E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Zecharia Sitchin says he's willing to stake everything he's written about alien astronauts on DNA tests that could be performed on the 4,500-year-old remains of a high-ranking Sumerian woman. It's the latest - and possibly the last - cause celebre for a fringe celebrity.
The way Sitchin sees it, the long-dead woman's genome could contain the signature of the gods and demigods he's been talking about since 1976.
The 90-year-old Sitchin was born in the Soviet Union, grew up in Palestine and now lives in a New York apartment. He has written 14 books about way-out subjects, starting out with claims that a "12th planet" named Nibiru swung past Earth thousands of years ago and dropped off alien visitors who were looked upon as gods by Middle Eastern cultures. Sitchin says these aliens were the Annunaki mentioned in Sumerian scriptures, and the Nephilim mentioned in the Bible.
Needless to say, Sitchin's ideas - like those of another ancient-astronaut author, Erich von Däniken - have been roundly scorned by the scientific community. But now Sitchin is asking that very community to help him with the mystery of Queen Puabi.
Puabi's remains were unearthed from a tomb in present-day Iraq during the 1920s and 1930s, roughly the same time frame as the discovery and study of Tutankhamun's tomb in Egypt. Forensic experts at London's Natural History Museum determined that Puabi was about 40 years old when she died, and probably reigned as queen in her own right during the First Dynasty of Ur. Sitchin contends she was something more than a queen - specifically, that she was a "nin," a Sumerian term which he takes to mean "goddess."
He suggests that Puabi was an ancient demigod, genetically related to the visitors from Nibiru. What if these aliens tinkered with our DNA to enhance our intelligence - the biblical tree of knowledge of good and evil - but held back the genetic fruit from the tree of eternal life? Does the story of Adam and Eve actually refer to the aliens' tinkering? The way Sitchin sees it, the ancient myths suggest that "whoever created us deliberately held back from us a certain thing - fruit, genes, DNA, whatever - not to give us health, longevity, and the immortality that they had. So what was it?"
Sitchin wants scientists to test the DNA from Puabi's remains, just in case it holds the answer. "Maybe by comparing her genome with ours, we would find out what are those missing genes that they deliberately did not give us," he told me. "Maybe. I cannot guarantee that, but maybe."
Inner Traditions / Bear & Co.
Zecharia Sitchin says "There Were Giants Upon the Earth" will be his last book.
That kind of talk has led Sitchin's critics to label him a pseudo-historian, a fraud or just plain wrong. But that kind of talk has also sold millions of books since the '70s. Sitchin's latest, "There Were Giants Upon the Earth," recaps all the theories he's built up over the years - the unorthodox interpretations of ancient scriptures, the planet Nibiru's eccentric travels and the existence of a superhuman space society that hopped over to our planet and sparked the ancient myths.
Sitchin claims that the ultimate fate of all those theories would be decided by the DNA tests he wants done on Queen Puabi's remains. "I'm really risking my life's work on this outcome," he said.
Michael Heiser, for one, isn't buying it. He's a scholar in biblical languages who maintains the "Sitchin Is Wrong" website, and he thinks Sitchin's DNA challenge to genetic researchers is just a lot of bluster.
"He wants them to search for something when they don't know what it looks like," Heiser told me. "It's not as if we have a known sample of alien DNA. How do you know when you sequence something, because junk DNA doesn't qualify. What's a hit? If they find anything where they say, 'Hey, we don't know what this does,' he would latch onto that. ... He would zero in on the gaps and the ambiguities."
On his website, Heiser provides in-depth discussions of the objections that have long been raised about Sitchin's writings: that the one-time journalist misreads the ancient texts, that he takes ancient myths as honest-to-goodness history and builds an outlandish cosmology around them, that he indulges in pop-culture paleo-babble.
Inner Traditions / Bear & Co.
Zecharia Sitchin.
Sitchin has a different perspective, of course. The way he sees it, modern science is proving him right. "In field after field, all my conclusions - including some that seemed out of place - are being corroborated," he told me. "If you go to my website you'll see entry after entry about how a new discovery has corroborated my claims."
For example, astronomers have found that distant worlds can trace orbits far more eccentric and skewed than they expected. There's even talk that an unseen giant planet may be lurking on the edge of our own solar system. All this has made Sitchin feel more confident in claiming that the planet Nibiru, home of the Annunaki, really does exist.
You won't find any top-drawer scientists willing to pick up on Sitchin's suggestions, but that's exactly the kind of person he's looking for right now. The Natural History Museum says that any request to conduct DNA tests on Puabi's remains would have to come from "a researcher with recognized experience and skills in this field, or with access to the necessary facilities required to undertake ancient DNA analysis."
Sitchin told me he's checking with various research groups, including some of the researchers behind last month's Neanderthal DNA findings and the DNA analysis conducted on 4,000-year-old human hair from Greenland. "I'm offering from my minuscule family foundation to fund this, by the way, so I'm not asking them for money," Sitchin told me. "And I'm not asking them to say Sitchin is right or wrong. I'm asking them to tell the museum in London this is too important not to do it. And that's where it stands."
It probably wouldn't be right for researchers to take Sitchin's money - but a TV documentary about the glittering riches of ancient Ur, climaxing with experts doing forensic tests on the remains of ancient royalty? Hey, if it worked for the Discovery Channel with "Secrets of Egypt's Lost Queen," ... for the History Channel with "Coroners Report: King Tut" ... and for the National Geographic Channel with "The Real Cleopatra" ... well, it should work with Queen Puabi as well.
Here are edited excerpts from my interview with Sitchin, followed by the statement I received via e-mail from the Natural History Museum:
Cosmic Log: Studying Puabi's remains would be important whether or not something extremely peculiar is found. But if something extremely peculiar is not found? If they find that the DNA sequence for these remains is pretty ordinary?
Zecharia Sitchin: Then I will look foolish. I’m really risking my life’s work on this outcome.
Q: So you feel as if this is something that would definitely disprove your view of who these Sumerians were?
A: Well you can't really "disprove." If somebody says "I did not see so-and-so," it doesn't disprove. But probably many will say it disproves my whole life's thesis. I'm so convinced that when you find the skeletal remains of this female with three cylinder seals, one of which specifically names her as "Nin" … there’s no doubt in my mind. I’m willing to risk everything from 40 years of writing and publishing on this. Now whether I could be proven right, I don’t know.
Inner Traditions / Bear & Co.
Gold jewelry that was found next to the head of Queen Puabi was apparently assembled into an ornate headdress, as shown on this mannequin.
The results may say, we don’t find anything interesting. Maybe a difference here and there, but it looks like our DNA. I’m sure people will then say, 'OK, Sitchin’s stature has collapsed.' Whether this means so or not, I don’t know. But listen, I’m 90 years old, so what the heck. This is my final book.
This is really my challenge to the scientific community. ... I’m really challenging science to corroborate the bibles. If you want it stated in one sentence, that’s what I’m doing. Science, with its ability to do whole-genome comparisons, now has the unique opportunity to test those ancient bones. Maybe Sitchin is right. I’m not asking them to undertake it to prove me right. But I think maybe if I am right, it opens such vistas of understanding in religion, in history, in genetics, in every field, that it ought to be done.
Q: A lot of people have talked about how you’re a pseudo-historian, or you have an incorrect understanding of how the Sumerian language, how the cuneiform inscriptions should be interpreted. Does this sort of criticism make you rethink some of the things you’ve said?
A: Absolutely not. First of all, I think anybody has the right to disagree with me. If I say that this sentence means this and that, you may say, ‘No, it does not say this and that.'
There is one classic instance where I was going to the meeting of the American Oriental Society. ... I was shocked, because there was an assertion about this and that, I don't know, Sumeria and Mesopotamia. The speaker had 10 minutes, and then there are five or 10 minutes with questions and answers. Well, the speaker gets up and asserts that a certain Sumerian word may have another meaning in addition to the accepted usual meaning. The guy is afraid to overstep boundaries, so he qualifies what he says. "Well, maybe I'm suggesting..." He qualifies in 10 different ways.
He has his 10 minutes, and then there are questions and answers. Somebody gets up and calls the speaker by his first name, so they must know each other. "Jim, I'm amazed at your stupidity. How could you even come up with this notion that this word has this second meaning that you're talking about?" And he runs down the poor fellow, insulting him, and that's it. The guy doesn't have a chance to answer because there's one more question and his time is up.
So what's the point? One guy thinks the word may have a second meaning, and the other guy calls him names for it. So what's one to do?
Q: Are there areas where you see that new evidence has come out and the view that you’ve had has changed through the years?
A: No, on the contrary, because of the evidence that is coming mostly from other fields. Let me give you an example. ... The planet Nibiru is listed in countless astronomical texts from Mesopotamia. The question was debated by scholars already in the 19th century, what planet is it? One school said, it’s another name for Mars. And another school said, it’s another name for Jupiter. Each group had their reasons to say it wasn’t Jupiter, or it wasn’t Mars. And I basically agreed with both of them: those who said it could not be Mars and those who said it could not be Jupiter.
So finally I came up with my solution, that it’s one more planet with a great elliptical orbit, etc., etc. So one of the criticisms that came out when “The 12th Planet,” my first book, was published in 1976 was that such an elliptical orbit is not possible, because in time, either the orbit would become more rounded and the planet would orbit closer to the sun, or it would be thrown out of the solar system. But to continue in an elliptical orbit, orbit after orbit after orbit, is not possible.
Now, I subscribe to all the magazines – Nature, Science, Archaeology – I’m keeping myself up to date on scientific discoveries. So now that we know about so-called extrasolar planets, the verdict is that an elliptical orbit is the norm. So a few months ago, there was a program [on TV] titled "Curse of the Yo-Yo Planet." I’m watching it, and the guy is talking about my planet! No doubt about it. He describes it, and calls it the "yo-yo planet" because it goes farther out and comes back. And when the program is over, there’s not one word mentioned about Sitchin!
Q: Yes, people have renewed the search for planets that may be out in the Oort cloud. For example, Sedna is a world that is between the Kuiper Belt and the Oort cloud. People wonder how it got there. There is a sense that the sun may have been born in a cluster with other stars, and that gravitational attraction may have disrupted a lot of orbits. There was a study just a couple of days ago suggesting that as many as 90 percent of the comets in our solar system were actually stolen from neighboring star systems during the early stage of solar system development.
A: This is the whole reason for orbiting in the opposite direction … it comes from those very findings you’re talking about. How does one explain why not only Nibiru but some of the comets have retrograde orbits? If the solar system was just by itself created because of this swirling cloud, then how come not everything orbits in the same direction? All these findings keep corroborating what I have said.
Q: But I think some people have interpreted those remarks to suggest that a companion star or a dark planet may once again disrupt the solar system as early as 2012.
A: Don’t link me to 2012. Nothing will happen in 2012. The last time that Nibiru was in our vicinity was in the 6th century B.C. I provide information about this and sky maps and anything you want in my book “The End of Days.” But don’t link me to 2012.
Another aspect, by the way, is that if you do a search on “Annunaki” you get a million and a half websites. People use my writings and make up their own stories … I’m responsible for what I say, but not for what others say and their interpretations.
In general I think there’s a whole industry that has grown up in the media, mostly in the movies, for creating panic and fear. Who knows? “Something will happen, it’s coming.” I don’t think so.
Nothing will return. But I think ["gods" visited Earth] because of all the biblical prophecies. They created us, they gave us knowledge, but what they kept from us … I’m trying to find out through the DNA tests. Maybe it has to do with health, immortality, maybe cancer and such. We are their children, many of us are the result of their intermarriage. If Noah was like the Sumerian hero, a demigod, then we are all demigods. So they are not coming back to destroy us. They are not coming back to use us as food. I’m really shocked, shocked by this fearmongering, which is unjustified.
I do what I do and say what I say, and now I’m throwing down the gauntlet to the scientific community. You don’t have to do my genome, you have to do the genome of Nin Puabi.
Q: Another thing that people say is that you’re trying to read too much literal, actual history into something that was intended more as a myth, a story about the spiritual world. It would be as if someone was looking back from the future at our different cultures, and saying, “Well, God had to be like this because all these different cultures are telling the same story.” Whereas actually it’s the case that a common theme – for example, the Gilgamesh story or the story of a great flood – made its way into different cultures and doesn’t necessarily reflect historical reality.
A: Well, if that is the criticism, then it’s true. My answer to that is, so what? I take it literally, and others say I shouldn’t, so … I plead guilty.
Now, let me tell you, I think it was November or December of last year, a documentary filmmaker came by with a camera crew, and for three days he really pestered me to the extent that he camped outside my home. I told him, listen, leave me alone. What did he want? He was making a film about the 10 most important people alive today in the world. And I’m one of them, according to him. So I said to him, "Why do you think I’m one of them? Why give me the honor?" He said, "Because you have demythologized mythology. You have done a tremendous thing, You took the mythologies of all the peoples, you showed where they stem from. And you show step by step that this is based on a series of actual events."
So I plead guilty. That’s why mythology is so similar all over the world. Not necessarily detail by detail, name by name, event by event, but basically it reflects human recollection of past events.
Now, here's the e-mail I received from Sam Roberts, media relations manager at London's Natural History Museum:
"First, as background to the collections, The Natural History Museum holds a collection of approximately 20,000 human remains dating back to prehistoric times. Over half is from the UK and has been collected by the museum from when we were founded in 1881. They range from a single tooth, hair sample, single bones to complete skeletons and come from a variety of sources - for example, by transfer from other institutions such as Royal College of Surgeons or archaeological digs.
"The human remains in the collection are used by both NHM researchers and visiting researchers in studies to form comparative samples in a wide variety of studies including human evolution, human variation, forensic and medical studies among many more.
"I have been in touch with the relevant team and they confirmed that Zecharia Sitchin has contacted the Museum to request that it collect comparative samples from the remains of Nin Puabi (Queen Shubad). The Museum has a responsibility to safeguard and maintain its collections for scientific research. It does not routinely conduct ad hoc analysis of its collections, and requests for DNA analysis would need to be part of recognised research project. To date the Museum has not received a request from a researcher with recognised experience and skills in this field or with access to the necessary facilities required to undertake ancient DNA analysis. All research and loan requests involving human remains in the collection are subject to the relevant Museum policy and procedures, which are based on guidance set out by the UK Government’s Department of Culture, Media and Sport."
In the days leading up to my interview, I heard from some Cosmic Log correspondents who thought Sitchin was totally bogus, and others who thought he just might be on to something. (The latter category probably overlaps with the estimated 32 percent of Americans who believe in UFOs.) Myself, I don't believe any of Sitchin's tales about alien astronauts or ancient demigods from the planet Nibiru. But I am intrigued by tales of Ur and its riches. In the right hands, I think the story of Queen Puabi could be as gripping as the stories of Queen Hatshepsut or even King Tut. What do you think? Feel free to hold forth with your comments below.
More about aliens, on Earth and beyond:
- Scientist: Alien life could already be on Earth
- The best places on Earth for spotting UFOs
- Search for alien life may take giant leap forward
- Eight of the usual suspects for extraterrestrial life
Join the Cosmic Log corps by signing up as my Facebook friend or hooking up on Twitter. And if you really want to be friendly, ask me about "The Case for Pluto."
Leave a Comment:
This reminds me of an evangelical stunt; the same as scientist's who wanted to make a case for Noah's ark. Sitchin wants the DNA taken to confirm what? That scientists don't know what alien DNA looks like, so he must be right? I think he's so arrogant in being "the one" to tie the real world with a world we can't see. Yes, there's a world that we can't see all around us, it's called the world of physics. But this ego-maniac doesn't deserve to be taken seriously.
It's so sad that people would actually believe him. He's no better than an old-fashioned snake oil salesman. He's no better than an old-fashioned tent revival preacher that you rarely see in the South anymore. Thank God.
I hope they leave Queen Puabi alone. No reputable scientist would even consider taking her DNA. At some point you have to know when NOT to insult science.
And NO, it doesn't compare to the story of the real story of King Tut, Queen Hatshepsut, or Queen Cleo.
Correcting myself:
The world we can't see is just as real as the world we can see.
You know, these people really pull me out of my otherwise tranquil orbit! Really! I can't stand these people who make money off of their ignorance and arrogance, not to mention having gullible people "drink the kool-aide"! Now I won't be able to sleep! Well, I'm stretching the assault to expanded mind a little.:-)
Thanks a lot, quack Sitchin!
Darrah, I should make clear that when I say the story of Ur and Queen Puabi would be gripping, I'm talking about the real-life tale of an ancient queen who apparently ruled solo, at a time when women generally played a subservient role in society. The mysterious tomb and the bodies and riches within add to the appeal. And when it comes to TV appeal, the fact that some people think she was an alien hybrid doesn't hurt either, even though I think that angle is pure fiction.
I know what you mean, Al. I'd like to know about her too; if it didn't include all the BS.
Aren't you being a little arrogant though? Actually read Alan's interview with him, he sounds pretty straight forward and honest to me. He's spent his life working on this, doesn't he have the right to defend and believe in his life's work?
I'll say right now, I don't believe any of his ideas. But clearly, whether his interpretation is right or not, he has done a lot of research.
So he wants to prove himself right? So what? Why does it make you so mad? Do you just want everyone to agree with what you believe about the world? What kind of a world would that even be? I think proper science requires good discourse. It requires that a minority voice exist, if only to remind us that a part of what makes science work is that people don't always agree with one another and that some times, just some times, that matters a lot.
That sometimes the earth is round, the sun is the center of the solar system, time is relative, and that things are not always how they appear or even how we think they appear.
You say that no reputable scientist would ever test her DNA...I say why not? Either it shows that this guy is right (highly doubtful) or we learn something more about the DNA of ancient humans and maybe even a little something about the life of Queen Puabi. Both outcomes yield useful results
Ax23000, I would agree with you wholeheartedly. I don't believe for one second that Nin was an alien, but to KEEP someone from forming a hypothesis and testing that hypothesis is NOT healthy science. Even though people disagree, and things on one side seem absolutely ridiculous, what makes science work so incredibly well is the allowance for disagreement and an allowance for proving a hypothesis.
ieee, I feel like an alien too, though I am not mexican, and I don't live in Arizona
Well after reading some of these comments, Who knows if the Ancient Aliens theory is true or not. theres evidence for it and against it. But it would'nt be the first time scientists have been proven wrong through pure arrogance.
Darrah and other like minded zeros.... I have spent many years reading and studying "Sitchin like" research from many different authors. There is simply too much hard, touch and feel evidence to support Sitchin and the others to do a wholesale discount of everything they offer.
I believe Sitchin was the first to push caution aside and take the plunge of explaining the Sumarian culture to enties from another world.
If one single piece of evidence, besides the fact that the Sumerians told us over and over that their knowledge of the solar system came from the Annanaki, opens the door to the possbility that he may even be 10% correct, then I am on board.
If anyone of you nay sayers can explain where the goat, cow, wheat, (especially maize), etc. and etc. or any other "post" deluge food source came from, then I will burn my Sitchin collection.
God, save us from the smug and arrogant.
By your insulting his application, you're merely being content with the way things are. Science is open to all posibilities. Don't be so arrogant as to rebuttle a possibility for which you have no statistical evidence will be false. And I'm not even a Stitchin fan before you even think about referring to me as anything related to that. I fight for science's open posibilities, not for an amatuer who wants to deny everything. Oh, and who am I to call you an amatuer? Well, if you weren't, and were possibly someone who was respected in the field, then you wouldn't waste you're time posting in such a insulting manner, on an article of a man you hate so much.
Very well put Shikamaru. I also tire of people's bashing negative skepticism. Real scientists who haven't been tainted and conditioned by status and reputation bound by immature social insecurities need to encourage every possibility and not dismiss things because it is outlandish. How many times can humans collectively experience but not learn the same lesson that what is true and right is often in conflict with what is at the time accepted as possible?
This is for Darrah, Greenville, SC and anyone else who has the same opinion. All they have to do is take a tiny sample from Queen Puabi and test her DNA. Lets say theres nothing, just ordinary human DNA. We've lost nothing. Now, on the other hand, lets say they find something of significance. We're talking about human origins, were we come from, who we are. Do you not think this to be important? I can not belive how some of us just throw aside any type of 'thinking outside of the box', because they can't get their head around it, or because thats not what I was tought at school! How narrow minded can you get. If theres a chance to learn more from a simple DNA test, well... Do it and stop making petty excuses!
What are you so afraid of? I find it interesting. True science has to push the envelope of understanding to make discoveries. And if this guy is paying for it, what's the harm?
Mainstream science would like to think they have all of the answers yet are terrified of challenging what they think they know. At the rate of change and discovery that we are undergoing at present, prepare to be surprised by what reality really is. If you are a fan of scientific advancement, the next 100 years are going to be beyond awesome.
I wonder why people get so hysterical about outlandish ideas. Every significant step forward began as an outlandish idea. Every great discovery was laughed at, the one who perceived it derided and often murdered by small-minded, frightened, hysterical men who were sure they already knew it all.
I agree. Now that we have technology capable of performing amazing things, why shouldn't we consider the outlandish ideas. Everything we know of science came from someone, somewhere who was initially considered a quack in some form or fashion. I'm all for expanding my mind to outlandish possibilities. If not for brilliant minds, albeit quirky and deemed crazy, we might still live with our hands over our ears and believe the world is flat.
That's a bit of a stretch--people who believed or believe that the world was / is flat (or 7,000 yrs. old) compared to people who are pretty sure that it would be outlandish for Queen Paubi to be alien or a descendant of aliens...just depends on what a person considers open-mindedness or just plain silly.
But you're missing the whole point, it was once considered obvious that the world was flat just like you now consider it obvious that Queen Paubi wasn't descended from aliens. And why not, there were tons of reasons for people to think that way. The earth looks more or less flat after all. Not to mention the whole falling off the bottom thing. Most people wouldn't even have considered it an area of science--it was just common sense.
Heck, imagine how hard it must have been for many physicists who grew up with Newtonian physics to grasp the idea that time is relative and that space is curved. Heck, most of them thought that there was nothing left for Physics to do! And then, just like that, it turned out that all those perfect equations weren't so perfect.
And then there's Einstein who never could grasp Quantum physics and all it represented. His universe was smooth and orderly, but quantum mechanics showed it be crazy. It turned out god DID play dice with the universe. Quantum mechanics introduced us to a world where two particles any distance apart could instantly 'communicate' with one another. This was so far outside Einstein's world view that he labeled it a paradox and actually thought it was proof of a flaw in quantum mechanics.
You can say that you're different, but the fact is you're not. The fact is the idea we're descended from aliens is no less crazy than Einstein's paradox.
I'll say again, I do not believe this man is right. In fact I'd be willing to put money on him being wrong. BUT things that look silly on the surface are sometimes correct, and things that make sense are sometimes wrong.
Well… I can't say that I believe much of Sitchin's theories. I did read the "12th Planet" and have read the articles on his website. I have also watched most of the TV programs about ancient aliens. For me, it was more of an exercise in making myself look at something from a different perspective. For a certain part of my life, I was very religious. I even attended a bible college. What I found interesting about Sitchin's writings was the feeling that if presented in the right way, his translations of ancient religious stories could be as believable as the stories themselves. If you believe that two naked people lived in a garden, communicated directly with god, and then were denied eternal life because of disobedience, how could you not consider that the story was written with an ancient misunderstanding of something that was more scientific than spiritual?
I'm not sure about ancient alien visitors but I'm not threatened by the Idea. I would say that I wonder more about an "ancient knowledge" of sorts. I wonder about knowledge that was gained and maybe lost somewhere between when the first caveman hit another one on the head with a club and when the inhabitants of Puma Punku in Bolivia were making sophisticated and almost geometrically perfect cuts in interlocking granite blocks that baffle modern engineers and stone masons and why the explanation of "how" seem to have been erased.
So if they tested her DNA how would they determine it was Alien? I would assume it would be easy if she had the kind of DNA like Lelu did in the 5th Element movie, but if she has human DNA like today or close to it, Would this be proof of Alien DNA?
Oh Darrah you might get a kick out of this but there is an actual flat earth society that still believes that the earth if flat and that all pictures and scientific proof that its round is a hoax. Here is the link: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org
No way... a Flat Earth Society? That HAS to be some kind of joke or play on something. How do they account for satellites staying above us being that they have to travel in some kind of orbit in order to remain up there? If it's a real group trying to prove the Earth is flat, I'm going to die laughing.
Wow! Someone must be trying to contact me or convince me:
History channel: Ancient Aliens
Animal Planet: Killer Aliens
Science channel: Deep Sea Aliens
Doesn't G.E. own NBC, along with these channels? NBC owns MSNBC. Alan works for MSNBC. I'm starting to get paranoid here.
Anyone out there?
Is anybody else going to comment or just leave me sitting here upset and scared? ;-)
Alan?
I was kidding, people! For God's sake!!
Michael Heiser immediately discredits himself - there is nothing JUNK about "junk DNA". What an insult to mother nature to call something so beautiful and refined, junk. Perhaps a little research on his behalf is in order about this so called "junk".
Just to clarify what "junk DNA" means:
http://www.psrast.org/junkdna.htm
Why don't they just show the birth certificate? What are they hiding?
His Mother was an American citizen, he is an American citizen PERIOD! Total Rocks!
The truth is out there, Darrah. I do have the "I Want to Believe" UFO poster from "The X-Files" hanging in my cubicle, and "Face on Mars" guru Richard C. Hoagland once compared me to Agent Mulder (until I let him down) ... but that's as far as it goes. There's no alien conspiracy that's out to get you. OR IS THERE!?
http://www.enterprisemission.com/tension.htm
You evil man!
You just linked to Hoagland. Just wanted to point that out.
He is extremely entertaining but the responses to his theories (when anyone bothers to make one) are much more logical. Just not as well written and without those huge pictures and cool black background.
funny
Darrah, History Channel has been showing the Ancient Aliens series for about 6 months now. Settle down, you freaking lunatic.
You don't know what satire is, do you? I was playing around with Alan. So who's the idiot?
Wow, Alan, what a fine mess you got us into. Do I have to add ;), ;), ;) for these "freaking lunatics" to understand what I meant?
Yes, a smiley face goes a long way toward settling jangled nerves. A winky face is even better, makes other folks feel like you're letting them in on the joke. ;-)
I did at the very end of my comment. Maybe "Skeptical Sentinel" subconsciously overlooked that because he or she was just waiting to call someone a "freaking lunatic." I'd rather be a little crazy than a lot stupid, SS! ;-)
And I don't recall my idol, Stewie Griffin ever having to "wink."It takes a smart person to understand "Family Guy" without all that wink, wink, nudge, nudge, canned laughter crap.;-)
Another thing is how some people get confused between "Cosmic Log" (the mostly science blog, but with a little bit of fun) and "Cosmic Log" (the mostly far out there blog for the mostly far out, looking for a savior type.) ;-) At least you could have come to my defense, oh noble one, and let people know that you knew that I was just kidding. You owe me one. ;-)
Test it, what is it going to hurt. It would be amazing if what this man stood for all these years was validated and if not, we know we are only human afterall, not made in gods image as Stichen sees it. I have read his website and his work, I also read the Bible, Torah, Kabala, Koran, I have worked among the Native Pueblo of Jemez, NM (who sounds suspiciously like Stichen in their creation story concerning water beings)and the Tao. I am no smarter then he and open to possiblities.
I sure don't know the answers but I don't appreciate anyone limiting discovery from asking questions.
So, am I the only one who will admit to having: von Daniken books, enjoyed "In Search of Ancient Astronauts", been totally caught up in his "evidence" at the time, and written a term paper in high school on this stuff? Wow! The 70's were...oh yeah...Rev. Sun Myung Moon, pet rocks, and streaking! A VERY INTERESTING DECADE! (giggle)
The Lakota have some interesting things to say about where some people came from also...............and they wait for the return of those peoples so that when they do, they can take their people home.
Aho, Baukman, there are many, many tales of ancient times. Not only Lakota but also Cherokee and the tale of the Nunahi ( little beings who helped with their crops ) compare the nae to Anunaki. to Mr. Sitchin it's good to see your face again. Collect the facts and share them , let the people decide what to believe and what to discard
You're so closed-minded & ignorant, it's hillarious & more sad than the BP Exec's who conintously ignored protocol for the sake of profit.
"I think he's so arrogant in being {the one] to tie the real world with a world we can't see. Yes, there's a world that we can't see all around us, it's called the world of physics. But this ego-maniac doesn't deserve to be taken seriously."
- Why are you calling him an ego-maniac? His asking for DNA testing isn't just to prove that his theories are correct. It opens up the opportunity for questions that have long gone unanswered to looked into. It gives man kind a chance to look into our own evolution. It challenges religion that has otherwise brain washed the masses with "something/someone that the real world can't see".
Before going on a hypocritical tangent & ignorant name calling, you should read & do some more research. It's very sad how the masses choose to be content with the unknown after so much progress has been made in humanity.
"It gives man a chance to look into our own evolution."
First of all, I think you need to educate YOURSELF. You must have made a wrong turn when looking for Bible study or some other crap.
Just so you'll know:
I'm big on evolution but not fairy tale BS.
I'm not an atheist, but I don't take the bible literally.
I'm big on exploring other worlds and big on science--not science fiction.
I don't feel sorry for a man just because he's 90 yrs. old. Maybe some of you feel sorry for him.
And Alan, why didn't you get all this flack? You wrote that you didn't believe the alien part of it. Go figure.
I feel sorry for people like yourself Darrah, I really do. But without you who could we go up against?
this darrah is a very angry person hunh? wow people cant post anything without her calling them names or putting them down. its just a disscussion. breath. none of us are going to change anything so why get so hot just say what you think and move on. now thats sad and misunderstood....
You know, many great ideas were considered to be crazy ideas when they first appeared. Copernicus, Galileo, The Ionian Philosophers and even Einstein. I'm just saying give the guy credit. The proteins that make up RNA were found on a rock in Australia that happened to be an meteor. Life travels on Earth from island to island over seemingly impossibly vast distances. Planets are just islands in space.
Zecharia Sitchin never fails to amaze me with his lively mind and willingness to engage in extreme and acute risk taking when it comes to leveling out and sobering up the human playing field. At 90, he appears no less agile in mind and spirit than one a 4th his age. It isn't going to kill anyone to analyze this Nin's dusty marrow - and won't we all have a lively adventure? Holding on to old bones for staring-into-glass-cases purposes is as fossilized an actively as using fossil fuel. This planet is loaded with fossilized thinking, fossilized organizations, fossilized ideas and dead as a doornail expectations for any kind of existence beyond this place - save those extrapolated from the same myths Sitchin is busting wide open. Go Zecharia! Keep running like a gazelle through hell!
"Keep running like a gazelle through hell!" I like that, especially when applied to a 90-year-old man.
You like it, because its true. Sitchin is done with pretense, done with the media and social dance. He's as naked and honest as a newly expelled fetus. Think about it - a museum curator doesn't get it, but a 90 year old curiosity kid wants to wade in with the heavy scientific artillery. That's what its all about, this unlocking minds thing. While BP is trying to put a top hat on their turn-of-the-century cataclysm using schoolyard technology, Sitchin is still pushing and panning for genetic gold in dusty, museum footlockers and the bones of ladies descended from guys on the Sumerian Kings List.
...and he's doing it so that we may know ourselves. Scary stuff. Rocks boats. Tugs at the underpinnings of power and shaves some of the polish off the hubris those underpinnings rest upon.
I really like the way you turn a phrase Gardener. Pure poetry! I've read several books by Mr. Sitchin, and feel that he has the truth on his side. Too much evidence has been ignored or dismissed by the status quo. Fear binds consensus. Most of the major stories of the Old Testament were lifted from Sumerian "Myths". Homo Erectus morphed into Homo Sapiens through "Intelligent Design".
I would be honored to meet this man.
What if he is correct, as it was previously mentioned everything we know today was at some point in history an outlandish idea by the "band wagon". I do think that if he is indeed correct it will be covered up or never published by the media (which is ran by the "silver spoons" of this country and others) for the people of the world to know about, which is unfortunate.
Continue science Mr. Zecharia Sitchin. Fight the societal norm, and like "The Gardener " wrote "bust it wide open"
Open-mindedness will always win over the closed thoughts of an idiot.
Sitchin is a brilliant man, I do not understand why he says some of the strange things he does, but he makes more sense than most, if you read his books and can let go of the idea that we are the beloved "children" of Jehovah, and just may be the genetic offspring of above that needed a lot of slaves to do whatever he needed done on earth (makes more sense than mud & borrowing ribs), and we revolted against our slavemasters, it explains much that we would have been known or refuted if the crusaders had not burned the library @ Alexandria.
When Cain was thrown out of the garden for killing Able, he found a wife elsewhere. Funny, they were the only humans acc. to Jehovah.
Somebody's got the wrong book, doubt DNA will fix that as most fundies don't understand science.
When I was growing up, i used to confound adult leaders and ministers in my church with the question of "who are the 'others'?" They had no idea whaat I meant, until I pointed out in the King James Bible that Cain went out and met "the others." They always come up with some gobbledygook that Adam and Eve had other children and that incest was perfectly OK back then and that the Bible was meant to be taken literally, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. Later, I would find fundamentalists, confirm that they thought the Bible was literal history, and poise the same question. They didn't fare any better, but said Cain probably married evil angels or something.
Glad to see someone else thinks like I do lol
Read "Genesis and the Big Bang" by Dr. Gerald Schroeder. There's a plausible explanation in there, and good answers to a lot of the other so-called 'unanswerable questions' of the Bible. Including the whole '6 days' thing.
You like it, because its true. Sitchin is done with pretense, done with the media and social dance. He's as naked and honest as a newly expelled fetus. Think about it - a museum curator doesn't get it, but a 90 year old curiosity kid wants to wade in with the heavy scientific artillery. That's what its all about, this unlocking minds thing. While BP is trying to put a top hat on their turn-of-the-century cataclysm using schoolyard technology, Sitchin is still pushing and panning for genetic gold in dusty, museum footlockers and the bones of ladies descended from guys on the Sumerian Kings List.
...and he's doing it so that we may know ourselves. Scary stuff. Rocks boats. Tugs at the underpinnings of power and shaves some of the polish off the hubris those underpinnings rest upon.
Why not test the remains? I see no problem in using our technology to analyze and compare her DNA to ours. It could potentially offer valuable insight into our own past.
Saying he is an ego-maniac for suggesting the test is a bit ludicrous, however.
I'm not so much into the alien side of the story. However, this research may give insight to the changes in DNA over this time period. What changes did our collective bodies do during this short period? We could use this to connect people around the world showing they have a common distance relative. Life is ever changing, I see this as an opportunity to show another page in our history. Do I think they are major differences? No, but the subtle diferences over this time period may give rise to a better understanding to how, over time, our environment can influence the direction we are going in the future. I would like for us to have another reference point into which to analyze the human population. But wouldn't it be cool if a rouge star with a planet orbitng it just happened to pass by some six centuries ago? With a brief visit from it's riders...........couldn't help but to poke fun. Good story, enjoyed this over all the other media for this week. Thank you, Mr. Boyle
What does "alien DNA" mean? If it is DNA, it is DNA. The same stuff that make a giant squid, an amoeba, and a human. It is quite likely that we see "alien DNA" aound us every day. I for one believe in the concept of Panspermia. We only need to look at the extreme flora and fauna on this planet that we have already discovered to support the notion of intraplanetary or intrastellar germination.
Our universe is the result of life, not the other way around. Just as we formulated the laws of physics, math, and thermodynamics, we will some day discover the laws of life, and it absolute inevitability in all reaches of the universe. At some point we will actually be pursuing the goal of the Enterprise's Five year Mission and seeking the diversity of life forms elsewhere, not answering the question of "is there life elsewhere at all?"
The one problem I have with the panspermia theory is the time constraint. Life appeared on Earth in an insanely short amount of time. For it to have formed somewhere else in our solar system first would be almost ridiculous. And if it formed outside of our solar system, it would have to have come from some of the other hypothetical stars in our 'stellar nursery', which would have been forming their own worlds at about the same time. Basically the further life had to travel to get here, the less time there is for it to have developed wherever it came from. If life's development on Earth was rushed, how suddenly must it have developed elsewhere to come here from there?
Darrah, I fail to see any satire in your first post but rest assured I don't think you're a lunatic. You just like to be angry with people that don't agree with every little thing you believe in. I have a name for that but I can't repeat it here... oh, what the hell. You're a republican aren't you? :) :)
As for me, I've read the books and watched the television shows and I don't believe all the jive from the ancient alien community. However, they do make a few good points here and there. For instance, I'm a little uneasy with our current explanation of the construction methods and techniques used to build those ancient cities and monuments. If I understand it right we are to believe the people had little more than primitive tools to cut, move, and build with stones that would take multiple heavy lift cranes to move around in today's world. Now, I'm not saying they could levitate rocks or had light sabers to cut through the stone but I for one could use another theory. The sheer magnitude of the projects and the exactness with which they built them is perhaps beyond the scope of most peoples understanding. With all of our technology and understanding it's arguable whether we could build the great pyramid today.
As for this idea of Mr. Sitchin I don't see the harm. If he can find an actual scientist who knows what he/she is doing to perform the test... let them. How is that an insult to science? Science is defined as the systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation. I think this qualifies as such. Don't you? In my mind the idea that aliens came here in the past and became the Gods of the ancients or even procreated with us moving along our evolution is far less absurd than the idea of a mythical being that magically built our universe.
Uh no...I'm a very liberal dem. How does that suit you?
And I thought this was a science blog...Maybe y'all need to reread the heading up there, you know where it explains that Alan is a SCIENCE editor. I've known him long enough to know that gets a little "frisky" sometimes and throws a wild one out there.
why are you so stupid?
Darrah,
I think the issue here is that liberals tend to shy away from testing objects that are part of ancient religious mythology, while conservatives tend to divide between those who want their superstitions scientifically confirmed versus those who want their superstitions to retain an air of mystery as tests of faith, as if faith is something good to have without evidence.
The Shroud of Turin is one good example. Liberals think testing holy relics like that to demean science because they feel they are so sophisticated and modern that its "obvious" that holy relics are just fakes because it is "obvious" that there is no such thing as holy miracles, God doesnt exist, etc etc etc. So they oppose science getting involved because of a lack of faith in their own convictions OR by a liberal elitism, the sort of snobbery one sees in A Brave New World of the modern people toward those on the reservations.
The Shroud was eventually tested, and found to be dated to several centuries after the time of Jesus. Science wins, superstition loses another one of its props, and the modern world gets a little more modern in its thinking, catching our minds up with our technology a little bit more.
I personally am all for science testing all sorts of holy relics, including this Puabi person, because I know that science cannot be harmed by the truth. Lets test the bag of bones and be done with it. What can it harm?
You're right. I was big on testing the Shroud of Turin, so I'm not quite evil. It's just that when it comes to taking a "mummy'" who was obviously adored, admired, and respected... to have her DNA being tested for such a ridiculous idea...to see if she's part alien is just too much.
I changed my mind. I stick by my comments--even though this is a science blog and people are in favor of insulting science to appease an old crack or whatever...what can they do but burn me at the stake? ;-)
No, I find these comments very disturbing--coming from "scientific, enlightened minds" and all.
Frak them all. ;-)
Mike, I am a progressive liberal, and I have NO idea on what you are basing your generalizations. Many liberals and conservatives alike believe that most mythology is based on some semblance of fact or truth, so exploring, theorizing, and testing that mythology is reasonable and prudent, if not expected.
Yet, to that point, there are many others on both sides of the ideological aisle that chose, by whatever motivation, to close their minds to questioning and discovery.
Mike, I think that the labels liberal, conservative, Democrat and Republican don't have any place in this discussion.
I’ve only read one of Sitchen’s books and I found that more than enough to realize that, in my opinion, he doesn’t know what he’s talking about at least as regards Ancient Near Eastern languages and texts, whether biblical or not.
Many years ago I read Sitchen’s book, Genesis Revisited (Avon, 1990). It was my first and only exposure to his work. He apparently does not know Sumerian very well. And I don’t believe that he knows the later Semitic languages of the Ancient Near East too well either. His readings of the ancient myths of the Near East ignore their cultural and historical contexts. He reads into them what he wants to find in them. His approach is akin to someone reading Mobey Dick and deciding it must be an allegory about the Second World War. And his conclusions therefore are just as nonsensical and for the same reason.
In his book, Genesis Revisited, he repeatedly referred to Sumerian in reference to the ancient Near Eastern creation epic Enuma Elish, as well as to the Sumerian translations of various things. I found that odd, since Enuma Elish is not a Sumerian text. It is an Akkadian text. And Akkadian is not related to Sumerian. Akkadian is a Semitic language, while Sumerian is not a Semitic language. In fact, it is in a category of its own, unrelated to any other known language family.
Then, on p. 161 of that book, he wrote, “The Akkadian language..." is "from which all Semitic languages have stemmed...” while on page 90 he claimed that Hebrew, with Assyrian and Babylonian, were “linguistic branches” of Akkadian. The obvious problem is that all Semitic languages do NOT stem from Akkadian. In point of fact, none of the currently spoken Semitic languages (Hebrew and Arabic, or the few surviving remnants of various Aramaic dialects) are descended from Akkadian. For that matter, no other Semitic languages are descended from Akkadian. Hebrew, for instance, is a Canaanite dialect belonging to the Northwestern branch of the Semitic languages. Akkadian belongs to the Eastern branch of the Semitic languages, and it is a dead end. That is, Akkadian sits alone out on its branch. Nothing comes from it at all. And yet, among all the problems with Sitchen’s book, that is actually one of the more minor ones.
On pages 224-228 he tries to explain that the extraterrestrials responsible for genetically engineering humanity from pre-existing hominids gave them a writing system: Sumerian. and he argued that:
“Mathematicians, especially those dealing with graph theory—thge study of points joined by lines—are familiar with Ramsey Graph Theory, named for Frank P. Ramsey, a British mathematician who, in a paper read to the London Mathematical Society in 1928, suggested a method of calculating the number of various ways in which points can be connected and the shapes resulting there from...Underlying the resulting graphs (i.e., shapes) are the so-called Ramsey Numbers, which can be converted to graphs connecting a certain number of dots. I find this results in dozens of “graphs” whose similarity to the Mesopotamian cuneiform signs is undeniable.
"The almost one hundred signs, only partly illustrated here, are simple graphs based on no more than a dozen Ramsey Numbers. So, if Enki or his daughter Nidaba, the Sumerian “goddess of writing,”had known as much as Frank Ramsey, they must have had no problem in devising for the Sumerian scribes a mathematically perfect system of cuneiform signs." (pp. 225-228)
This is so wrong. Even in Sitchen’s book, he has, on page 225, a chart (figure 69) which shows the evolution of the cuneiform signs from drawings that actually looked like what they were symbolizing, until, ultimately, the abstract, simplified forms that he wishes to identify with having come from extraterrestrials familiar with Ramsey Numbers. If cuneiform came from Ramsey Numbers, why do they not start out looking like Ramsey Numbers? If the Ramsey Numbers were the source, wouldn’t the earliest symbols look like graphs instead of like pictures of physical objects? Instead, the earliest symbol for man is a drawing of a penis, and the early symbol of a woman is a drawing of a vulva. As we examine cuneiform texts, we only find over hundreds of years that the original pictures slowly mutate to become the hardly recognizable “graphs” which Sitchin then wants to identify as somehow related Ramsey Numbers.
Incidentally, the standard reference book for cuneiform signs is Manuel D’epigraphie Akkadienne (Signes, Syllabaire, Ideogrammes) by Rene Labat published by Librairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner, S.A., Paris which I had to purchase when I took three years of Akkadian at UCLA back in the early 1980s as a graduate student. It shows the cuneiform symbols as they appear over the course of time so one can see their changes from the earliest to the latest forms. Depending on the texts we had to translate for class, that was very useful. Stichen might want to purchace a copy. He might find it a corrective to some of his misperceptions. I just checked Amazon.com and it's still available for purchase.
I am not an expert in astronomy, just an educated layman and active amateur astronomer. But I am an expert in the Ancient Near East, particularly in the Bible, Hebrew and some related Semitic languages,and so I can speak to where Sitchin’s interpretations are, to put it bluntly, simply not possible. When scholars disagree at conferences, their disagreements are over possible translations, not translations that are culturaly and historically ludicrous. After reading a colleague's paper, Wolfgang Pauli is quoted as saying, "This isn't right. This isn't even wrong." My opinion of Sitchen's work is in agreement with Pauli's feelings about his colleague's paper.
R.P. Nettelhorst is the author of The Bible’s Most Fascinating People, Reader’s Digest Books, 2008 and the forthcoming A Year With God, Thomas Nelson, November, 2010.
Its Moby-Dick R.P.
Still, I know what we're talking about. Big fish. Swallow you whole; whether you're Akkadian or Sumerian (and have access to the high seas). Not dead on, but near enough that I get the idea. Same with Sitchin.
Whether investigation of the lady's bones reveals startling new evidence of significant differences in her DNA structure or not, it may still reveal valuable clues as to what goddesses, back in the day, ate when they were children and in later life. It can reveal how she died and perhaps give insight into the health problems of our ancestors. Recovered bone reveals plenty about it owners. If it did not, the forensics experts would cash in their bone chips and stick to hair and fiber. Two delightful young ladies from Australia have discovered how to regenerate tissue from dinosaur bones. Handy stuff and a laudable discovery suspended from a curiosity's thread.
The man is 90 years old. His main thrust is getting people to think, imagine, probe, investigate and, if possible, discover something that may go a long way to coming to know of their human origin. Language and translation is an ongoing process. Bone marrow also speaks a language, a scientific language that points to a path. Why deny the exploration of that path over a handful of words when the science to light the way exists?
Michelangelo's "Moses" sports a lovely set of finely crafted horns. A contemporary mistranslation of a word meaning "rays" or "nimbus". Is it any less magnificent an accomplishment? And...if old Mike was still around, would we deny him the right to chisel up another one?
Give Sitchin his bones, and thank him for holding the lantern high.
To The Gardener:
I agree with you about Sitchin having the right to investigate more of Nin Puabi and requests for DNA analysis would need to be part of recognized research project.
Like he has said. He is the only person that eventually will lose his credibility and (honor?) if the DNA of Nin Puabi will tell she was just an normal human like us. And he even offer to pay from his on found for the research.
Many historic founding have been dated or categorized in wrong way before. Few days ago on History channel there was an archaeologist that stated after study some human bones, that man existed on this planet more than 30 million of year ago. But the new funding has been suppressed because all the BIG inconvenience and discredit many historians and teachers will suffer. When a new theory or proof are displayed, many (experts) just disagree calling people crazy or worst.
I do believe that it will very worth to apply a DNA test on the remain of Nin Puabi. How can any body working in this field not be enough curious to know if Mr. Stichin was right? More important, to discover information that maybe will tell more about us.
I am a very simple (intellectually) person, but I really would like to know more about this theory that can show us that we are coming from other being living in other worlds or different dimension....Just hope we will know more of where we are coming from.
What the hell is wrong with not letting him do this. If he has the money, why not let the guy do this? Really, you know what makes me mad about some of the people in the world. too many stupid people. especially for someone trying to do some science of aliens and UFOs. why do people say no in the name of good? what is wrong with people caring about the wrong things when this will do nothing but rock this guys socks, and somebody has to care! he doesnt care if hes right or wrong? what more is there. People can be such @!$%#s for no reason at all.