I got the "Atlantis in Antarctica" theory from the work of Rand and Rose Flem-Ath. It works into the Richat Structure thesis in that Atlantis was a worldwide empire based in Antarctica with one of the outposts being in Mali. I've often wondered if Corsetti is a sort of limited hangout specifically to divert from Antarctica. I've never once heard him mention it, and here he is popping up on Rogan, a controlled outlet.
Part of this whole theory concerns the sudden shift of the Antarctic that hardly anyone talks about. Take a look at the Piri Reis map. Everyone talks about how the coast is shown ice-free, which indicates a warmer climate there, but even more startling is that it is shown connected to South America!
Now look at that same area on a globe. Notice that the Andes is all bent to the east, and there's another corresponding mountain range in Antarctica also bent to the east. Now look more carefully and you'll see a chain of islands wrapping around and connecting them. I suggest this was a single mountain range, bent all out shape during the shift. Who knows what other havoc took place during this time.
As for long lives, it seems as if it has something to do with Anunnaki genetics in humans. They live, I believe, for perhaps 500k years. If you look at the Sumerian King List, you'll see three distinct lengths of reign: first tens of thousands of years, then thousands, then hundreds. I would suggest these correspond to full Anunnaki, part-Anunnaki, then mostly human genetics.
So thinking about Noah, there's that very anomalous incident where his sons saw him naked. No one wants to see their Dad's dingle, sure, but what's the big deal? I'm guessing here that there was something about his physical appearance that made him obviously not a normal human. What that was would be pure guesswork.
Very, very, very long story short, it turns out the Bible is basically about some of the dealings of the Anunnaki with humans. Actually, it's only a small part of a much larger picture. You can approach it as Mauro Biglino does by just reading what's in the text and realizing it's been terribly mistranslated, and a very different story emerges with a correct translation.
IDK how much Biglino really knows about the whole story, although I can see he treads very carefully when brushing up against people's religious convictions. As for myself, I just want the truth.
So it turns out, in brief, that in the Old Testament, these are the fundamental mistranslations (English = original Hebrew = actual identity):
"God" = "Elohim" = Anunnaki (or Nibiruans)
"Lord" = YHVH (or Yahweh) = the Anunnaki named Enlil
Plus, it turns out that Satan is the Anunnaki named Marduk, nephew of Enlil.
The Creator of the Universe is named only once, in Genesis 1:1, which was of course mistranslated. The proper translation is, "The Father of the Beginnings created the Elohim, the heavens and the Earth".
Finally, it's much harder to discern working in the New Testament, but clearly Jesus (and probably other messiahs in history) was sent to aid humanity by one of the Anunnaki, either Enlil of Enki.
It's all a story that the word "fascinating" does not begin to do justice to, and it makes me sad that people are missing out on it. But let's be honest: very few really want to hear it.
I've definitely seen the Piri Reis map. But I guess I never fully considered that it was connected to Antarctica. You make a solid point. Me, I assumed there was some margin for error there, based on the fact that they were working 2 dimensionally when they were making those maps (essentially), and we only have a few examples that corroborate anything similar. This isn't me discounting what you're saying, though. Just throwing my thoughts out there.
I'm aware of the Sumerian king list, too. Definitely a trip. I've always assumed there was more to that particular story.
I'm also vaguely aware of this idea that there is some different more Ancient-Sumerian-friendly, for lack of a better term, translation of the Bible. Do you know where this Mauro Biglino fellow dug up this new translation?
And I'm also not one who is going to tell you there's no chance anything in the Bible was mistranslated. I've heard a fair bit of evidence to suggest otherwise. But if you're down with Jesus, do you think he was pointing humanity towards a God or the Annunaki? And... do you think he's coming back?
I agree that this is all super fascinating. But there is still this issue of trusting authorities to me. I suppose I should probably start looking more into the actual supporting evidence. Got any suggestions on where to start?
Actually, in one of his presentations Biglino tells the "origin story" of this part of his work (couldn't tell you exactly where, though). He's a professional translator and was working for the official publishing house for the Vatican. Starting with the Leningrad Codex, the oldest complete Hebrew copy of the OT, he said, "I'd like to do a translation in the most straightforward way possible. No interpretations, just the plain meanings of the words."
As he moved along in the work, it dawned on him that the story being told was much different that everyone seemed to think. It was actually the story of the interaction of humans with a group of powerful extraterrestrial beings. Sometime later he realized that this group of beings were the same ones the Sumerians wrote about and that Sitchin studied. In short, all his work is original.
As far as Jesus, his whole message boils down to, "act morally". Interestingly, the same simple message comes out of the OT as well, but it's like no one bothers actually reading it. Take a look at Isaiah 1, for example. Yahweh flatly rejects what we would call "organized religion" and tells the people basically just to "act morally". In more modern and developed terminology, we would simply say that everyone should act in accordance with "natural law" (the moral law of the Universe, see Mark Passio). Well, none of this has anything specifically to do with God or the Anunnaki, unless you want to say that the Creator established natural law in the Universe along with it's physical laws.
Jesus (and the other Anunnaki) are definitely coming back. (Note that Satan and his faction of 200 Anunnaki never left.) Jesus says that he'll return "at the end of the age". The Anunnaki alternated rulership of the Earth by zodiacal ages, each being 2160 years.
There are giant problems figuring out when that is, though. Our chronology has been so screwed up with fake history and lies we can't tell what year it really is. Strong evidence tells us that Jesus, for example, was born in what we would call the year 1152 AD. Then we have to establish what year the last turnover was.
You can see the problem. With reasonable guesses, the end of the age is still several centuries out, but on the other hand the Elites sure seem to act like they're running out of time. So who knows? Could be tomorrow or could be a thousand years. In my book, nothing about any of that should affect our adherence to natural law.
Finally, as to where to start, I suggest it should all be guided by the questions you pose to yourself. What do you really want to know about? You'll end up branching off anyway. Like with me, I set out years ago to learn about the "Baltic Dry Index" so I could improve my investing activities. I still do not know what it is.
I'll check Biglino out. You don't have any worries about him working for the Vatican though?
I have mixed feelings on organized religion. There's Isaiah 1, but the Old Testament also has a lot of specifics based on how religion is supposed to work, and there's structure to it. And, in the New Testament, the apostles setup proper churches. Acts covers this quite a bit. 1 Corinthians 14 is just a random example that talks specifically about order in the church.
I think the Bible teaches that we're supposed to gather together in an organized fashion (beyond that I'm not making assertions). However, I get what you're saying. When Paul talks to the churches in Revelation, like what, 1 in 7 doesn't get reprimanded? I think a lot more people are doing it for the wrong reasons than realize it. And I agree that organized religion fails more often than not. But even so, I think the Bible is big on not forsaking the assembly of the saints.
As far as Jesus' teachings go, I'm more curious about the nuance beyond "act morally." There's the concept of grace through faith. There's some real specific prophecy. The concept of the Holy Spirit. The signs that will follow the believer:
17 And these signs will follow those who [d]believe: In My name they will cast out demons; they will speak with new tongues; 18 they[e] will take up serpents; and if they drink anything deadly, it will by no means hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.”
The idea of eternal life:
27 My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. 28 And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father’s hand. 30 I and My Father are one.”
This isn't really Jesus' teaching, but how about the armor of God? (Ephesians 6:10-18) What do you do with that?
I'm aware of a lot of these outside of the norm ideas. I am on conspiracies.win... lol. I like having my ideas challenged. Your viewpoint is particularly interesting, because you have a lot of the pieces put together. I'm not sure what the whole picture looks like, but that's what made me curious. I appreciate you sharing.
I've heard of some ideas about deleted history. "There was no dark ages..." etc. But where do you get Jesus being born in 1152 AD? Or are you just saying that's how far our calendar is off?
(Also, for whatever reason my upvotes don't seem to save. Maybe it's because this account is pretty new?)
Technically speaking, Biglino didn't work for the Vatican but for the publishing house Edizione San Paulo, which handles almost all the Pope and cardinals' work. He steers wide of the Church and it's doctrine, since he's aware of how people get so easily wrapped around the axle with all that. Watch any of his videos and you'll see he's is just all about linguistics and deep etymology. It'd be boring a hell if it wasn't for the actual subject matter. Oh, and when he started talking about this stuff, they flushed him right quick.
You know, you touch on the whole concept of morality, Jesus' teachings, other Biblical teachings, Church doctrine, etc, etc. As you know, the debate is endless. But in the course of this area of research, I stumbled onto a conclusion about the nature of morality and human consciousness that would necessitate a fundamental reconsideration of that entire debate.
Bold claim, to be sure, and I wouldn't make it unless I was sure. There is, as you might guess, an extremely long story that can and should be told to back it up. Guess I'll have to write a book one of these days.
Just as the tip of the iceberg, I'll mention that the penny finally dropped when I closely read the Garden of Eden narrative. Not to explain everything I found, but what I realized was that everyone else had been misreading it. And I mean everyone.
Another tall claim, but do the experiment if you don't believe me. Write down ten (or however many you like) facts about the story that you "know". Then go back and find them in the text (and technically, remember the real text is in Hebrew, not English). Waving your hands around about "what it means" is not allowed.
You'll be shocked how far off you are. If you think you got it all right, send me a copy and I'll put metaphorical red ink all over it just like in school, but no one likes that. Remember, it's not a test for a grade, it's an exercise for learning.
Strangely enough, I saw a confirmation of what I thought were my most esoteric ideas on this in the first season of "WestWorld". That was both startling and reassuring. And if you're wondering how I could possibly wrap this all back to WW, well, I told you it was a long story.
As for the 1152 dating of the Nativity, you'll find it here in Chapter 1 of TSAR OF THE SLAVS by А.Т.Fomenko, G.V.Nosovskiy. These guys are academics, so you may find it rough going when reading it. But that's just the point: it is, as we used to say in mathematics, "closely reasoned". You also find out the Shroud of Turin is real, unless you can convince yourself it's all one big coincidence!
I got the "Atlantis in Antarctica" theory from the work of Rand and Rose Flem-Ath. It works into the Richat Structure thesis in that Atlantis was a worldwide empire based in Antarctica with one of the outposts being in Mali. I've often wondered if Corsetti is a sort of limited hangout specifically to divert from Antarctica. I've never once heard him mention it, and here he is popping up on Rogan, a controlled outlet.
Part of this whole theory concerns the sudden shift of the Antarctic that hardly anyone talks about. Take a look at the Piri Reis map. Everyone talks about how the coast is shown ice-free, which indicates a warmer climate there, but even more startling is that it is shown connected to South America!
Now look at that same area on a globe. Notice that the Andes is all bent to the east, and there's another corresponding mountain range in Antarctica also bent to the east. Now look more carefully and you'll see a chain of islands wrapping around and connecting them. I suggest this was a single mountain range, bent all out shape during the shift. Who knows what other havoc took place during this time.
As for long lives, it seems as if it has something to do with Anunnaki genetics in humans. They live, I believe, for perhaps 500k years. If you look at the Sumerian King List, you'll see three distinct lengths of reign: first tens of thousands of years, then thousands, then hundreds. I would suggest these correspond to full Anunnaki, part-Anunnaki, then mostly human genetics.
So thinking about Noah, there's that very anomalous incident where his sons saw him naked. No one wants to see their Dad's dingle, sure, but what's the big deal? I'm guessing here that there was something about his physical appearance that made him obviously not a normal human. What that was would be pure guesswork.
Very, very, very long story short, it turns out the Bible is basically about some of the dealings of the Anunnaki with humans. Actually, it's only a small part of a much larger picture. You can approach it as Mauro Biglino does by just reading what's in the text and realizing it's been terribly mistranslated, and a very different story emerges with a correct translation.
IDK how much Biglino really knows about the whole story, although I can see he treads very carefully when brushing up against people's religious convictions. As for myself, I just want the truth.
So it turns out, in brief, that in the Old Testament, these are the fundamental mistranslations (English = original Hebrew = actual identity):
Plus, it turns out that Satan is the Anunnaki named Marduk, nephew of Enlil.
The Creator of the Universe is named only once, in Genesis 1:1, which was of course mistranslated. The proper translation is, "The Father of the Beginnings created the Elohim, the heavens and the Earth".
Finally, it's much harder to discern working in the New Testament, but clearly Jesus (and probably other messiahs in history) was sent to aid humanity by one of the Anunnaki, either Enlil of Enki.
It's all a story that the word "fascinating" does not begin to do justice to, and it makes me sad that people are missing out on it. But let's be honest: very few really want to hear it.
I've definitely seen the Piri Reis map. But I guess I never fully considered that it was connected to Antarctica. You make a solid point. Me, I assumed there was some margin for error there, based on the fact that they were working 2 dimensionally when they were making those maps (essentially), and we only have a few examples that corroborate anything similar. This isn't me discounting what you're saying, though. Just throwing my thoughts out there.
I'm aware of the Sumerian king list, too. Definitely a trip. I've always assumed there was more to that particular story.
I'm also vaguely aware of this idea that there is some different more Ancient-Sumerian-friendly, for lack of a better term, translation of the Bible. Do you know where this Mauro Biglino fellow dug up this new translation?
And I'm also not one who is going to tell you there's no chance anything in the Bible was mistranslated. I've heard a fair bit of evidence to suggest otherwise. But if you're down with Jesus, do you think he was pointing humanity towards a God or the Annunaki? And... do you think he's coming back?
I agree that this is all super fascinating. But there is still this issue of trusting authorities to me. I suppose I should probably start looking more into the actual supporting evidence. Got any suggestions on where to start?
Actually, in one of his presentations Biglino tells the "origin story" of this part of his work (couldn't tell you exactly where, though). He's a professional translator and was working for the official publishing house for the Vatican. Starting with the Leningrad Codex, the oldest complete Hebrew copy of the OT, he said, "I'd like to do a translation in the most straightforward way possible. No interpretations, just the plain meanings of the words."
As he moved along in the work, it dawned on him that the story being told was much different that everyone seemed to think. It was actually the story of the interaction of humans with a group of powerful extraterrestrial beings. Sometime later he realized that this group of beings were the same ones the Sumerians wrote about and that Sitchin studied. In short, all his work is original.
As far as Jesus, his whole message boils down to, "act morally". Interestingly, the same simple message comes out of the OT as well, but it's like no one bothers actually reading it. Take a look at Isaiah 1, for example. Yahweh flatly rejects what we would call "organized religion" and tells the people basically just to "act morally". In more modern and developed terminology, we would simply say that everyone should act in accordance with "natural law" (the moral law of the Universe, see Mark Passio). Well, none of this has anything specifically to do with God or the Anunnaki, unless you want to say that the Creator established natural law in the Universe along with it's physical laws.
Jesus (and the other Anunnaki) are definitely coming back. (Note that Satan and his faction of 200 Anunnaki never left.) Jesus says that he'll return "at the end of the age". The Anunnaki alternated rulership of the Earth by zodiacal ages, each being 2160 years.
There are giant problems figuring out when that is, though. Our chronology has been so screwed up with fake history and lies we can't tell what year it really is. Strong evidence tells us that Jesus, for example, was born in what we would call the year 1152 AD. Then we have to establish what year the last turnover was.
You can see the problem. With reasonable guesses, the end of the age is still several centuries out, but on the other hand the Elites sure seem to act like they're running out of time. So who knows? Could be tomorrow or could be a thousand years. In my book, nothing about any of that should affect our adherence to natural law.
Finally, as to where to start, I suggest it should all be guided by the questions you pose to yourself. What do you really want to know about? You'll end up branching off anyway. Like with me, I set out years ago to learn about the "Baltic Dry Index" so I could improve my investing activities. I still do not know what it is.
I'll check Biglino out. You don't have any worries about him working for the Vatican though?
I have mixed feelings on organized religion. There's Isaiah 1, but the Old Testament also has a lot of specifics based on how religion is supposed to work, and there's structure to it. And, in the New Testament, the apostles setup proper churches. Acts covers this quite a bit. 1 Corinthians 14 is just a random example that talks specifically about order in the church.
I think the Bible teaches that we're supposed to gather together in an organized fashion (beyond that I'm not making assertions). However, I get what you're saying. When Paul talks to the churches in Revelation, like what, 1 in 7 doesn't get reprimanded? I think a lot more people are doing it for the wrong reasons than realize it. And I agree that organized religion fails more often than not. But even so, I think the Bible is big on not forsaking the assembly of the saints.
As far as Jesus' teachings go, I'm more curious about the nuance beyond "act morally." There's the concept of grace through faith. There's some real specific prophecy. The concept of the Holy Spirit. The signs that will follow the believer:
17 And these signs will follow those who [d]believe: In My name they will cast out demons; they will speak with new tongues; 18 they[e] will take up serpents; and if they drink anything deadly, it will by no means hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.”
The idea of eternal life:
27 My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. 28 And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father’s hand. 30 I and My Father are one.”
This isn't really Jesus' teaching, but how about the armor of God? (Ephesians 6:10-18) What do you do with that?
I'm aware of a lot of these outside of the norm ideas. I am on conspiracies.win... lol. I like having my ideas challenged. Your viewpoint is particularly interesting, because you have a lot of the pieces put together. I'm not sure what the whole picture looks like, but that's what made me curious. I appreciate you sharing.
I've heard of some ideas about deleted history. "There was no dark ages..." etc. But where do you get Jesus being born in 1152 AD? Or are you just saying that's how far our calendar is off?
(Also, for whatever reason my upvotes don't seem to save. Maybe it's because this account is pretty new?)
Technically speaking, Biglino didn't work for the Vatican but for the publishing house Edizione San Paulo, which handles almost all the Pope and cardinals' work. He steers wide of the Church and it's doctrine, since he's aware of how people get so easily wrapped around the axle with all that. Watch any of his videos and you'll see he's is just all about linguistics and deep etymology. It'd be boring a hell if it wasn't for the actual subject matter. Oh, and when he started talking about this stuff, they flushed him right quick.
You know, you touch on the whole concept of morality, Jesus' teachings, other Biblical teachings, Church doctrine, etc, etc. As you know, the debate is endless. But in the course of this area of research, I stumbled onto a conclusion about the nature of morality and human consciousness that would necessitate a fundamental reconsideration of that entire debate.
Bold claim, to be sure, and I wouldn't make it unless I was sure. There is, as you might guess, an extremely long story that can and should be told to back it up. Guess I'll have to write a book one of these days.
Just as the tip of the iceberg, I'll mention that the penny finally dropped when I closely read the Garden of Eden narrative. Not to explain everything I found, but what I realized was that everyone else had been misreading it. And I mean everyone.
Another tall claim, but do the experiment if you don't believe me. Write down ten (or however many you like) facts about the story that you "know". Then go back and find them in the text (and technically, remember the real text is in Hebrew, not English). Waving your hands around about "what it means" is not allowed.
You'll be shocked how far off you are. If you think you got it all right, send me a copy and I'll put metaphorical red ink all over it just like in school, but no one likes that. Remember, it's not a test for a grade, it's an exercise for learning.
Strangely enough, I saw a confirmation of what I thought were my most esoteric ideas on this in the first season of "WestWorld". That was both startling and reassuring. And if you're wondering how I could possibly wrap this all back to WW, well, I told you it was a long story.
As for the 1152 dating of the Nativity, you'll find it here in Chapter 1 of TSAR OF THE SLAVS by А.Т.Fomenko, G.V.Nosovskiy. These guys are academics, so you may find it rough going when reading it. But that's just the point: it is, as we used to say in mathematics, "closely reasoned". You also find out the Shroud of Turin is real, unless you can convince yourself it's all one big coincidence!