Tag Archives: Sitchin

Jason Colavito’s Review of “Sekret Machines: Gods” by Tom DeLonge with Peter Levenda

Another solid review by Jason Colavito. If you’ve ever read one of Jason’s lengthy reviews you know it’s not just an essay informing his readers about what’s in a particular book or a simplistic “liked it … hated it” exercise. You’ll learn something.

As Jason points out, Sekret Machines: Gods, is “the first in a nonfiction trilogy covering what DeLonge believes to be the true history of space aliens’ involvement with earthlings.”

Jason’s review is in three parts:

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

 

Read More

Mike Heiser Interview with John Ventre of UFOs Over Pittsburgh: Part 2

This is Part 2 of 2 of my interview with John Ventre, the Director of Pennsylvania MUFON. Part 1 can be found here.

Read More

Mike Heiser Interview with John Ventre of UFOs Over Pittsburgh: Part 1

John Ventre is the Pennsylvania MUFON Director and has been a member of that MUFON chapter since 1998. He recently interviewed me about UFOs, alien abduction and, of course, my thoughts on Zecharia Sitchin’s work. Here is Part 1 of 2.

Read More

Iraqi Transportation Minister Says Iraq the HQ of Ancient Aliens — Sounds Dumber than Tariq Assiz

Here’s a link to a Breitbart story, part of which reads: “Iraqi transportation minister Kadhem Finjan al-Hamami asserted that Sumerians, the members of an ancient Iraqi civilization, built ‘the first airports’ and ‘Sumerian spaceships used to launch from here towards the other planets’ 7,000 years ago.” Classic Zecharia Sitchin Sumerian paleobabble.

My favorite part of the article was the picture used with it — a cuneiform tablet with a magnifying glass poised over it — fostering the idea that some scholar had detected spaceships in the lines of wedge-shaped characters that all the translators had somehow missed (or were forced by the Jesuits and their reptilian overlords to keep secret). The truth — as I’ve demonstrated here, and given readers the means to replicate — is that such ideas don’t exist in the cuneiform tablets. Sitchin literally made up the ideas and now others have chosen to perpetuate his myths. So go use that magnifying glass … or can I recommend an electron microscope? But alas, the results will be the same. No data.

The story brought back memories of Tariq Assiz, the guy who played spokesman for the Iraqi army during the first Gulf War. he’d go on TV and talk about how mighty the Republican Guard was, and how Iraq was going to defeat the U.S. The late Mr. Assiz was described by Reuters as “an urbane, cigar-smoking diplomat who relayed Saddam’s tough and uncompromising stance to his enemies.” Actually, he was more like a living cartoon, sent out by Saddam to make ridiculous claims that anyone who didn’t have to report to a bloodthirsty dictator would say were absurd.

But I’ll play along for the sake of readers. Hey, Mr. al-Hamami, maybe YOU can show me the lines in the cuneiform tablets about the spaceships and the aliens. I’ve been asking for them over ten years. Sitchin couldn’t, but maybe you can.

I’m not holding my breath.

Read More

Cuneiform Lexical Lists: Another Reason Sitchin Was Wrong

The Ancient History website just published this short essay on cuneiform lexical lists — basically, the ancient equivalent of bilingual (and otherwise) dictionaries for Sumerian and Akkadian produced by the ancient scribes. From the opening paragraph:

Lexical lists are compilations of cuneiform signs and word readings written on clay tablets throughoutMesopotamia. From the late 4th millennium BCE up to the 1st century CE, scribal communities copied, modified, and passed on these cuneiform lexical lists and preserved them for as knowledge for a variety of purpose

From another site, we read:

“Sumerian lexical lists were provided with Akkadian translations in order to teach and preserve the knowledge of the dead language. . . . The Old Babylonian word lists are nearly all written in unilingual Sumerian. We know for certain, however, that in class the Sumerian words were translated into Akkadian — the translations were just not written down. Over the centuries the word lists grew and became more and more extensive, including more and more regular, abstruse, as well as utterly fantastic Sumerian words. At the same time, it became more and more common to write the Akkadian translation in a second column next to the Sumerian word. In the first millennium, eventually a more or less standardized bilingual (Sumerian-Akkadian) version emerged that was used all over Mesopotamia”

So sorry, Sitchinites and ancient aliens enthusiasts, I’ll let the ancient scribes tell us what they meant by their words and vocabulary, not Zecharia Sitchin. Sitchin, of course, didn’t tell his readers such things exist (numbering roughly 15,000). They may have checked such resources and learned the ancient Mesopotamians weren’t writing about space aliens and rocket ships.

 


Cuneiform Lexical Lists: Another Reason Sitchin Was Wrong was first posted on May 8, 2016 at 6:29 pm.
©2016 “Dr. Michael S. Heiser“. Use of this feed is for personal non-commercial use only. If you are not reading this article in your feed reader, then the site is guilty of copyright infringement. Please contact me at webmaster@postmortaldesign.com

Read More

Cuneiform Lexical Lists: Another Reason Sitchin Was Wrong

The Ancient History website just published this short essay on cuneiform lexical lists — basically, the ancient equivalent of bilingual (and otherwise) dictionaries for Sumerian and Akkadian produced by the ancient scribes. From the opening paragraph:

Lexical lists are compilations of cuneiform signs and word readings written on clay tablets throughoutMesopotamia. From the late 4th millennium BCE up to the 1st century CE, scribal communities copied, modified, and passed on these cuneiform lexical lists and preserved them for as knowledge for a variety of purpose

From another site, we read:

“Sumerian lexical lists were provided with Akkadian translations in order to teach and preserve the knowledge of the dead language. . . . The Old Babylonian word lists are nearly all written in unilingual Sumerian. We know for certain, however, that in class the Sumerian words were translated into Akkadian — the translations were just not written down. Over the centuries the word lists grew and became more and more extensive, including more and more regular, abstruse, as well as utterly fantastic Sumerian words. At the same time, it became more and more common to write the Akkadian translation in a second column next to the Sumerian word. In the first millennium, eventually a more or less standardized bilingual (Sumerian-Akkadian) version emerged that was used all over Mesopotamia”

So sorry, Sitchinites and ancient aliens enthusiasts, I’ll let the ancient scribes tell us what they meant by their words and vocabulary, not Zecharia Sitchin. Sitchin, of course, didn’t tell his readers such things exist (numbering roughly 15,000). They may have checked such resources and learned the ancient Mesopotamians weren’t writing about space aliens and rocket ships.

 


Cuneiform Lexical Lists: Another Reason Sitchin Was Wrong was first posted on May 8, 2016 at 6:29 pm.
©2016 “Dr. Michael S. Heiser“. Use of this feed is for personal non-commercial use only. If you are not reading this article in your feed reader, then the site is guilty of copyright infringement. Please contact me at webmaster@postmortaldesign.com

Read More

Cuneiform Lexical Lists: Another Reason Sitchin Was Wrong

The Ancient History website just published this short essay on cuneiform lexical lists — basically, the ancient equivalent of bilingual (and otherwise) dictionaries for Sumerian and Akkadian produced by the ancient scribes. From the opening paragraph:

Lexical lists are compilations of cuneiform signs and word readings written on clay tablets throughoutMesopotamia. From the late 4th millennium BCE up to the 1st century CE, scribal communities copied, modified, and passed on these cuneiform lexical lists and preserved them for as knowledge for a variety of purpose

From another site, we read:

“Sumerian lexical lists were provided with Akkadian translations in order to teach and preserve the knowledge of the dead language. . . . The Old Babylonian word lists are nearly all written in unilingual Sumerian. We know for certain, however, that in class the Sumerian words were translated into Akkadian — the translations were just not written down. Over the centuries the word lists grew and became more and more extensive, including more and more regular, abstruse, as well as utterly fantastic Sumerian words. At the same time, it became more and more common to write the Akkadian translation in a second column next to the Sumerian word. In the first millennium, eventually a more or less standardized bilingual (Sumerian-Akkadian) version emerged that was used all over Mesopotamia”

So sorry, Sitchinites and ancient aliens enthusiasts, I’ll let the ancient scribes tell us what they meant by their words and vocabulary, not Zecharia Sitchin. Sitchin, of course, didn’t tell his readers such things exist (numbering roughly 15,000). They may have checked such resources and learned the ancient Mesopotamians weren’t writing about space aliens and rocket ships.

 


Cuneiform Lexical Lists: Another Reason Sitchin Was Wrong was first posted on May 8, 2016 at 6:29 pm.
©2016 “Dr. Michael S. Heiser“. Use of this feed is for personal non-commercial use only. If you are not reading this article in your feed reader, then the site is guilty of copyright infringement. Please contact me at webmaster@postmortaldesign.com

Read More

Old Post About My Being Censored by the History Channel

I just discovered that this very old web page (2003) doesn’t live anywhere in my new website ecosystem. It’s an orphan of my old website. Consequently, I’m posting it here so it does. Sorry that this appeared on Twitter, but that’s automated.  Anyway, I’ve been asked four times now to be on Ancient Aliens and a similar show (America’s Book of Secrets) for an in-kind episode on ancient astronauts. My answer is always the same: “I’d love to be on your show, but can you promise me in writing you won’t do this ….?” (This effectively kills the conversation for months).

History Channel Censors Facade Author Mike Heiser from its “UFOs in the Bible” Show

February 6, 2003

Well, if you’ve clicked here you no doubt by now have seen the History Channel’s special, “UFOs in the Bible” (aired 1/28, 29), or your curiosity was at least piqued by the front page blurb. Let me give you some brief background before I turn my attention to the telling and cowardly effort of Weller-Grossman Studios, who produced the show.

Last February (2002), Weller-Grossman Studios (hereafter WGS) flew me out to Los Angeles to be interviewed for the UFOs and the Bible special. The reason was simple: they had heard of me from Guy Malone (also interviewed) of Roswell, NM’s “Alien Resistance HQ”. They learned from Guy that I had academic credentials in biblical studies and biblical languages, and an interest in UFOs. The choice was natural.

When I received my list of questions from WGS prior to the interview, I noticed the questions were very stilted toward “confirming” that the Bible indeed gave evidence of ETs and UFOs, neither if which I believed. I called my contact at WGS, and told them up front that if they interviewed me, they would not get the answers they evidently wanted. I was told this was no problem, since they wanted to give all sides to the issue. I also sent Gabe the link to the ancient iconography behind the visions of Ezekiel 1, which obviously did not look like a flying saucer (ancient sculptures which account for all the “craft” details in Ezekiel’s vision – in effect, the polaroids of the day). I went to LA and had a great time. In fact my planned one hour interview was extended about half an hour at their request. They let me know that the show would likely air in January of 2003. I also got to meet my friend Lynn Marzulli (author of Nephilim) at the set, who had arranged his own schedule so he could take me back to the airport. It was a lot of fun. A month or so ago I got a courtesy call from WGS informing me of the airing time. I then relayed the information to my newsletter subscribers and others on my email lists. I hadn’t planned to watch it, but I was very curious as to how it would be edited. It was evident to all but Gabe (who sort of knew what to expect) that the crew was surprised that I didn’t gush about aliens in the Bible, but rather gave clear, coherent reasons that such ideas were bogus and completely contrived and inserted into biblical narratives. I expected that my part would be small, since I wasn’t following the party line (but at least, I thought, people like WGS were interested enough to do a show on the subject).

If you watched the show, you’ll know that my part WAS small – in fact, I didn’t appear in it at all. WGS completely cut my entire interview out of the production (at least Guy Malone made it into a few frames, but he and others were, pardon the pun, framed). Instead, the audience was treated to the wild, baseless speculations of pseudo-authorities on the Bible who told us things like:

  • The three “men” who met Abraham in Genesis 18 were aliens
  • Two of these aliens went to Sodom and Gomorrah, which city was destroyed by alien technology
  • Elijah was taken to heaven in a UFO
  • Ezekiel saw a UFO in his vision

I’ve had people ask me if I was upset at not being in the show. My answer is that, personally speaking, this worked out well, actually. Sure, it would have been nice to be on TV (providing I didn’t have to watch myself). No, I wasn’t afraid about my academic reputation being tarnished (I went on to demonstrate that ancient astronaut ideas were ludicrous, which would hardly damage me). Rather, this decision by WGS is powerful evidence at the utter falsity of the claim that they wanted to give their audience the truth, or even more than one view. I couldn’t have asked for more striking evidence that my own work matters – and so I say to the pusillanimous effort by WGS: thanks for the shot in the arm. I feel re-energized.

What do I mean by all this? Ask yourself some simple questions:

  • Why is it that, in a show about UFOs and the BIBLE the only person interviewed with recognized graduate credentials in the Hebrew BIBLE and all the related ancient languages was excluded from the show?
  • Why is it that WGS did not show the ancient artwork I sent them that SHOWS us what Ezekiel saw (his vision’s descriptions match these artistic representations of the throne-chariot theophany in every detail)?
  • Why is it that other ufologists who have broad media exposure, like Whitley Strieber, refuse to interview me (There have been a few courageous exceptions, most notably the stellar staff and hosts of Coast to Coast AM).
  • And, most telling, why is it that Zecharia Sitchin refused to debate me after I was asked by Art Bell on the air for such a debate?

The (longer) answer is pretty obvious: I’m the only guy in this game who (a) has taken real classes for real credits from real professors at real universities in the ancient languages of the Bible and its surrounding civilizations, which means (b) I can demonstrate from these texts, using sound scholarly methods and resources, that the ancient astronaut idea is an intellectual dogpile. The short answer is FEAR. These people, all of whom want to portray themselves as “digging for the truth,” are doing anything but that when it comes to analyzing the data of ancient texts. They refuse to look at the demonstrable ineptitude of Zecharia Sitchin’s work in the ancient languages (as well as those who defend him) because they WANT to believe his hypothesis. I’m the fly in their ointment, so censorship is the response. I have the goods on Sitchin’s bogus scholarship, and these individuals don’t want to be confused by the facts. The truth doesn’t make for good TV (and, more importantly, doesn’t help them get their intended message out to the public).

As I noted above, people like George Noory, now having taken Art Bell’s mantle on Coast to Coast, are the noteworthy exception. It is no secret that George is a fan of Sitchin’s views, but to his credit, he truly wants to engage all sides for his audience. He had me on recently about the James ossuary, and still decided on his own to bring up Sitchin. My guess is that his genuine journalistic curiosity got the best of him, and the thought of bias never occurred to him. I have to agree with Art Bell about George: he “gets it” when it comes to delivering for his audience. He deserves to be publicly commended, since his actions stand in such stark contrast to the super-evident bias and intellectual cowardice of others.

What’s especially energizing about all this is that this wholesale, gutless censorship will be duly noted by thousands who click to this editorial. Even more encouraging, those same thousands will get to read my not-so-amazing predictions and my open challenges below to other media cravens. If they had nothing to hide, if they had real scholarship on their side, they would have no trouble with interviewing me, inviting me to their conferences, and even taking it upon themselves to arrange a debate with Zecharia Sitchin. Don’t hold your breath.

This brings us full circle for now. Why exclude my voice? Because I can show the entire “aliens in the Bible” paradigm is a contrivance that lacks any substance or coherence.

It’s not about seeking the truth or presenting all viewpoints. It’s about money — titillate the audience, get viewers, sell advertising.

Read More