Some readers may have seen this article today. The page is the home of Cosmic Log, the science blog of Alan Boyle, science writer for MSNBC. Boyle interviewed Zecharia Sitchin (who’s hawking yet another book about how aliens are the explanation for human life and civilization). Sitchin is demanding that the proper authorities and specialists run genetic tests on Puabi, a Sumerian queen whose remains are at the Natural History Museum in London. Sitchin wants the museum to authorize the genetic testing to prove or disprove his thesis that aliens spliced their genetic material into an earth hominid to create human beings. Naturally, the demand is being made in the wake of the recent genetic testing of King Tut’s remains and the sequencing of the Neanderthal genome. Sitchin somehow thinks that his reputation and theories would be at stake if the tests were conducted.
Boyle also interviewed yours truly for this article–and I thank him here for including some of my comments in it.
It should come as no surprise that I think this is an utterly useless exercise. Sitchin’s theories wouldn’t be at stake if these tests were run. His theories collapse on their own since none of what he claims is in the Sumerian texts about extraterrestrials is there. I have an entire site devoted to Sitchin. If readers go there, I hope they watch me do exciting (but absolutely telling) things like record myself searching the online Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature for the Anunnaki. The term (and synonyms, like Anunna) occurs over 100 times in Sumerian literature — you can get the results in a file from my site — and in no instance do we read things like the Anunnaki being on or in or associated in any way with Nibiru (which Sitchin says was their extra-solar planet home). I also show his ideas about the Hebrew word “elohim” are incorrect. I won’t rehearse the site here, but there’s a lot on it that shows Sitchin’s ideas are without substance in every regard.
But even if Sitchin’s arguments weren’t vacuous, what about the testing? Think about it. Sitchin wants scientists to go find alien DNA or alien genes. Tell me, Mr. Sitchin, what would that DNA look like? Since we don’t have an example or control sample of alien DNA or an alien DNA sequence portion, we have no idea what it would look like or how to observe a match from Puabi. Sitchin’s demand is akin to demanding a zoologist to go find an animal that has never been seen — how would our zoologist know if he was looking at one. The demand is utterly pointless.
Ten years after first accepting the public challenge to debate Zecharia Sitchin on this stuff (a challenge Sitchin never accepted), I’m still amazed by how people can cling so tenaciously to ideas that are demonstrably wrong. It’s positively mystifying.
For those interested in taking some online courses with me on Sitchin’s ancient astronaut theories (and those of Barry Downing), click here.
i haven’t finished reading the interview part on sitchin (referring on cosmic log). but i read the conclusion made by the interviewer. he said that is not a sitchin believer; me as well after reading ur sitchin is wrong website. alright. well, sitchin ideas r worthy for some fiction story. hehehehehehehehhehehehehehe im thinking about writing a novel, a fantasy novel hehehehehehhehehhehehehehehehehhe sitchin’s ideas would be a nice pick. wht u think mike? :D:D:D
I would say that Dr. Frankenstein’s laboratory is still in business churning out froot-loops such as Sitchin, von Danekin, the late Ron Wyatt, Ken Ham, Kent Hovind and all memvers of “Answers in Genesis”.
I dont discount the probability of Alien life in the Universe. NASA is finding plenty of evidence it could exist, but not as “Little Green Men” that came ot Earth and helped in such enterprises as buliding the pyramids.
I encountered a member of an Atheist Group who said his favorite books ar “The God Delusion”: Richard Dawkins, “Chariots of the Gods”; von Dankien(!) and “God” is not Great”: Christopher Hitchens.
He posted a glowing review from Amazon.com about “Chariots of Fire”. I got sucked in for a couple of years by von Daniken when his books started to come out. I even saw his movie. It did not take me long to wake up to this idiot. Needless to say, I tore up all of his books I had.
I gather books like these are ‘devoured’ by many brain-poisoned citizens of the United Christian States of America. I regard these books as believable as the “Holy” Bible”
bloggers bias is sickening. please learn to think for yourself and question authority and not the other way around.
please learn to read the primary sources — you know, the stuff the Sumerians wrote — and they weren’t even bloggers!
It is easy to live in deniable perspectives for there are too many things to contrary any evidence that another poses. I search for medians across all proposed suggestions. Example: Aliens have been drawn in paintings, shown in sculptures, woven in designs across all nations and times. Even today there are countless of eye witnesses stating varying accounts of seeing to being visited or even taken. Only the government controls variations of the ‘truths’ given out only what is necessary to satisfy the hordes of many by stating its merely whether balloons, or scientific testing or Government controlled experiments of flight stimuli. We hold those truths over others for it is the ‘reality’ that makes the most sense.
The Sumerians are the oldest ‘known’ culture/civilization who has many accounts of human DNA splicing with alien Deities. Egyptian history also submits to Alien sourcing for magic, healing and teaching of surgical methods. Asian cultures states similar accounts as does Celtic, Norseman, Vikings, Persians ect… Yet we find it outlandish that someone requests we prove this through DNA Genetic testing?
In response to how “Think about it. Sitchin wants scientists to go find alien DNA or alien genes. Tell me, Mr. Sitchin, what would that DNA look like?” it is simply whatever is NOT normal to the human DNA would therefore have to be OTHER. What that other is would need to be determined as either that of the Earthly known or NOT. Simply it is how we determine whether a NEW species is now existing for its DNA Structure falls under OTHER Biology. Example is the Platypus. When found they could not determine based on KNOWN species what it was so it fell under UNKNOWN category until it was identified to represent a NEW category of species. Humans do this with things we are not sure of its original disposition.
If you want to impose the idea of someone being off their rocker at least use things based on a sense of moral standards that include conclusive Facts.
Science is limited to the available data sourcing of material and when it comes across an unknown that is NOT always given to the public for viewing and debate Especially if it inspires the idea that we are not just from the lineage of Neanderthals. Think about it. IF his (Stitchin) claim is true and it was already found would the government or other groups want us, the little people, to know? That would be an outcropping of many degradation of values that would warrant an even bigger split in society than already exists. God comes from Aliens? God IS an Alien? Life exists on other planets and we are not the only ones here? -Ego burst- What!? The progression of humans in technology was NOT just government, scientific or advancement of the human race??? I could go on to a multitude of splits in any direction of that panicking idea. Imagine if it was proven. Now maybe the bigger truth would be who would NOT want that published?
This makes little sense. “other” DNA for example could be terrestrial (an unknown species). There is no a priori reason to say it is of ET origin. If you found something anomalous, you are still under the burden of proving (and HOW?) that it was of ET origin. Impossible to do that. And please show me a picture in ancient material of an alien. Naturally, my first question will be “how do you know it is of an extraterrestrial and not something else? I don’t mind giving you that question, and since I have, whatever you come back with needs to be accompanied by an explanation as to how you know it’s an ET. I hope you produce something, since anything will be a prime opportunity for the PaleoBabble audience to get some lessons in logic and illogic.
So far you’ve done an effective job of dismantling Sitchin’s work even though I have as yet not completed all of the material on your sitchiniswrong site. Nonetheless I would like to see those DNA tests done.You are correct that these tests wouldn’t prove the existence of ET for reasons you’ve stated.
However, if any DNA anomalies exist, this would certainly raise questions regarding where the DNA came from. This could turn out to be a key piece of evidence, depending on what else may be found in the future. In order to solve any puzzle, you need to have enough pieces of the puzzle to gain insight as to what the big picture is. Failure to examine any piece of evidence because you may not understand it’s significance at the moment is not in my view a good enough reason for ignoring it.
On the other hand, if nothing unusual is found, wouldn’t that simply put another nail in Sitchin’s coffin?
The problem, of course, is “what is an anomaly?” Junk DNA is “anomalous” in the sense that we don’t know what it does — i.e., it’s purpose is not readily discernible. So how would one *know* that one was looking at “anomalous” DNA that wasn’t also human junk DNA?
Again, it’s a fairly hopeless task.
Anunnaki means “those from heaven to earth came”. Make sense as suemrian worship aliens as gods.
uh, no it doesn’t. I can tell you haven’t spent much time on my sitchiniswrong.com site (or studying Sumerian). Maybe as much time as Sitchin has.
Quote: “Aliens have been drawn in paintings, shown in sculptures, woven in designs across all nations and times”
“Only the government controls variations of the ‘truths’ given out..”
Just the kind of twaddle I used to subscribe to when I was a kid.
twaddle is a wonderful word.
Anyway.. But wouldn’t it be cool to do the DNA test just to find out more about the people of that time? Stupid question.. of course it would be cool. Why do people always have to whittle things down to one or two options! They’ve done DNA testing on all the pharos in eqypt.. even ozzy osborn. Why do these global elites continue to keep information hidden.. it seems to be working against them as of late.
I am not a scholar of any sort nor do I have any formal education beyond high school, but I try to stay cognitive in my reasoning and my thinking; especially when it come to matters of history and theoretical origins of man. I commend your personal academic achievements, good for you. As I am certain that you contribute vastly to the scientific community, set aside from your allocated time for ramblings and redundant debunking of Sitchin and his loose theories on human origin. Meager as his translation skill may be, could it not be possible that his concepts have theoretical relevance, in some respect? I do not know if his findings are spot on or not. Founded concretely in scientific method or not. Or that his scholastic background is suitable enough to even give a lucid finding, inside his work. I don’t know, who does know? I know science and “education” in all its’ profound relevance and necessity is also rooted in blind ignorance as well. What we accept today as fact is cast aside tomorrow as unenlightened thought or scientific practice, in the face of a broader perspective and reasoning on issues we certainly know nothing of. Ipso facto, people of the greater past who were visionaries and thought greatly outside the box were indeed scoffed at by their surrounding consortium or colleagues for their interpretations of what was deemed to be inane or downright poppy cock and it was not until much later that those bold individuals were proved to be correct in their forward thinking or ideology. So with all your accomplishments in education and your professional accolades, abroad. Can your heighten sense of reasoning and your staunch logic, provide an answer or rebuttal to this very basic and straight forward question? For all your academic knowledge and reasoning, can you or your colleagues answer certain and undeniable truths?
“If Sitchin is wrong or Von Daniken or even the Mayan culture, for that matter, can you or your colleagues explain how that Mr. Sitchin is wrong concerning the amount of celestial bodies, he saying twelve and you saying five; how on Earth did a primitive culture with little resources and no telescopes ever differentiate planets from stars and their alignment from our Sun?”
I like your arguments, do not mistake the nature of this email. I truly respect your approach. But please enlighten me, without boorish redundancy of text book argument, to your personal point of view on this question and please answer life’s mystery with your own concept and not something you learned from someone else’s propaganda research, that could later be debunked through natural scientific research and development. I employ you to answer this both directly back to this email, as well that you place this entire missive on your site with an exact rebuttal sent to my address. If you do not, then I will have no choice but to forward my arguments to Sitchin followers and allow them reign over your failure.
I do posture myself to be fair and un-bias when considering others concepts and integrating them with my own, but I read several of your rebuttals and honestly they appeared contrived and orchestrated. Also it appears that you are on a crusade against Sitchin and any like minded individuals, by hiding behind academia and its’ shaking and often rather contradictory foundations. By all means sir, your move.
The issue isn’t fairness. Either what he says can be found in the tablets or it cannot. I say it cannot and offer people who visit my Sitchin site the opportunity to check ME – my claim. The key ideas upon which he bases his theory do not exist in the tablets. Since ignorance is not a point of view, the issue isn’t me or anyone else being fair to him. I’ve been asking since 2001 for someone to produce a single line from a tablet that has nibru as a planet beyond Pluto, or that has it cycling through our solar system every 3600 years, or that has the Anunnaki associated with nibiru in any way. ZERO results. I am safe in my challenge since I’ve looked. And I invite others to do the same. It’s actually pretty simple; you DON’T need to be a scholar.
Mike,
Noted to your rebuttal. You answered abstractly to my underlying question or actually you did not answer at all my direct quest. Again I will post verbatim, follow carefully please:
“If Sitchin is wrong or Von Daniken or even the Mayan culture, for that matter, can you or your colleagues explain how that Mr. Sitchin is wrong concerning the amount of celestial bodies, he saying twelve and you saying five; how on Earth did a primitive culture with little resources and no telescopes ever differentiate planets from stars and their alignment from our Sun?”
Now, again please answer this very simple, very basic question. I am not the one who is trying to have a cult following here. I am sure your eager followers will be quite distinctly interested in your response to this question. And please don’t give me the prominent night sky, unobscured from pollution and electric lights, bit. That simply does not cut it. You are in no way reputing that the Sumerians were in fact aware of other Celestial bodies-aside from the Sun-therefore I would appreciate an educated response concerning how you feel they were able to determine this very same fact. Again my friend, I employ you to ratify this little conundrum. Thank you my friend.
I can answer it in four words: “because of the texts.” It’s that simple. I know he’s wrong because I read the actual texts. Give me the actual tablet citations for what he says.
You are a flipping “tool” you posture your self as an academic or scholar, when really, all you are is book worm régurgitât. Never in any of my postings did you come close to answering my questions-at all.
So it is I who will concede to this matter. There is no need to banter with you on this subject matter or any for that matter, because you really don’t know what you are doing in life or work, you simply exist off a medium that convinces you that because you were studious enough to pass some sort of redundant courses and post a lengthy curriculum vitae, that you are in some way adequate enough to dispute another persons finding based off technicalities? And you cannot even answer a direct question from a simpleton such as myself. No, sir, I think perhaps your grander sense of reasoning and comprehension has been spoon fed to you, thus making you irrefutably a troglodyte of the highest order. Your professional accompishments will never leave beyond the text book you read it from. Thank you so very much for this enlightening and rather disappointing experience. Ciao, mon potte!
my credentials are real, friend. I note for posterity that you offer no citations from the ancient tablets to support your views. You can no join your hero, Zecharia Sitchin, in that regard. He couldn’t pony up for ten years either.
Whoa..whoa, super dork. I never procclaimed Mr. Sitchen as my hero. Quite the contrary. I accept his ideals as plausible or possible. I need not quote citations from the tablet.
I asked you, a specific question.
You did not answer.
What I think is bizzare is the fact you are wanting to argue translations, which could be definable by points of perception, because no person living today is Sumerian or is well versed is Sumerian language. At this juncture, all aquired knowledge of the text is based on a collaborative effort of scholars defining the meanings. Correct…yes…correct.
So you want to argue, technicalties and misinterpretations-then fine. I am no archeologist and I have stated this.
What I want you to debate with me is some basic facts, that is all, but you do all that is possible to transform this discussion in to a Holy Crusade against Sitchin, hell if I did not know any better, I would think that you want his “package”, which makes you gay and a necrophiliac.
So, be my hero smart ass.
ANSWER THE QUESTION : (again I will post for the third time)
“If Sitchin is wrong or Von Daniken or even the Mayan culture, for that matter, can you or your colleagues explain how that Mr. Sitchin is wrong concerning the amount of celestial bodies, he saying twelve and you saying five; how on Earth did a primitive culture with little resources and no telescopes ever differentiate planets from stars and their alignment from our Sun?”
Again Mike, I ask that you answer very directly. No talk of tablets and translations. Answer my question. And if you answer, because that is what the tablet translates, then you still are not answering my question. If the statements are there to be translated, then how would they know? Very simple very basic. And if you cannot answer properly, you truly suck at life and your profession and you should probably fall back from your current obligations and do charity work with whatever state you reside in and become a school teacher and teach from state mandated curriculum, so that you are truly doing what you are doing now, dancing around questions and not arguing questions to the fact.
Again my friend your move. Oh and check mate!
You’re amazingly dense. My Sitchin site shows what you’re asking for. I give you the resources for primary sources so you can look up the material and not take my word for it. You area apparently to lazy to do so. Let’s try this for shorthand: If what Sitchin says isn’t in the tablets (that you aren’t interested in), then he *can’t* be correct – you’re asking me to disprove what’s disproven already since it is non-existent. If you want to prove his case, put up the data. And since you’ve degenerated the conversation, you can kiss your opportunity to post goodbye. But your ignorance to this point will live forever for others to see.
MSH, I think Paul wants to know how a primitive culture without telescopes could differentiate planets from stars…
Paul: Planets move in the sky very differently than stars, dumbass. They exhibit retrograde motion. You don’t need a telescope to figure this out. You need two eyes. Did you even google this one?
You took the words right out of my mouth (sort of – your reply was better and more entertaining than mine would have been).
Well from an objective stand point it would appear that you are not answering his question. He is a bit redundant on trying to convey his point of view, but alas you are not answering his question. I know you keep referring to your site, but he does ask some fundamental questions that appears that you seem to be evading for some reason. The subject matter is subject to conjecture, as is any thing in history. If you are certain on what you are backing up then why is it so difficult to answer directly to his question in quotations? Even if you feel that arguing the fact is futile in the face of reason, then why not just simply put the whole question in perspective for him. What seems bizzare is the fact the correspondence from him stopped with your last comment, who knows, perhaps he tired of arguing the fact. However the case I just happened upon this site and found the content intresting and did notice his base question was never truly answered. Look forward to seeing the response from this point forward.
This is an old post, so could you re-post in another comment the specific question you don’t think I’m answering? Thanks.
Let me ask you though, because it probably is of some relevance to the eventual (seeming, but probably not plausible) linguistic isolation and eventual obsolescence of the Sumerian language… has anyone done any DNA testing on any Sumerian remains (obviously these exist at least in the aforementioned case). I am not so much concerned with alien DNA (I think your above logic is sound) as with the possibility of this adding insight into Sumerian linguistic relations.
not to my knowledge; there is almost nothing to test in this regard.
In rebuttal to Mr. Robar,
The question in my mind still remains. How would a primitive culture, a culture from which all basic concepts are the only known to be understood in our time. How would they know, despite rotations fixed positions, or what have you. How would they know a star from a planet, dumb ass! All you people think you are pundits of education, fact and knowledge. You still cannot conceive a realitive concept or question. You have modern people today who cannot differentiate fact from fiction, what in the world lead you to believe that pre-dawn civilization was savvy to these concepts, fully. Jesus Christ!
Shorter Paul Gregory: I’m uneducated, so, to alleviate my feelings of inferiority, I will bad-mouth people who have continued learning, using claims that only underline my ignorance.
that about summarizes it
“ITDOESNTMATTER” seems to be laboring under the misapprehension that the Sumerians (and, by extension, other ancient people), “knew” that planets were comparatively small, cool bodies that orbit stars. So, the question, “how could the ancients tell planets from stars?” seems legit to him, because he is unaware that our word “planets” is from the Greek “planetes,” meaning “wanderers.” To the ancients, there were fixed stars, and the few “wandering stars.” They had no idea of our modern dichotomy of stars and planets.