field of searching for evidence for E.T. genetic engineering? You just looked over that. You looked over the fact, that you should read Sitchin, for I won't take hours and hours to compile a summary for you of the genetic engineering story, even if I still had the book at hand. You just went over the flaws of the theory of evolution, by not looking into what you didn't look into before, instead you just referred to what you read in the past. I don't have the books with the evidence, I told you what you could find in Dr. Horn's book for example, I wouldn't spell it out for you if I had the books at hand, do the research if you are truly interested. Can I make it any more obvious?

[Calz]

Posted by TraineeHuman (here)
Unfortunately I consider Arizona Wilder as a very unreliable source, and in my opinion not worth listening to at all, unfortunately. All I was saying was that I consider I personally detected lots of dark energy and dishonesty around Sitchin (from my long-distance intuitive perception).

I don't disagree at all ... just throwing it out there

I enjoy Icke and thus watched it a long time ago.

[Calz]

Posted by Calz_Avaretard (here)

Posted by Omniverse (here)
Interesting thread. Thanks pie'n'eal. I haven't read Sitchin's books. It's a shame they appear to connect dots that are non-existent. I remember reading his funding ties were to like the Rockefellers or something. Although my memory on that is a bit hazy. I haven't checked out any debunked sites about Sitchin either. But I am certainly interested in the Anunnaki. Does anyone have a source explaining Sumer and the Anunnaki that is not reputed to be channeling the info? Or reputed to make stuff up about it? I don't trust Sitchin's info enough to read his books.

Posted by Calz_Avaretard (here)
Perhaps someone can help me out as well.

I remember hearing from what I thought to be a reliable source that Zecharia was actually channeling annunaki (automatic writing) on at least some of his material.

I am still trying to backtrack and find that source.

I did find a *hint* of sorts in that direction with the Jordan Maxwell Camelot interview.

Anyone???

I first heard this from Bill Ryan saying Jordan Maxwell told him that(or something along those lines). It's a post on this forum. Although I don't remember where. Maybe in the Anunnaki thread Bill made would be my guess.

Thanks Omni.

I was fairly certain it was within camelot/avalon in some fashion or another.

Cal

Spot on Omni

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
--------

(snip)

One veteran researcher, who Kerry Cassidy and I also know personally, knew Zecharia Sitchin very well. This person told us that Zecharia had told him that his books were NOT translated from the Sumerian - but were actually channeled products of automatic writing.

We were also told that Zecharia Sitchin was paid on a retainer basis by the NSA, who always wanted to be kept up to date by Sitchin about what the Anunnaki were up to - because it seemed that Sitchin had a direct telepathic line to the Anunnaki in real time. (Note: there is quite a lot in Sitchin's books that is certainly disinformation - possibly deliberately inserted by the Anunnaki themselves). But quite a lot of the basic story is probably quite true.

Bill Ryan
Project Avalon
April 2011

https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...light=zecharia

[161803398]

I never read Sitchin because I think its a bunch of crap and a useless diversion....a fairy tale to keep us occupied thinking about garbage. I think there were people of some sort here on earth for a very long time. My thoughts just based on my own speculation is that there was a nuclear war long ago and we bombed ourselves back to the stone age...which we will do again because we aren't, generally, as a species, very mentally or emotionally developed. There's some very good people in the world but they don't have or want power. We follow the psychopaths who are motivated by their own sick, lying instincts. We still haven't been able to overcome this even when we know the truth.

[Tony]

Being mislead.

Neuro Linguistic Progamming is like jamming two ideas into one hole, it is meant to confuse. This could be intentional or just bias data. This often happens when putting a bolt in at the wrong angle and getting a cross thread. Pride makes you try harder to getting thing in, common sense says, “Take it out and try again, and get it straight this time.”

It is very easy to twist an argument in ones favour, as we are very clever animals. We all fall into some sort of camp/group so we all have some bias. It's important to acknowledge this.

When I here the words in the Bible about pulling down the temple, to me that is about pulling down fixed concepts in the mind. To someone else they may take that more literally. I am so biased, that the meaning I put on it even over rides, the meaning that the originator may have put on it. Because it makes sense to me.

The point about Annunaki, Enki and Niribu is at this moment irrelevant. At the moment it is a misleading devious diversion.

When talking to people about the uneasy feeling in the world, about health, diet, media, banks, daft laws, wars, education, mind and consciousness they can see this for themselves. They may not be able to join all the dots up, but we can give them something to consider, and because they slowly begin to trust us they may reflect on it some more.

Sticking Annunaki and Niribu in the conversation negates all credibility. This is jamming two ideas into one mind, it will not go. To me that is why it is being propagated!

Evolution is about consciousness, and even that is being hijacked into a wooly belief systems. Pure consciousness is all you have, it is all you are.

How to play nicely- simple inside and complex outside. A yogi in a cave can be simple in both, but we are householder and have to function in a chaotic world. Find essence and everything else sorts itself out.

Because of clinging to human emotions the outer world will never make sense. The emotions are important though, as they can help to find ones way back to the source, 'your' pure consciousness. As long as we drop the clinging.

[Calz]

Posted by pie'n'eal (here)

The point about Annunaki, Enki and Niribu is at this moment irrelevant. At the moment it is a misleading devious diversion.

(snip)

Sticking Annunaki and Niribu in the conversation negates all credibility. This is jamming two ideas into one mind, it will not go. To me that is why it is being propagated!

If it was simply (and verifiably) a matter of studying "history" that would be one thing.

In the "white man" thread we have been taking a long look at the *possibility* (suggested by Lord Sid) that Enki is returning (and Enlil has *perhaps* never left).

Perhaps "at the moment" Enki and/or his faction are "arriving" which, *if true*, would not make it irrelevant nor a devious diversion.

Setting aside Nibiru ... are you suggesting those entertaining such ideas lack credibility???

https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...d-planet-Earth

[Tony]

Posted by Calz_Avaretard (here)

Posted by pie'n'eal (here)

The point about Annunaki, Enki and Niribu is at this moment irrelevant. At the moment it is a misleading devious diversion.

(snip)

Sticking Annunaki and Niribu in the conversation negates all credibility. This is jamming two ideas into one mind, it will not go. To me that is why it is being propagated!

If it was simply (and verifiably) a matter of studying "history" that would be one thing.

In the "white man" thread we have been taking a long look at the *possibility* (suggested by Lord Sid) that Enki is returning (and Enlil has *perhaps* never left).

Perhaps "at the moment" Enki and/or his faction are "arriving" which, *if true*, would not make it irrelevant nor a devious diversion.

Setting aside Nibiru ... are you suggesting those entertaining such ideas lack credibility???

https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...d-planet-Earth

Well, I'm still investigating. I have just received a reply from a Sanskrit Scholar friend who teacher the subject in a Nepal Monastery.
He can find no reference to Annunaki or Niribu or anything to do with the return of the Gods.

I shall check on your thread.

[Omni connexae!]

Posted by chiquetet (here)

Posted by Omni connexae! (here)

...if you want to be perfectly clear, I suggest you point out exactly what prejudices I'm apparently defending.

The fact, that evolution is like a dogma is undeniable, where do you see fundings for mainstream investigators in the field of searching for evidence for E.T. genetic engineering?

dogma

n. pl. dog·mas or dog·ma·ta (-m-t)

1. A doctrine or a corpus of doctrines relating to matters such as morality and faith, set forth in an authoritative manner by a church.

[Latin, from Greek, opinion, belief, from dokein, to seem, think; see dek- in Indo-European roots.]
_________________________________________________________________

Evolution is nothing like a dogma. Your disparaged use of the word will not change that.

Evolution has been supported by archaeology, anthropology, paleontology, paleoanthropology and biology. You could say that no discipline, discovery, theory or philosophy of science provides any challenge to evolution. In fact, evolution has been argued to be the most solidly and widely supported theory in science. That has absolutely nothing to do with it being pushed like a dogma.

So, some random guy comes along and says all you guys must be wrong, all he has to support his claims are some crazy interpretations of some tablets and texts that does not even use the "dictionary" we have found, that tells us what they say. Then you wonder why people like this are not taken seriously. Why such theory's are not funded?

It is no coincidence, that the only people who believe such theorys, are the same people that see no value in genuine critique.

Saying there is more then meets the eye, and that science cannot find out the whole truth for us is one thing. I would strongly agree.

Saying that the highest supported scientific theory is a biased dogma for the likes of "blind men", without making any suitable claim in it's place is another.

That, is the definition of pure ignorance.

If anyone honestly believes they hold the information that suggests evolution is all wrong and we were clearly genetically manipulated, I suggest they get off their backside, build a strong case and let the scientific community know about it.

Something of this nature would be the most historic discovery ever. If you can't be bothered, or are unable to do that, please stop spouting unfounded non-sense that jeopardizes the whole alternative community.

That is all.

Posted by Pie'n'eal"
Sticking Annunaki and Niribu in the conversation negates all credibility. This is jamming two ideas into one mind, it will not go. To me that is why it is being propagated!

I suspect the same.

[Forevernyt]

I feel that Evolution is mostly right. But as I mentioned before, there are things that Evolution cannot account for. However, if you question the theory of evolution, you get shot down by those scientists in high places, who's whole livelihoods are based on the theory. Rather than keeping an open mind and investigating, they disparage and eventually drive away those who question Evolution. Watch the documentary Expelled. It explains it much better than I can.

Evolution works well with the history of species and their changes over the years. Evolution does not do so well, when the question of how or why life started. Where did the information from DNA come from? This most important issue, evolutionary scientists have no answer. People believe what they believe. Some so strongly as to close themselves off to any other possibilities.

[Omni connexae!]

Hey Forevernyt,

Posted by Forevernyt (here)
I feel that Evolution is mostly right. But as I mentioned before, there are things that Evolution cannot account for. However, if you question the theory of evolution, you get shot down by those scientists in high places, who's whole livelihoods are based on the theory.

For what reasons do you think they based their livelihoods on this theory?

Posted by Forevernyt
Rather than keeping an open mind and investigating, they disparage and eventually drive away those who question Evolution. Watch the documentary Expelled. It explains it much better than I can.

I have watched it. For anyone that hasn't, it can be watched here.

Posted by Wiki
Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed is a 2008 documentary film, directed by Nathan Frankowski and hosted by Ben Stein. The film contends that the mainstream science establishment suppresses academics who believe they see evidence of intelligent design in nature and who criticize evidence supporting Darwinian evolution and the modern evolutionary synthesis as a mainstream conspiracy to keep God out of science laboratories and classrooms.

Are you basing your understanding on this video?

If so, you may be intrested in this site: http://www.expelledexposed.com/

Posted by Expelled Exposed
Welcome to Expelled Exposed, a detailed look at the Ben Stein movie Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed. We'll show you why this movie is not a documentary at all, but anti-science propaganda aimed at creating the appearance of controversy where there is none.

To learn why the claims made in Expelled are false, find out The Truth behind the Fiction. For information on the producers and their actions, go Behind the Scenes. To learn more about evolution and intelligent design, or to see what other people thought of Expelled, view our links to other online Resources. For the results of the contest to refute claims by the film's spokesperson, see how visitors to Expelled Exposed Set Ben Straight.

"No Intelligance Allowed"... an intresting word play they used.

Posted by Forevernyt
Evolution works well with the history of species and their changes over the years. Evolution does not do so well, when the question of how or why life started. Where did the information from DNA come from? This most important issue, evolutionary scientists have no answer. People believe what they believe. Some so strongly as to close themselves off to any other possibilities.

Begs the question: how many scientific papers regarding the origins of coded DNA have you read? Are you aware of any theorys that may account for it? Have you researched any scientific theorys regarding the origins of life?

Would you like to discuss those?

-OmniC

[christian]

Posted by Omni connexae! (here)
dogma

n. pl. dog·mas or dog·ma·ta (-m-t)

1. A doctrine or a corpus of doctrines relating to matters such as morality and faith, set forth in an authoritative manner by a church.

[Latin, from Greek, opinion, belief, from dokein, to seem, think; see dek- in Indo-European roots.]

Evolution is nothing like a dogma. Your disparaged use of the word will not change that.

I'm sure you know, what cognitive dissonance is.

It's a very reasonable thing to look up the definition of dogma, I agree. To make it even more clear I offer yet one more!

This is from Webster's:
1
a : something held as an established opinion; especially : a definite authoritative tenet b : a code of such tenets <pedagogical dogma> c : a point of view or tenet put forth as authoritative without adequate grounds
2
: a doctrine or body of doctrines concerning faith or morals formally stated and authoritatively proclaimed by a church

Obviously point one applies here, because we can leave the church out of the equation.

Now you say Darwinian Evolution is not hold as an established opinion?
But is has adequate grounds, right?

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=GVB3nz1GSkg

Posted by Omni connexae! (here)
Evolution has been supported by archaeology, anthropology, paleontology, paleoanthropology and biology. You could say that no discipline, discovery, theory or philosophy of science provides any challenge to evolution. In fact, evolution has been argued to be the most solidly and widely supported theory in science. That has absolutely nothing to do with it being pushed like a dogma.

Saying that the highest supported scientific theory is a biased dogma for the likes of "blind men", without making any suitable claim in it's place is another.

That, is the definition of pure ignorance.

Amazing how you know all these scientific disciplines by name! I assume you also know about the so called "forbidden archeology" and how it supports Darwinian Evolution. I wonder why it is called forbidden..

And it's of course known, that all the widely supported views argued to be the most solid are really the most reliable. That's has nothing to do with being pushed of course, especially not like a dogma, how could I not see that?

Posted by Omni connexae! (here)
If anyone honestly believes they hold the information that suggests evolution is all wrong and we were clearly genetically manipulated, I suggest they get off their backside, build a strong case and let the scientific community know about it.

What a superb idea! Let's say I am the scientist who discovered the impossible. I have a wife, 3 kids and a mortgage, but I don't care if will no longer be employed or get no more funding because I will speak out for what I found out to be true, I'm an idealist! Just like the brave men and women from Architects & Engineers for 9-11 Truth. By now it is officially known, that 9-11 was an inside job, I guess my case will be just as successful. Or all the other cases in history, telling something that contradicts the mainstream view is always highly appreciated by everyone. Darwin did so! Well he was connected to many sinister folks among the "New World Order". But that is only a crackpot conspiracy theory, obviously!

These nutcases even write books!

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=1xwCGk5Qdrc

(starting at 1:55)

Posted by Omni connexae! (here)
Something of this nature would be the most historic discovery ever. If you can't be bothered, or are unable to do that, please stop spouting unfounded non-sense that jeopardizes the whole alternative community..

I speak for myself and no one else speaks for me, not a single person and not 'the alternative community', so I might merely jeopardize myself.

It's very impressive how you defend Darwinian Evolution, but for the sake of the debate, read Sitchin's Genesis Revisited or Dr. Horn's Humanity's Extraterrestrial origins. You really want plausible points for the case of genetic engeneering? Read the books. Don't ask me to spell them out for you, just get the books, and read them from the beginning to the the end.

If you are short on money, you maybe find some information as well as Genesis Revisited (I don't know if it's the entire book, though) in the Biblioteca Pleyades.

[Tony]

Isn't evolving meaning a new realisation?
I have evolved from a really, really, really, angry, fuming, spiky thing, to the lovely thing I am now. I have evolved!

[christian]

They say there are missing links, well they say there are no missing links though...

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=SWDRz5cSziQ

Yet another scientist speaking out. I guess he could just be labeled a conspiracy nut, so he's not among respected scientists anymore, so Darwinism is still the real deal.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=7Wr-lXLGCxQ

[Forevernyt]

Omni,

I hear what you are saying. I'm not claiming to be a scientist. I do not have formal training in biology, geneology or any other "ology" that pertains to evolution and or the origins of life. "They how can I comment on such things?" one might ask. Well, I'm a fairly intelligent person. I've seen enough documentaries, read enough articles, and heard plenty of stories in my lifetime to question, ask and discuss things.

To answer your question, no I have not studied research papers or read up on "theories" of the origin of DNA. That was until just now. I found an article relating to the origins of life and how things may have come together in the primordial soup that was the early Earth. They explained about how the components of the atmosphere at the time, coupled with pressure and electrical discharge, could have paved the way for the molecules to cling together forming chains of amino acids and other building blocks. Then they postulate how RNA may have been the "jack-of-all-trades" in helping the protein catalysis along with the DNA strand. From the article:

Instead, it is assumed that RNA acted as a precursor of both protein and DNA, in the sense that it can serve both as catalyst (like protein enzymes) and as carrier of genetic information.

I got the gist of it, but if you ask me, there are a whole lot of maybe, assumptions and guesses about what actually happened still.

Again, I'll say I'm not an enemy of evolution. I believe evolution can be used to explain all of the mutations, genetic trends, and family trees of all living things on Earth. But, I also believe that evolution still cannot, without a shadow of a doubt, explain how life started.

There are many theories and ideas by modern scientists. As our technology and understanding of these things improve, so will our ideas about what started life. I look forward to the day that they know for sure.

But, I also do not want you to think that I'm only a proponent of Intelligent Design and by that, I think that God had a hand in starting life. I'm not looking at it in a religious stand point at all.

Here's another idea (which will probably get me laughed at, but I don't really care). If you've followed any of the Dan Burisch stories, he talks about his Lotus project. I don't claim to know all of the details, and I'm expounding from memory right now, but according to what Dan claims, the project consisted of a liquid medium and some sort of silicate crystal, being activated either electronically or harmonically, in such a way, that organic material began to spontaneously appear within the liquid medium. At one point, they produced what he believed to be neuronal material. The project was created organic material coming from somewhere else. Who's to say, assuming that his experiments were true as he explained them, that the conditions were not the same in the early stages of the earth, to produce this material spontaneously?

It's just a thought, and idea..a theory if you will.

[gabbahh]

Posted by Omni connexae! (here)
In fact, evolution has been argued to be the most solidly and widely supported theory in science.

That would be math.

But yeah, we can all see the dinos are long gone.

For your ENTERTAINMENT and some food for thought I present to you some guy from the Church who tries to shoot holes in the evolution of the Universe and of Species. I find a number of his arguments shaky, but others are compelling.

If you are allergic to Religion/Christianity, do not watch. Many will prolly zap away, others might have a laugh.

I present to you:
100 reasons why evolution theory is stupid.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...8597272982882#

[Omni connexae!]

Hey Forevernyt,

Posted by Forevernyt (here)
Omni,

I hear what you are saying. I'm not claiming to be a scientist. I do not have formal training in biology, geneology or any other "ology" that pertains to evolution and or the origins of life. "They how can I comment on such things?" one might ask. Well, I'm a fairly intelligent person. I've seen enough documentaries, read enough articles, and heard plenty of stories in my lifetime to question, ask and discuss things.

I have no problem with people commenting on things like this, in fact I encourage it! It's only when people start talking about stuff they don't know about, yet talk as if they know it all, that I can't stand... and for the record, your not one of them =)

When I see that happening, I atleast try to offer a chance for people to understand these things. It's the least I could do.

Posted by Forevernyt
To answer your question, no I have not studied research papers or read up on "theories" of the origin of DNA. That was until just now. I found an article relating to the origins of life and how things may have come together in the primordial soup that was the early Earth[...] I got the gist of it, but if you ask me, there are a whole lot of maybe, assumptions and guesses about what actually happened still.

Yeah, but that's where a scientific theory always starts.

Crazy ideas, assumptions and guesses about what could have happened.

But the thing is, that's only the start of a very long process, it has to be tested and verified in so many ways before it should ever be taken seriously.

Again, I'll say I'm not an enemy of evolution. I believe evolution can be used to explain all of the mutations, genetic trends, and family trees of all living things on Earth. But, I also believe that evolution still cannot, without a shadow of a doubt, explain how life started.

Well, this is actually a common mistake. What your saying is true, but is irrelevant because...

Evolution as it is accepted today, only claims to explain how life changes once it already exists.

Abiogenesis is the study of the "origins of life". =)

Here's a short video that points this out, and a few other common misconceptions when dealing with this topic. It also describes briefly one of the leading abiogenesis models.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=U6QYDdgP9eg

Posted by Forevernyt
But, I also do not want you to think that I'm only a proponent of Intelligent Design and by that, I think that God had a hand in starting life. I'm not looking at it in a religious stand point at all.

Understood. ;-)

Posted by Forevernyt
Here's another idea (which will probably get me laughed at, but I don't really care). If you've followed any of the Dan Burisch stories, he talks about his Lotus project. I don't claim to know all of the details, and I'm expounding from memory right now, but according to what Dan claims, the project consisted of a liquid medium and some sort of silicate crystal, being activated either electronically or harmonically, in such a way, that organic material began to spontaneously appear within the liquid medium. At one point, they produced what he believed to be neuronal material. The project was created organic material coming from somewhere else. Who's to say, assuming that his experiments were true as he explained them, that the conditions were not the same in the early stages of the earth, to produce this material spontaneously? It's just a thought, and idea..a theory if you will.

I havn't looked into it before, I'll check it out. However, the experiment you described did remind me of the Miller Urey experiment. It proves how amino acids can spontaneously appear. I guess it's not exactly the same thing you described, but it tends to lead to the same conclusion you have.

Heres a short video about that experiment:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=j9ZRHoawyOg

-OmniC

[Forevernyt]

You know, (tongue in cheek) all of this discussion reminds me of one of my favorite passages from H.P. Lovecraft...

The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents. We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far. The sciences, each straining in its own direction, have hitherto harmed us little; but someday the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall go mad from the revelation or flee from the deadly light into the peace and safety of a new dark age. - H.P. Lovecraft "The Call of Cthulhu"

[gabbahh]

So what you are saying Oc, is that Life is a (mathematical) certainty, governed by the Laws of the Universe. This implies that alien life is a certainty. When looking at fractals and nature, its quite easy to see how basic patterns and laws can lead to pretty complex manifestations in 3d reality.

So we got this Universe and these laws/maths. Simple yet efficient, creating something so complex and vast, too vast for our simple minds to fully appreciate and understand. That all this happened by chance.... Maybe there are infinite of these realities, all with slightly different laws. So when there are infinite Universes, chance turns into certainty. Who knows?

Greetings, Johny Stardust

[Omni connexae!]

Hey Gabbahh,

Posted by gabbahh (here)
So what you are saying Oc, is that Life is a (mathematical) certainty, governed by the Laws of the Universe. This implies that alien life is a certainty. When looking at fractals and nature, its quite easy to see how basic patterns and laws can lead to pretty complex manifestations in 3d reality.

Well saying it's a "mathematical certainty" is hard to define, that's a crazy tangent in itself. You could say Mathematics and Geometry are ways to model the way everything in the known universe "works".

Although, I made a short post in this thread regarding alien life probabilities:

Posted by OmniC
I personally expect there to be other life in the universe. But I've been looking into it on a more technical level recently. The odds are actually a lot lower than most people think. Let alone intellegent life.

The book "Rare Earth" is worth a read.

I expect that life is fairly common in the universe (fairly is ofcourse fuzzily defined.) But intellegent life is another matter... if we take our current understanding and do the maths, it's improbable. Not impossible, but highly rare if at all. Then when you start factoring in not just distance but time aswell, the likelyhood of ever meeting a real ET becomes highly improbable to say the least.

Posted by gabbahh (here)
So we got this Universe and these laws/maths. Simple yet efficient, creating something so complex and vast, too vast for our simple minds to fully appreciate and understand. That all this happened by chance.... Maybe there are infinite of these realities, all with slightly different laws. So when there are infinite Universes, chance turns into certainty. Who knows?

What your saying reminds me of one of the quantum mechanics interpretations, the "Many-worlds interpretation". Infact that also reminds me of the "Timeline" theory that is discussed here. But I know next to nothing about quantum mechanics. That's a whole new can of worms.

There is the whole "Multiverse" thing aswell, might be worth checking out.

-OmniC

[alsiani]

Hi everyone!

Let's get things even more confusing to you. I took this from bibliotecapleyades. Here is the direct link:
[URL="http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sumer_anunnaki/anunnaki/anu_14.htm"]


Aloha Dr. Salla,

> Thank you for sharing your insights and reflections on the Anunnaki
> and Jehovah in your paper examining the exopolitical history of
> humanity

Thank you for the compliment!

> I also agree with you that a key historical event was the
> disappearance of the Anunnaki around 2000 BC. Now your insight here
> that this signified a take over by another group of ETs led by
> Jehovah is very insightful.

I have also been able to scavenge enough data from the ancient clues to construct a mathematical model of the orbit of Nibiru / Planet X, and guess what, in that fateful year 2024 BCE it was precisely in its aphelion, the farthest out point. Think about it, if you are an outsider seeking to attack the Anunnaki bases on Earth, when would be the best time for attack?
I will present my model of the orbit of Planet X in my book, along with the full chain of reasoning that led to it.

> This would explain why Yahweh could not be seen [...]

I have also pondered the possibility that Yahweh did not want anyone to see his physical form because he was so extremely ugly and gross. Which brings us to the following thought... does anyone remember the highly negative “disclosure briefing” John Lear gave to Art Bell last year? When he was “showing” the 18 alien species known to the shadow government, he made a comment about one of them:

“These are five-second slides of the 18 different alien species we are looking at. That one there is the most gruesome-looking. The guards at one facility are carefully indoctrinated over a period of several months being shown pictures similar to but not exactly like the alien. Only when they’d been acclimatized, so to speak, to the horrible-looking beings are they allowed to stand in security positions. Before these acclimatization were done, we had two guards die of a heart attack as the aliens came down the hallway unexpectedly.” [Alex Collier spoke about this, too]
(...)
Hmm, Yahwist reptilian-insectoids helping Nazis... But then we know that Hitler was in fact a Jew, an illegitimate grandson of one of the Rothschilds.


(And for those wondering, my answer to the Lear Test is an emphatic Yes.)

> It was another ET race, the Reptilians, who basically came and took
> over the Earth by gaining the allegiance of various tribes such as
> the Hebrews.

. and I believe their methods involved mental takeover, neuro-linguistic programming (NLP) and Controlled Remote Influencing (CRI). I will write more about this in my book.

> Now there
> are a couple of areas where it would be useful getting some
> clarification and a disagreement over who are the best allies of
> humanity in the present exopolitical situation on Earth.

OK...

> First, the role of the Illuminati in what has been described so far
> is critical.

Yes.

> Who exactly are they? Are they remnants of the Anunnaki
> control that previously existed (my initial idea) or extensions of
> the Reptilian takeover (Icke’s idea) or a combination of both?

I believe the former. Of course considering that the Yahwists’ primary modus operandi seems to be mental takeover and reprogramming, it is entirely possible and plausible that many of the Illuminati have fallen to their side.

> My guess is that the Illuminati are more closely aligned with the
> Anunnaki which is why there has been historic conflict between the
> Illuminati and Religious institutions such as the Catholic Church
> which presumably are bastions of Reptilian control.

Very sharp, that’s exactly my reasoning.

> E.g, the Knight
> Templars and their destruction by the Catholic Church, here the
> Anunnaki elite are destroyed by the Jehoavah/Yahweh based elite.

Yes, and think about what got the Templars in trouble in the first place: they undug something in the ruins of Jerusalem, which we know from Sitchin is the site of Anunnaki’s Command Centre. Now think about these two questions:

1. What is the most restricted and most secure place on Earth today?
It is not the White House. It is not the Pentagon. It is not Kremlin. It is the Dome on the Rock in Jerusalem. Or Area 51. One of those two.

Or rather they are probably about equal. Now what does it tell you, the mere fact that those two can be listed side by side like this? They are fundamentally of the same nature, major ET sites on Earth.

2. What is the never-ending conflict between Israel and Palestine all about?

It’s about Jerusalem. Even more specifically, about who ought to own that Sacred Spot. It is the apple of the dispute.

Now why is it so special? Why is it worth risking World War III over? We know why it was so important in the past - it was the Anunnaki Command Centre. But why is it so important now? Merely because of its ancient history? I doubt that. What if there is some interplanetary communication equipment still operating there TODAY?

And one more point. We’ve all heard of government mind control and programming. They are putting programs in us. But think about it: where are the programs coming from? I’m a computer programmer by profession and know very well that programs need to be written by programmers, distributed, etc. What if the programs being beamed into our minds by the shadow government are being DOWNLOADED to Earth (from Alpha Draconis?) through the interplanetary radio link at Mt. Moriah in Jerusalem and then distributed further?

I have a lot more to say about that Sacred Spot on Mt. Moriah, but I will save the rest for my book. Stay tuned.

> In your analysis, if the Illuminati are associated with the
> Anunnaki, they are the good guys.

Yes. I know this will be a great shocker to this whole community which generally sees the Illuminati as the root of all evil. This is one of the hardest to swallow bits of my research. That’s why I don’t like just dropping this on people, I want to ease it on through point-by-point reasoning and evidence in my book. But you sort of prodded it out of me.

> The conflict in Iraq has
> echoes of this ancient conflict between the Anunnaki and the Jehovah
> based religionists who are secretly a front for the Reptilians. I’d
> be interested in hearing your thoughts on this.

I fully agree with you that the war in Iraq is an exopolitical conflict.

We independently reached the same conclusions. When the whole saber-rattling about Iraq was just starting, I realized from the get-go what was going on: “oh great, invasion of Sumer”.

I(...)
OK, it’s time for me to drop another bombshell. Brace yourself. I believe Saddam Hussein was/is a good guy. All the bad things they say about him are reptilian propaganda. He undug some ancient Anunnaki equipment and was able to reactivate it. He reestablished contact with Anunnaki and was trying to bring them back. That’s why they wanted him out.

And just recently I heard on Coast to Coast that Saddam’s lawyer argues for his client having a right to run in the Iraqi elections, and some poll showing that 42% of Iraqis want him back. Wouldn’t it be great if the Iraqis elect him democratically? That would be a powerful message to the reptoids, we don’t want Yahwists, Yankees and their lies here, we want our true gods and goddesses, the Anunnaki, and our legitimate President Saddam Hussein!

> The problem
> then shifts from Reptilians per se, to hybrid human-Reptilians that
> comprises the Enki faction of the Anunnaki.

“Problem”? Enki is not a “problem”, he was a hero and a saint in my book! This is probably the area where I disagree with you and a number of other people who think of Anunnaki as controlling and manipulative.
It is true that Anu was very authoritarian, and his son Enlil (whose mother was Anu’s wife and half-sister Antu, i.e., pure Anu race) was the same way. Enki was very different. His mother was one of Anu’s concubines, who I believe was a Sirian queen or princess.

So Enki was only half Anu race, the other half Sirian. His exopolitics was also totally different from Anu’s. While the Enlilites indeed established an aristocratic social order in the civilizations under their control, and I have to agree that they were too controlling and undemocratic, I do not see a single shred of evidence of any such controlling behavior on Enki’s part. Enki managed the ancient Egypt, and note that all of celestial alignments in the pyramids point to Sirius and the belt stars of Orion, NOT to Rigel which is where I believe the planet of Anu came from (I’ll explain this in my book).

Enki was NEVER interested in any manipulation and control of humans, and he was always interested in giving humans as much as possible in the way of civilization, wisdom and spirituality. And his son Marduk even wanted to teach humans how to build rockets and go to space in 3500 BCE! (I’m talking about the Bab-Ili rocket launch tower of course.) After the nuclear holocaust of 2024 BCE Enki, risking his own life, went around in the radioactive fields of Shumer trying to use his scientific/magical tricks to clean up the place as much as possible and to make plants grow again.

> Now the final point I wish to make and where I feel we disagree is
> with the idea that the Anunnaki are our allies in freeing the earth
> from the Reptilians who use Jehovah/Yahweh/Allah as covers for their
> secret domination of Earth. As I see it, there are two ET factions
> who have historically competed for control of Earth. By choosing one
> faction over the other, presumably because it is genetically more
> human and has shown evidence or being more compassionate than the
> other, doesn’t appear to be very transformative to me.

Yes, we disagree a little here. I don’t believe that the Enki faction ever had any intent of domination and control, and therefore they ought to perfectly qualify as our true allies. As for the rest of the Anu clan, i.e., the Enlilites, they indeed had a few undesirable qualities, and I agree with you that we need to be careful with them. But I’m not saying that we should revert totally to the old ways and just bow down to them. We should welcome them as friends, but on new terms: as friends and not as overlords.

But I don’t think that the present-day descendants of Anunnaki, if they come into contact with us, would try to control us like they did before.

The exopolitical situation now is totally different. We now have a common enemy, and defeating them is far more important than our petty differences. That is basically my main argument: we can’t compare Anunnaki and reptiles side by side and say that they are just vying for control and one is no better than the other, because they are incomparable.

Anunnaki weren’t just “a little more compassionate to us”, we ARE them basically, and although yes, they did screwed up majorly a few times, those wounds can be healed and we can move forward together, but the dark forces of Yahweh are the enemy of Life itself. To use a Tolkien analogy (Lord of the Rings), the differences between us and Anunnaki are the little differences between humans, hobbits, elves and dwarves/gnomes, but Yahweh is Sauron and USA is Mordor.

(...)
> I think we can look beyond these two factions for a solution and
> find the answer in other ET races that are not associated with
> either faction that are used to running the Earth. A number of
> contactees have spoken of ET races from Andromeda, Arcturus, Sirius
> A., Pleiades, etc., who are also here trying to assist humanity in
> its evolution.

Which brings us to my favorite slogan: Proletarians of all planets, unite!

(It is of course derived from Karl Marx’ famous “Proletarians of all counties, unite!”, and yes, I am a Communist and I’ll reveal some startling Soviet-Anunnaki connections in my book.)

> However, I believe
> that even the Anunnaki cannot be fully trusted due to ingrained
> habits of control and elitism that would soon result in new
> institutions of power and control that would enslave/limit portions
> of humanity.

Yes, and I certainly don’t suggest that we blindly entrust them with everything, but again I believe in giving them a second chance as friends rather than controllers, and I really believe that they have learned a lesson and will now know that it’s much better to cooperate rather than control, and that in open cooperation we will be much stronger together and much more effective in fighting the forces of darkness.


Love & light and Blessed Be,
Michael Sokolov
Engineer / Researcher / Truth seeker / Freedom fighter
-----------------------

Still in shock?
I'm not saying that I believe with this all, but it actually makes sense. At least, we should think about this.

Michael Sokolov and Robert Morning Sky (who wrote Terra Papers) agree in one thing: the annunaki were betrayed by the yawhists, the reptilian race remants. Since 4000 years ago the reptilian seem to be ruling the things out here.

It makes some sense to think that the good annunaki guys that were really interested in helping humankind and that is why they are taking so long to implement their agenda.
A bunch of logical questions could be answered then.

If the controlling elite are in charge for so long why would they wait for us to come to this point (we're almost 7 million!) to implement their ultimate control.

I think that Sitchin either lied or was forced to lie. He should know that the Annunaki are not the ones in charge now.

I'll be back to this subject soon.