Velikovsky, Fomenko, and the reinterpretation of History

Historical insights & thoughts about the world we live in - and the social conditioning exerted upon us by past and current propaganda.
hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: Velikovsky, Fomenko, and the reinterpretation of History

Unread post by hoi.polloi » Sat Apr 18, 2015 8:02 am

Thanks. I agree. And I'm waiting for that evidence to not just be presented, but be presented well.

If one really does have the documents one claims (and I don't think it's unlikely or else one wouldn't make such a case) then it might be difficult to organize and present. And this being one of the only forums like this on the whole Interwebs, I guess we can be a little patient while they work on constructing a good, cogent, well-cited post with some select pieces.

One thing we don't need in this thread is a thousand pieces of evidence all at once. Let's instead take it point by point and discuss it. What we could use is the first, most convincing and relevant pieces of evidence to be presented to everyone in some way so that any reader can understand the research the presenter has done and how to do it. But no rush. Users like 'scud' and others have raised the bar for summarizing research, and others have raised the bar for how to clearly lay out the path of getting to that research one's self. Simon comes to mind for his constant insistence that — yes, indeed, you can go to specific archives and find the information he presents. That's what I expect. Evidence. Citation. Personal reflection on how to do that research and what one may draw from it.

Flabbergasted
Moderator
Posts: 879
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 12:19 am

Re: Velikovsky, Fomenko, and the reinterpretation of History

Unread post by Flabbergasted » Sat Apr 18, 2015 12:02 pm

ReadyToBeDeployed wrote:Humanity grows fast after the deluge [...]

Before that there were no humans on Earth, the human spirit incarnated/materialized here very recently, a matter of centuries [...]
I am beginning to see signs of an underlying doctrine of sorts.

Perhaps, while we wait for you to select and post some of those thousands of supporting documents, you would care to clarify:
i) where humans are supposed to have come from and when, and
ii) when and where the Deluge occurred and how you prove this.

PS: you have not addressed the question of independent record keeping by cultures not controlled by 19th century Organized Jewry, or however you prefer to define "them".

bostonterrierowner
Member
Posts: 853
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 10:01 pm

Re: Velikovsky, Fomenko, and the reinterpretation of History

Unread post by bostonterrierowner » Sat Apr 18, 2015 5:33 pm

ReadyToBeDeployed wrote: Medieval tournaments were happening in the late 18th century, and 19th century France, there are drawings of "middle age" knights of that time and you can see the mixture of 19th clothing and medieval armour.
Image

How about pictures from 21st century Poland ?

Do you have more "evidence" like this ? :)

Why didn't you respond to my question about Fomenko's treatment of bible fables as if they really happened? Much more recently of course ...

p.s.

Hoi seems to have noticed some merit in your "revelations" , my impression is quite opposite anyways there is one area when you seem to have something of quality to say. Elaborate on dating of documents, 4 digit "christian" way as you put it or lack thereof. Calendar altering has been rampant throughout history and my ears are always open to this subject. I kind of give you the benefit of doubt here.

fbenario
Member
Posts: 2240
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA
Contact:

Re: Velikovsky, Fomenko, and the reinterpretation of History

Unread post by fbenario » Sun Apr 19, 2015 12:23 am

Ataraxia wrote:The onus is upon him to show us something so we can truly learn. He states he has thousands of documents scanned onto his computer but he hasn't uploaded one as evidence?
I also want to see some proof of his claim that the historical dating with which we are familiar has been faked.

Ataraxia
Member
Posts: 50
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 1:15 am

Re: Velikovsky, Fomenko, and the reinterpretation of History

Unread post by Ataraxia » Sun Apr 19, 2015 2:23 am

Or what about a brief timeline showing when things were supposed to happen?

This is just my example, and I likely have the concept completely wrong, and not trying to put words in his mouth, but just trying to jam everything into 500 years or so:

1500 AD: humans come into existence (do they begin in one place and spread out? Why are there different types of people? etc.) People spend about 50 years getting their feet wet and getting to know their new world. Start farming.
1550-1650 AD: Egyptians, Babylonians, Assyrians all during this time. Pyramids built, bible first being written, etc.
1650-1750 AD: Greeks, Alexander the Great, Hellenistic Age, Romans and then Byzantine Empires.
1750-1850 AD: The Dark Age and then the Middle Ages. Then the Renaissance and Enlightenment. America discovered sometime around 1830 and the Age of Discovery also follows. The entire world is mapped out. Both the plague and the Thirty Years War also need to be fit in.
1850-1914 AD: The Scientific and Industrial Revolutions. American/French Revolutions. As he says (if I read it right), Napoleonic Wars in 1871.
1914-2015 AD: Basically brings humanity into the modern ages, using WW1 as a traditional marker for the 'modern era.' There are thousands of people alive who are in their 90s and older who could probably swear that the life they remember living is generally what we're told it is. So we should be okay there?

Where I'm hazy on this, at some point they start pushing back the previous eras? Plato and Homer and others are fabrications? If not pure fabrications, they are at least pushed back further into time to give an illusion of antiquity. Or they invent a Roman Era that parallels their current society, and that's why you can find allusions and comparisons, say between the 12 Apostles and Charlemagne's 12 Paladins, simply because they take what they know and plop it onto the past? It's a reverse Biblical antitype thing happening, but they can't help there from being odd resemblances between things. Like a bad movie remake. Like how the movie Prometheus is almost exactly like Alien but just different enough to be new and yet creepily similar. Except they do it backwards, where Prometheus is really the first, and a new 'original' Alien shows up at some point further down the line, though which now suddenly appears to have always existed?

If they said all along that humanity was only around for a few hundred years, wouldn't that neatly prove the existence of a soul or a spirit or God or something? Wouldn't that give absolute and undeniable power to our rulers or priests who (they would certainly claim), are the physical voices for these gods? Why introduce doubt when they seek absolute control?

Another idea: time is all relative, so if humanity only existed for 500 years, they wouldn't even know that 500 years was not that long of a time, because 500 years only seems to be a short amount of time when compared to our 'normal' history. Which then, why would there be any need to extend the time back, specifically long enough to make it appear ancient to how we now perceive what ancient even is. Maybe I haven't explained it well, but this becomes a paradox I think. But if they didn't extend the dates back, it would appear ancient even if it was 300 years ago, because you wouldn't know any different.

hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: Velikovsky, Fomenko, and the reinterpretation of History

Unread post by hoi.polloi » Sun Apr 19, 2015 6:19 am

Thank you for trying to be reasonable, and I appreciate it. But this subject is presently just waiting for evidence of some kind to be presented — evidence that Velikovsky, Fomenko or others of their ilk are anything but fools or charlatans. Please let's be patient and allow the case to be made instead of getting all irate at it before we even have anything to refute. Surely we are not going to accuse anyone of literally claiming everything happened in 500 years? That's unacceptable mockery of the topic and makes the concept of questioning history out to be idiotic. Did I miss where any user claimed such a short span for all of history? If I did, I apologize for even giving a platform to such an idea.
If they said all along that humanity was only around for a few hundred years, wouldn't that neatly prove the existence of a soul or a spirit or God or something? Wouldn't that give absolute and undeniable power to our rulers or priests who (they would certainly claim), are the physical voices for these gods? Why introduce doubt when they seek absolute control?
This is getting a step removed from the point, I fear. It would prove nothing. We don't need to take the argument there at all. There is none in the self-styled 'elite' priesthood — religious or scientific — that claims such a short time span. Every one of them in that class would tell us all how to think about everything and each has its pulpit masters who argue vehemently about the details; when any two disagree on even a tiny point, they lose the gullible's credibility, which they cherish. (Unless everyone is shown wrong in which case they only gain credibility through "intellectual phaselocking" or through collective acceptance that the answer to that point is an unknown mystery).

Please do not post here any more unless you are discussing specific, cited evidence. Thank you. That goes for defenders of the controversial historians as well. I am sure Simon will lose patience and lock this thread if it devolves any further into squabbles or meanderings instead of mature on-topic discussions of the most challenging questions of our day.

Just to be clear, I mean no personal assault. I genuinely enjoy how your minds work and enjoy reading your posts, and I agree with a lot of them, but I think we can do better at staying on topic.

By the way, no reason you can't start another different topic!

bostonterrierowner
Member
Posts: 853
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 10:01 pm

Re: Velikovsky, Fomenko, and the reinterpretation of History

Unread post by bostonterrierowner » Sun Apr 19, 2015 9:36 am

hoi.polloi wrote:Thank you for trying to be reasonable, and I appreciate it. But this subject is presently just waiting for evidence of some kind to be presented — evidence that Velikovsky, Fomenko or others of their ilk are anything but fools or charlatans.
I wrote about this before but I will repeat myself here. Will anyone honestly interested in calendar alteration throughout history please go to internetarchive.org and download The worship of Augustus Ceasar. Later on one might take some interest in the author and see how his person was/is a perfect example of academic exclusion. Why is Alexander del Mar practically erased from memory and Fomenkos of this world are being promoted ?

The answer is obvious, at least to me.

Reading Del Mar is a remarkable intelectual experience, highly recommended.

ReadyToBeDeployed
Member
Posts: 17
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2012 11:41 pm

Re: Velikovsky, Fomenko, and the reinterpretation of History

Unread post by ReadyToBeDeployed » Mon Apr 20, 2015 1:25 pm

READ.

http://pialogue.info/books/Fomenko-Hist ... -vol-1.pdf

Watch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbQMplPvA7k

This book is A MUST, it's an obligation to participate in this discussion. You need to do your homework, read at least the first 100 pages please, then comment.

PS: A suggestion, after giving some weeks to read this book, I would suggest two different threads, a more "locked" serious organized one of theory and evidence, and another of questions and derailing. But please, download and read the book,

Flabbergasted
Moderator
Posts: 879
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 12:19 am

Re: Velikovsky, Fomenko, and the reinterpretation of History

Unread post by Flabbergasted » Mon Apr 20, 2015 4:20 pm

ReadyToBeDeployed wrote:This book is A MUST, it's an obligation to participate in this discussion. You need to do your homework...
Really?

I will decide about that when you (not Fomenko) have answered my two questions based on statements in a previous post of yours ... questions which I shall repeat below to save you the trouble of scrolling back:
Where are humans supposed to have come from and when?
When and where did the Deluge occur and how do you prove this?

Undoctored
Member
Posts: 48
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2015 5:27 am

Re: Velikovsky, Fomenko, and the reinterpretation of History

Unread post by Undoctored » Thu Apr 23, 2015 2:09 am

Fomenko's Chronology Vol. 1, p. 32:
As we shall learn, the consensual point of view about the Old Testament books preceding those of the New Testament also causes many doubts, and contradicts the results obtained by modern empirico-statistical dating methods.
Just that one sentence discredits whatever "empirico-statistical dating methods" this book may be using to support its conclusions.

So we are to believe that the "New Testament" Gospels, a set of stories addressing a culture with the "Old Testament" Hebrew Bible as its central text, and containing many quotes and allusions to it, was not written after the Hebrew Bible? Give me a break!

kickstones
Member
Posts: 286
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 1:15 pm

Re: Velikovsky, Fomenko, and the reinterpretation of History

Unread post by kickstones » Thu Apr 23, 2015 12:39 pm

Critical Mass wrote:
By the way there are several claimed military advances during that conflict alone... I'm uncertain if you think the Naval war of the late 18th/early 19th centuries are a hoax too* or where you think the large & extremely sophisticated naval vessels are meant to have come from.

* Might be a good racket come to think of it... pay for ships to be built but then don't really build them just say that you did, pocket the cash & fake the battle reports.

Talking of good rackets, here's some information regarding the recorded cost and numbers of the British fleet in year 1757(Paine 1776):
The first and second editions of this pamphlet were published without the following calculations, which are now given as a proof that the above estimation of the navy is a just one. See Entic's "Naval History," Intro., p. 56.

The charge of building a ship of each rate, and furnishing her with masts, yards, sails, and rigging, together with a proportion of eight months boatswain's and carpenter's sea-stores, as calculated by Mr. Burchett, Secretary to the navy."

For a ship of 100 guns, ...... 35,553 £
90 " .......... 29,886
80 " .......... 23,638
70 " .......... 17,785
60 " .......... 14,197
50 " .......... 10,606
40 " .......... 7,558
30 " .......... 5,846
20 " .......... 3,710

And hence it is easy to sum up the value, or cost, rather, of the whole British navy, which, in the year 1757, when it was at its greatest glory, consisted of the following ships and guns.

Ships Guns Cost of One Cost of All
6 ... 100 .... 35,553 £ .... 213,318 £
12 ... 90 ..... 29,886 ...... 358,632
12 ... 80 ..... 23,638 ...... 283,656
43 ... 70 ..... 17,785 ...... 764,755
35 ... 60 ..... 14,197 ...... 496,895
40 ... 50 ..... 10,605 ...... 424,240
45 ... 40 ...... 7,558 ...... 340,110
58 ... 20 ...... 3,710 ...... 215,180

85 sloops, bombs, and fireships,
one with another at 2,000 ... 170,000
Cost, ..... 3,266,786 £
Remains for guns, ....... 233,214
Total, ..... 3,500,000 £
When you consider that Britain had apparently "a debt upwards of one hundred and forty millions sterling, for which she pays upwards of four millions interest" (Paine 1776) at the time of writing, would money gained by not building a few ships be small change for those in charge of the purse strings?

I'm no expert on these matters, but would assume there would be a stringent tax system in place to pay off the interest on the national debt.

Why not have ships built when you getting the money back in taxes anyway?

However, a point to be noted, it was also written at the time:
The English list of ships of war is long and formidable, but not a tenth part of them are at any time fit for service, numbers of them are not in being; yet their names are pompously continued in the list; if only a plank be left of the ship; and not a fifth part of such as are fit for service can be spared on any one station at one time. The East and West Indies, Mediterranean, Africa, and other parts, over which Britain extends her claim, make large demands upon her navy. From a mixture of prejudice and inattention we have contracted a false notion respecting the navy of England,"

"if America had only a twentieth part of the naval force of Britain, she would be by far an over-match for her; because, as we neither have, nor claim any foreign dominion, our whole force would be employed on our own coast, where we should, in the long run, have two to one the advantage
If these accounts are to be believed, and Britain did not have the firepower to engage in naval battles with a rival, could, like you suggest, many of the nautical battle reports around that time period be faked?





http://www.ushistory.org/paine/commonsense/sense5.htm

ProperGander
Banned
Posts: 152
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2015 1:16 pm

Re: Velikovsky, Fomenko, and the reinterpretation of History

Unread post by ProperGander » Fri Oct 09, 2015 8:26 pm

""An unusual aspect of the Egyptian expedition was the inclusion of an enormous contingent of scientists and scholars ("savants") assigned to the invading French force, 167 in total. This deployment of intellectual resources is considered as an indication of Napoleon's devotion to the principles of the Enlightenment, and by others as a masterstroke of propaganda obfuscating the true motives of the invasion; the increase of Bonaparte's power.

These scholars included engineers and artists, members of the Commission des Sciences et des Arts, the geologist Dolomieu, Henri-Joseph Redouté, the mathematician Gaspard Monge (a founding member of the École polytechnique), the chemist Claude Louis Berthollet, Vivant Denon, the mathematician Jean-Joseph Fourier (who did some of the empirical work upon which his "analytical theory of heat" was founded in Egypt), the physicist Étienne Malus, the naturalist Étienne Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, the botanist Alire Raffeneau-Delile, and the engineer Nicolas-Jacques Conté of the Conservatoire national des arts et métiers. Their original aim was to help the army, notably by opening a Suez Canal, mapping out roads and building mills to supply food.[3] They founded the Institut d'Égypte with the aim of propagating Enlightenment values in Egypt through interdisciplinary work, improving its agricultural and architectural techniques for example. A scientific review was created under the title Décade égyptienne and in the course of the expedition the scholars also observed and drew the flora and fauna in Egypt and became interested in the country's resources.

The Egyptian Institute that Napoleon established saw the construction of laboratories, libraries, and a printing press. The group worked prodigiously, and some of their discoveries were not finally cataloged until the 1820s"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_ca ... _and_Syria


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X36EXVwholY

They just keep working on the Sphinx, don't they?
Image
Image

Where are the pyramids?

Image
Image
Image


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oppxto8b6zg

Could much of Egypt be nothing more than a 'Disneyland' of sorts?


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_heg8o3loxs

Are the pyramids made out of concrete, an artificial re-agglomerated limestone? Joseph Davidovits and the Geopolymer Institute crew shows that only few people is able to rapidly and easily produce several tons of pyramid stone blocks.

full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znQk_yBHre4

ProperGander
Banned
Posts: 152
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2015 1:16 pm

Re: Velikovsky, Fomenko, and the reinterpretation of History

Unread post by ProperGander » Sat Oct 10, 2015 6:42 pm

Moving Temple of Ramses II (Egyptian Pharaoh)
An artist is never satisfied and neither are these guys.


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCDQikYVnCA

hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: Velikovsky, Fomenko, and the reinterpretation of History

Unread post by hoi.polloi » Sat Oct 10, 2015 11:22 pm

Interesting. One suggestion of yours seems to be that because you find inconsistencies in the documentation of the Sphynx that it's probable (on some level) that the Sphynx has been slowly created as it has been "unveiled"?

Can you summarize more for those with slower connections and/or for text readers?

ProperGander
Banned
Posts: 152
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2015 1:16 pm

Re: Velikovsky, Fomenko, and the reinterpretation of History

Unread post by ProperGander » Sun Oct 11, 2015 12:35 am

Yes. I think it is entirely possible the early depictions of the Sphinx were nothing more than illustrations, based on verbal accounts. Where is the desert in some of the art? Some of the illustrations look like they are not set in the Egypt we know, as there are trees and what looks to be grass.

The Sphinx could have then been sculpted into reality at some later date by European artists. This would be the purpose of the Napoleon expedition. Perhaps many of the cultures we think of as ancient are simply artificial creations of European minds.

Of course this is just an idea I've been toying with. And as we can see there is some pictorial evidence to support the idea as the pyramids are missing in some of the art and the Sphinx has some neck issues as well as the face of the Sphinx being drawn looking different from the sculpted version. This art provides the visual evidence, we now would expect photographs to provide. People in pre-photography days would take a work of art as having more reality than we do today. These would be the 'photos' or videos of the day and these would be the tools for the manipulation of the mass public. Art has always been used in this manner. Books replace sitting around the campfire. Musical compositions and operas and plays apparently derive from religious ritual and the reenactment of myth, or so we are told. In any case, art as well as food and clothing and so forth, are all elements of culture and all serve to define the boundaries of the public consciousness in one way or another. Artists include engineers and architects and so on. In many ways the artists are the curators of the artifice we call civilization.

The recent LEGO film illustrates this in a brilliant way. I think that film is basically telling everyone how our entire artficial world has been created and managed since its creation. Most would see a child's film about a son playing with his father's toys, with the references to the "New World Order' and pyramids and secret societies tossed in as a joke. Yet the entire script is clear and dead on with the way it all works and anyone who has woken up even a slightly to this grand illusion can see it.

Ancient Greek and Roman and other such 'history' might be contrived as well. Another bit of proof that there is something wrong with the timelines we are presented might also be art history as it is taught. We are told that the craftsmen got really good at their art during the Ancient Roman times and then the knowledge is lost as a result of the legendary invasions of Rome by their northern neighbors. The resulting art from the dark ages looks childish in comparison. But what if the art from the supposed 'Golden Age' simply belongs in the Renaissance? What if such Greco-Roman art was actually created during this later period?

The idea that history is manufactured is not so easily dismissed considering we have witnessed it with events like 9/11, the wars and NASA's ongoing comedic endeavors. Such boldness on the part of the 'archons' (which simply means ruler in Latin, apparently derived from Ancient Greek, as in "monarch" or "one ruler"), could be explained by this being a centuries old modus operandi.

The university system itself is one of the greatest examples of 'mind control'. The museum displays of 'historical treasures' reinforce the cultural narratives of our civilization.

The 'mason' myth might have more to do with actual masonry and sculpture and architecture, than not.

These are possibilities to consider.

see also:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transmiss ... k_Classics

Post Reply