Sitchin Ancient Alien work is Illuminati Psy-Op tied to Rothschild

I see that you use the word ESTIMATED !!!

estimated does not make it true
especially when you are estimating
2 different rock classifications.

Sandstone does not weigh as much
as granite or diarite. So if the stone
is of a different compound then your
estimated weights are BS.

doesn't appear so

Red granite is red granite. anything other than actually weighing the object on a scale is called an estimation. now go fuck yourself.

Sure red granite is red granite, no one can doubt this nonsense. But i guess you mean red granite is red sandstone, and this is fundamentally wrong.



What is the Difference Between Sandstone and Granite?
Sandstone, as its name implies, is composed of many small grains of sand loosely held together. You may be able to rub some off with your hand. The grains will be small and there will be spaces between the grains. Granite on the other hand is formed from the melt underground, and has crystallized there. The crystals will be larger - up to cm size - and firmly bound.


How is granite different to sandstone?
Granite is an Igneous rock, sandstone is a sedimentary rock, sandstone is made up of grains that are bonded together lightly, you can even rub some of the grains off with your hands. Granite is not made from grains, they are deep into the mountains, and used for building materials, they even have crystals in them.

Granite is harder than sandstone for a start. Also granite has a crystal type structure whereas sandstone has a sedimentary structure which is weaker as it has been compressed and deposited in its formation which makes it weather easier.


Why is granite harder than sandstone?
Granite is composed of interlocking grains, a result of minerals solidifying at different temperatures as they cool from magma. This interlocking structure makes granite very durable and hard. Sandstone is formed of cemented sand sized grains. The bond between grains is not as strong as the interlocking grain found in granite.


Ask away!
( [link to wiki.answers.com]

WOW, you assume a lot of nonsense.

While your language shows, that it is the other way around here. You classify anyone who doesn't believe your point of view, are 'fucks'. This term applies, 'less human' then you.

It also shows a lack of respect to your fellow humans, and all this, just for being wrong in your belief system.

Also its a quasi indirect adhominem, a logical fallacy,

Shows a lot, in just a one-liner, doesn't it.

You know what i find the most funny here, the evolution theorist group is actually in defense for the creationist group. While they are even more opposed against each other then to the intervention theorist.

If you dont know the difference between the interventionist and the creationist, then why are you oven brothering to debate.

The trilithon are composed of red granite, which is much harder and denser than sandstone. The Sarcophagus in the king's chamber is made of red granite. Red granite varies slightly in density from sample to sample; however, there are limits. Why is there no Roman documentation of this feat of moving such huge blocks to compose the retaining wall? Are you telling me it was common practice, just a nothing event done every day in the ancient world? You are being argumentative and counter productive. Face it, this fucking obfuscation about the trilithon's weight is you covering for a piss poor explanation. I do not assert aliens did anything; however, I do know that to this very day we would be hard pressed to duplicate the feat of constructing baalbek or Cheops pyramid.

And then there is the tight mortarless fit of the massive stones in the wall at Sacsayhuaman. You know, the ones where you have cyclopean stones weighing many tons that have been fitted with such precision, although there are numerous odd angles, that you cannot fit a piece of paper in between them.

And then there are the massive stone spheres in Costa Rica etc. You know! the ones that weigh many tons and are just lying around all over central america for no particular reason.

And then there are the negroid features on the massive stone carvings found in central america which date back to a time before ANybody from africa had ever been to the americas.





Do not forget, the pyramid has no writing on it and it was dressed in white limestone casing blocks which gave it smooth flat surfaces on each of its four sides. It literally shimmered like a brightly lit object in the desert in the midday sun. That was magic to the extant population of what is now Cairo some 2000 years ago. And all the evidence we have of Cheops is a small statue some few inches high. Some bizarre legacy to say the least. Again, to hell with aliens, but give me a break, You'd think Cheops would have tooted his horn a bit more. Then there is the fact that pyramids built subsequent to Cheops are inferior in construction quality. Hmmm! what is that all about? Lead poisoning in the water supply? Pica in the bread, onions and beer?


The real test is for all these armchair assholes to try to duplicate the construction method they think they have nailed. Some Japanese engineers tried to build a replica of the great pyramid a few years back and even with the help of a modern crane they could not put together a forty foot high replica.

The other thing I would like to have explained is how the egyptians were able to carve out the red granite sarcophagus in the king's chamber in such a way that the volume removed was equal to the volume remaining? And then there is the accuracy of the dimensions, the precision of the orientation of the pyramid to true north. There are many things that appear to be very difficult to do that have been attributed to good luck. I just do not buy it.

I watched all the vids in the OP. i think that we continue to disregard the existence of giants in those times. i mean literal giant humans. hybrids? half-man half-angel? possibly. but, the ancient writings all speak of giant men, pre-flood era.

Salt

I can see not too many others
watched the debunk video.
They would rather go on
ranting about non-sense.

The video gives the kinds of explanations that are flimsy at best. They are not proofs. There is only conjecture. No proof. Prove it by doing it or shut the fuck up.

the only argument i see in michael's vid is the discussion about the watchers and the nephilim.

i find these to be hybrid creatures (nephilim)
and they were also giants.

so....

everything else debunking sitchin is correct.
sitchin is a illuminati shill. period end of sentence.

the video proof comes from a PHD Professor
in ancient languages from the Univ. of Wisconsin
Madison.

and how many degrees does Sitchin have ???

ZERO

and how many degrees does Von Daniken have ???

ZERO

but Daniken does have a criminal record
in Switzerland for fraud and embezzlement.
He spent a yr in prison.

Do criminal records count as degrees
where you come from ???

good job :)
you would be correct

plenty of proof around
for those who just look.

there is also another parallel
between these Ancient Alien
propaganda shills.

They are ALL Jewish.

Josef Blumrich = Austrian Jewish
Zecharia Sitchin = Russian Jewish
Von Daniken = Swiss Jewish

Zionist Illuminati Psy-Op ???

and their funding

Rothschild = Zionist Jewish

yes but they aren't real jews. they are jewish descent, but are now zionist imperialists.

valid point :)
thanks

In formal logic, your counter argument is called an appeal to authority. Let us assume that the phd in languages is as much an amateur as anybody else when it comes to ancient building techniques, anthropology and egyptology.


As far as sitchin is concerned, his resume' is as follows:
Sitchin was born in the then Azerbaijan SSR of the Soviet Union, but was raised in Mandatory Palestine. He received a degree in economics from the University of London, and was an editor and journalist in Israel, before moving to New York in 1952. While working as an executive for a shipping company, he taught himself Sumerian cuneiform and visited several archaeological site.

It looks like sitchin does have a degree.

Just remember that Schliemann, the guy who discovered Troy, was an amateur acheologist who embraced his hobby after he had made his fortune in business. He did much the same thing sitchin did.

Read the following entry from wikipaedia:

Heinrich Schliemann (German pronunciation: [ˈʃliːman]; (January 6, 1822 – December 26, 1890) was a German businessman and amateur archaeologist, and an advocate of the historical reality of places mentioned in the works of Homer. Schliemann was an archaeological excavator of Troy, along with the Mycenaean sites Mycenae and Tiryns. His work lent weight to the idea that Homer's Iliad and Virgil's Aeneid reflect actual historical events.

Sitchin's thesis begins with the notion that the bible reflects actual historical events. So! there is a precedent for what Sitchin did.

Again. I must state that I believe there was some kind of advanced civilization that disappeared and took with it it's technology; otherwise, there would be an historical account of the methodology employed in the construction of these miraculous objects that seem far in advance of anything our antecedents had for the last couple of thousand years.

above post translated means:

I didn't watch the video either

so thanks for clarifying that
for us

I watched the fucking video and I know that the putz who made it was making an argument. Just like a court room where lawyers present a case. The jury is us. I am not of the opinion that ancient astronauts built the pyramids; however, I am of the opinion that there was an ancient culture that we have lost touch with that was able to build the megalithic structures that fascinate us today. The Pyramid builders predate The theoretical trilithon builders (Romans according to the video, which I do not believe to be the case), according to the video, by many thousands of years. The central and south american megalith builders, according to the movie had no contact with the egypt or rome. How the fuck did three separate cultures, separate in both time and geography quarry, dress, transport and put into place such huge, heavy megaliths and then leave no evidence or documentation as to how they did it.

Oh and while you are at it. Please explain how the folks about 600 years ago in Peru without the help of the wheel were able to transport the stones used in Machu Picchu.

From wikipaedia:

The Incas never used the wheel in any practical manner. Its use in toys demonstrates that the principle was well-known to them, although it was not applied in their engineering. The lack of strong draft animals, as well as steep terrain and dense vegetation issues, may have rendered the wheel impractical. How they moved and placed the enormous blocks of stones remains a mystery, although the general belief is that they used hundreds of men to push the stones up inclined planes. A few of the stones still have knobs on them that could have been used to lever them into position; it is believed that after the stones were placed, the Incas would have sanded the knobs away, but a few were overlooked.

In the trivium, grammar takes care of the who, what, when and where. Rhetoric takes care of the how.

The video is a rhetorical flourish that you buy hook line and sinker. I remain unimpressed until you can corroborate the the theoretical how of the video with a practical demonstration. Show me, not with a model, show me by actually moving a thousand ton stone without a wheel or modern machinery. I doubt you could do it. QED.

This is the closest I can come to showing you the level of proof I require to be convinced:

OMFG this is so nice to see so many people here waking up to the elites lies!

[link to shundrallah.blogspot.com.au]

I have been reporting this for years, debunking sitchen, all anyone has to do is get a sumerian dictionary, learn the real meaning of the words, and read the ancient summerian texts

REALLY GOOD WORK!

yes it is great work

is a pity more don't listen

didn't debunk anything you idiot. its like saying cats are better than dogs. its an opinion stfu

Even IF Sitchin is a fraud it does change all of the other cultures who have beings who descended from the Heavens and left their mark on mankind.

The question is: What would be the point? If your theory is correct it would mean the "Illuminati" made up similar stories with "The Book of Enoch", Ancient China, Ancient Africa, Ancient India, Ancient South America, and the American Indians.

So basically the Illuminati needed to finance a Psyop to support obvious archeological evidence?

Funny thing is I just completed a post on this same subject!

[link to revelationnow.net]

What's better than a conspiracy? A conspiracy of a conspiracy?...give it a rest, you people just love saying everyone is wrong and pointing fingers.

All you need to do is a little browsing of the other videos hosted by the YouTube Account hosting the Ancient Aliens Debunked video to see why that person spent 3 hours trying to steer people away from those theories.

I just sat through a 10 minute video on that channel about Sleep Paralysis stating that it's a 'demonic attack', that it is sometimes linked to researching UFO's or 'occult' (upon which the video showed a photo of a person meditating LOL), and that it is sometimes linked to having a Grandfather who has been practicing 'masonic rituals' (LOL). The video proceeds to claim that 'astral projection' is only done with teh assistance of a demon (LOL). And if you couldn't already guess the ending, it says the only way to stop 'sleep paralysis' is to invoke the name of J.C.

Religion is a hell of a drug.

BE NOT DECIEVED BY:The Great Deception - Project Blue Beam

[link to www.youtube.com]

even if he is. are those giant stones made by modern men aswell??

I would have to concur that indeed Zecharia Sitchin did receive funding for his literary career from the Rothchilds, I was well aware of his being schooled at the London School of Econ. during the time I began to read his material. John F. and Robert Kennedy both went to the same school as well.

Although some of Zecharia's cuneiform translations have been attacked as erroneous by other anthropologists, I believe the breadth of his material to have some factual basis. Remember he has not been the only one to do this kind of work. Some elements of history speak for themselves.

With that being said there may very well be lie worked into the truth to scue the results... or abet the winner just that much more. What matters is that there is speculation that there is lie within the truth and to always be aware of that.

Personally I've seen and read way to much to discount the supposition that there was an intervention in our evolutionary progress.