Some readers know about my website devoted to demonstrating the nonsense put forth by Zecharia Sitchin. Part of that site includes an open letter to Sitchin (now deceased of course) and his worshippers. It’s been there over 10 years (Sitchin never responded) but at long last someone has stepped forward to defend their hero. I have to give him points for that. The response, however, runs the gamut from excuses, misreadings, incoherence, and the obligatory “the Asyriologists just didn’t have the benefit of reading Sitchin when they translated these tablets” pablum. <Sigh> Just what I expected when I originally posted it. Here is the response along with my inserted replies (it’s a PDF; double-click on the sticky notes for my replies).
I know what many of you are thinking: “Why do you bother, Mike?” I’ve had people ask me that many times, including scholars in the various fields Sitchin stumbles through. Honestly, I do it for people who sincerely want to think through the data, not for people already blinded by what Sitchin says because they were bored or offended with something else (like mainstream Judaism or Christianity or materialist science). I don’t do it to win the blinded disciples, because no matter what data you put in front of those people, it just doesn’t matter. But there are people who haven’t been brainwashed but are genuinely curious. They are still reachable.
Is it me or is there a plague of ‘magickal thinking’ afoot?
It’s extraordinary how many people fall prey to ‘I feel strongly about this, that makes it true!”
Thanks to the “His-story” channels more and more people are falling for these self professed “text-perts” who go about accusing real scholars [like you Dr. Heiser] of shrouding the truth in falsehood when that is what they themselves are doing. Ah the skill of misdirection, it should be left for street magicians. 🙂
Thanks for posting,
R.
What can I say? (And it’s the Fantasy Channel 🙂 )
The yellow note replies aren’t working for me when I double click them.
Oh boy but this wasn’t on Fantasy channel. Of course this is not the first time world class Egyptologists were at a loss to explain something. Back in the fifties, they were arguing that the great pyramid could not be built…period, not then, not today, not ever…Still, those Egyptians they kept freaking building them long before there ever was an Egyptologist…
Neither the commenter’s response nor my reply was about Egyptology. Wow. Did you read either of them?
It’s just ignorance. Sounds like the guy thought about it a lot knowing too little (not that I am an expert myself).
Although, I think it is a bit rude to refer to him as a “nut” as he seemed pretty respectful. But you seemed pretty merciful yourself!
Mike, if you are there, your responses to the Italian scholar who responded to your Open Letter on the Sichin site, do not open up, despite the double-clicking. You should know this. Many of us want to read your rebuttals.
I know that you are enormously busy. Respectfully speaking, this inability to contact you (even about something like a technology glitch) seems to diminish your case. Just FYI. Thank you for your attention.
boy; I wish I knew why – thanks for this — can you tell me what version of Adobe Reader you are using? If it’s old (8 or less, we’ll say), try updating it. But even if that is the answer, I need to figure out how to do this so it isn’t a problem. Another idea – try downloading it first and then opening with Adobe Reader (as opposed to reading it online). Maybe that will get us somewhere.
Great job Mike. I was especially entertained by his constant reference to Sitchin’s works as the authoritative references for Mesopotamian languages. I have no problem with a person being self-taught linguist (Richard Francis Burton and George Perkins Marsh come to mind), but even self-taught linguists can demonstrate their abilities. Sitchin fails to do that, as do his minions. But here we have yet another patient suffering from a bad case of Sitchinitis.