Support Hubzilla
Fans of Western European hegemony often resort to history (especially of ancient Rome) to justify their privileged position in relation to their colonies. Allegedly, all the fruits of civilization are their merit, and all other people for many years should be grateful to them for teaching all the others to count, write, take loans and fill out tax returns.
But the fact is that modern Western European history is falsified. First of all, extra 1000 years have been added to the efforts of Catholic party people from Goa to Western European history.
Поклонники Западно Европейской гегемонии часто прибегают к истории (особенно античного Рима) для обоснования своего привилегированного положения по отношению к своим колониям. Якобы все плоды цивилизации - это их заслуга, и все остальные народы ещё долгие годы должны быть им признательны за то, что они обучили всех остальных считать, писать, брать кредиты и заполнять налоговые декларации.
Но дело в том, что современная Западно Европейская история фальсифицирована. Прежде всего, усилиями католических тусовщиков из Гоа к Западно Европейской истории были добавлены лишние 1000 лет.
First of all, the efforts of this particular Order turned the letters j and i into 1000 years.
Прежде всего, усилиями именно этого ордена буквы j и i превратились в 1000 лет:
Plate from the Cathedral of St. Thomas (Chennai, India). 250 years ago, they did not write "March 1793" on it, but wrote "March J793", after the Christians recaptured this territory from the Muslims.
Плита из Собора Святого Фомы (Ченнаи, Индия). 250 лет назад на ней не написали "март 1793", а написали "март J793", после того как христиане отбили территорию у мусульман.
And there the famous engraving of a German Christian artist (at the bishop's court), the engraving depicts the famous antique story.
А вот известная гравюра немецкого христианского художника (при дворе епископа), гравюра изображает известный античный сюжет:
1515? More like the I515.
1515? Больше похоже на I515.
And on this depiction of Queen Maria Illichna from Meierberg Album (Types and everyday paintings of Russia of the XVII century: Drawings of the Dresden album, reproduced in full size from the original, with the map of the imperial embassy of 1661-62)...
А на этом изображении Царицы Марiи Ильичны из Альбома Мейерберга (Виды и бытовые картины России XVII века: Рисунки Дрезденского альбома, воспроизведенные с подлинника в натуральную величину с приложением карты пути цесарского посольства 1661-62 гг):
It is difficult to say for sure, either i662 or j662, but definitely not 1662.
Сложно сказать точно, либо i662, либо j662, но точно не 1662.
And on this map of Krondstadt (was founded, ostensibly, in 1704), that in Ingermanland, it is written in plain text...
А на этой карте Крондштадта (что был основан, якобы, в 1704 году), что в Ингерманландии, так вообще прямым текстом написано:
"750 year". Without any i, j, I, J.
"750 году". Без всяких i, j, I, J.
It turns out that only 1019 years have passed since the birth of Christ? And not 2019, as stated by the Pope of Rome?
Выходит, сейчас прошло только 1019 лет после рождения Христа? А не 2019, как об этом заявляет Папа Римский?
#calendar #christianity #conspiracy #documents #europe #history #hoax #infosec #memory #metaprogramming #past #property #revision #time
But the fact is that modern Western European history is falsified. First of all, extra 1000 years have been added to the efforts of Catholic party people from Goa to Western European history.
Поклонники Западно Европейской гегемонии часто прибегают к истории (особенно античного Рима) для обоснования своего привилегированного положения по отношению к своим колониям. Якобы все плоды цивилизации - это их заслуга, и все остальные народы ещё долгие годы должны быть им признательны за то, что они обучили всех остальных считать, писать, брать кредиты и заполнять налоговые декларации.
Но дело в том, что современная Западно Европейская история фальсифицирована. Прежде всего, усилиями католических тусовщиков из Гоа к Западно Европейской истории были добавлены лишние 1000 лет.
First of all, the efforts of this particular Order turned the letters j and i into 1000 years.
Прежде всего, усилиями именно этого ордена буквы j и i превратились в 1000 лет:
Plate from the Cathedral of St. Thomas (Chennai, India). 250 years ago, they did not write "March 1793" on it, but wrote "March J793", after the Christians recaptured this territory from the Muslims.
Плита из Собора Святого Фомы (Ченнаи, Индия). 250 лет назад на ней не написали "март 1793", а написали "март J793", после того как христиане отбили территорию у мусульман.
And there the famous engraving of a German Christian artist (at the bishop's court), the engraving depicts the famous antique story.
А вот известная гравюра немецкого христианского художника (при дворе епископа), гравюра изображает известный античный сюжет:
1515? More like the I515.
1515? Больше похоже на I515.
And on this depiction of Queen Maria Illichna from Meierberg Album (Types and everyday paintings of Russia of the XVII century: Drawings of the Dresden album, reproduced in full size from the original, with the map of the imperial embassy of 1661-62)...
А на этом изображении Царицы Марiи Ильичны из Альбома Мейерберга (Виды и бытовые картины России XVII века: Рисунки Дрезденского альбома, воспроизведенные с подлинника в натуральную величину с приложением карты пути цесарского посольства 1661-62 гг):
It is difficult to say for sure, either i662 or j662, but definitely not 1662.
Сложно сказать точно, либо i662, либо j662, но точно не 1662.
And on this map of Krondstadt (was founded, ostensibly, in 1704), that in Ingermanland, it is written in plain text...
А на этой карте Крондштадта (что был основан, якобы, в 1704 году), что в Ингерманландии, так вообще прямым текстом написано:
"750 year". Without any i, j, I, J.
"750 году". Без всяких i, j, I, J.
It turns out that only 1019 years have passed since the birth of Christ? And not 2019, as stated by the Pope of Rome?
Выходит, сейчас прошло только 1019 лет после рождения Христа? А не 2019, как об этом заявляет Папа Римский?
#calendar #christianity #conspiracy #documents #europe #history #hoax #infosec #memory #metaprogramming #past #property #revision #time
show all 119 comments
The european, christian/roman calendar can be compared to the dates of chinese, indian and even mayan calendars and the respective archeological records and historical documents. The results are clear: the roman republic fell 2050 years ago, all the events reported since about 3000 years happened as recorded. Not a single year is missing.
@Иван Злакс,
Вот и Хрусталёв говорит об этом же
Выходит, сейчас прошло только 1019 лет после рождения Христа? А не 2019, как об этом заявляет Папа Римский?
Вот и Хрусталёв говорит об этом же
apparently the Europeans who took over that church in India thought the plaque meant "Jahre 793". the letter 'J' appears historically later than 'A', 'B', 'C' in the Latin alphabet.
And the Roman Republic fell 2050 years ago, but then the Roman Empire went on a conquest spree until about 475. After the Austrians sacked Rome for the last time, it wasn't an empire any more, no one wanted to try to keep it going.
And the Roman Republic fell 2050 years ago, but then the Roman Empire went on a conquest spree until about 475. After the Austrians sacked Rome for the last time, it wasn't an empire any more, no one wanted to try to keep it going.
No es la primera vez que escucho algo así pero no le doy credibilidad. Hay muchas pruebas y recorrido arquitectónico que lo demuestra. ¿Vamos a negar los 781 años de presencia musulmana en la península ibérica?
@Hartmut Noack
Please prove it for me if you are not lie. Show me digital scan or photos of some documents or artifacts with the dates of chinese, indian and even mayan calendars for the grigorian year 999.
If you can not do this, respectively, your statement is false. So you're just trying to cheat me.
The european, christian/roman calendar can be compared to the dates of chinese, indian and even mayan calendars and the respective archeological records and historical documents. The results are clear: the roman republic fell 2050 years ago, all the events reported since about 3000 years happened as recorded. Not a single year is missing.
Please prove it for me if you are not lie. Show me digital scan or photos of some documents or artifacts with the dates of chinese, indian and even mayan calendars for the grigorian year 999.
If you can not do this, respectively, your statement is false. So you're just trying to cheat me.
@Ognik
Я слышал об Алексее Хрусталёве, кажется, кто-то в комментариях Андрею Степаненко раскрывал его модель.
Слышал он молодым скончался. Знаете подробности причин кончины? Ведь если не ошибаюсь он прямо из Франции вещал?
Вот и Хрусталёв говорит об этом же
Я слышал об Алексее Хрусталёве, кажется, кто-то в комментариях Андрею Степаненко раскрывал его модель.
Слышал он молодым скончался. Знаете подробности причин кончины? Ведь если не ошибаюсь он прямо из Франции вещал?
Знаете подробности причин кончины?
Мне думается, что причина, какой бы не была она официально, на самом деле та же, что и у Задорнова, Данилова, Жарниковой...
@J R
Considering the different spelling (look at these pictures, for example, here) - i think rather Jesus and Isus version is more likely.
I doubt that the correct dating, because according to official data the Roman Empire in Western Europe existed yet 200 years ago.
apparently the Europeans who took over that church in India thought the plaque meant "Jahre 793". the letter 'J' appears historically later than 'A', 'B', 'C' in the Latin alphabet.
Considering the different spelling (look at these pictures, for example, here) - i think rather Jesus and Isus version is more likely.
And the Roman Republic fell 2050 years ago, but then the Roman Empire went on a conquest spree until about 475. After the Austrians sacked Rome for the last time, it wasn't an empire any more, no one wanted to try to keep it going.
I doubt that the correct dating, because according to official data the Roman Empire in Western Europe existed yet 200 years ago.
Not to be confused with Roman Empire or Western Roman Empire.
That's what it says right on top on the wikipedia article you just shared.
@Victor Gabriel
Aquí está la dirección a uno de los tours más informativos en la antigüedad. Es necesario comprender las peculiaridades de la cultura inglesa con respecto al uso del color de este porta para evaluar la profundidad de esta fundación de la antigüedad de Europa occidental.
Yo - todavía no. Existe la posibilidad de que el calendario musulmán sea confiable. Después de todo, la Gran Bulgaria era un estado musulmán.
No es la primera vez que escucho algo así pero no le doy credibilidad. Hay muchas pruebas y recorrido arquitectónico que lo demuestra.
Aquí está la dirección a uno de los tours más informativos en la antigüedad. Es necesario comprender las peculiaridades de la cultura inglesa con respecto al uso del color de este porta para evaluar la profundidad de esta fundación de la antigüedad de Europa occidental.
¿Vamos a negar los 781 años de presencia musulmana en la península ibérica?
Yo - todavía no. Existe la posibilidad de que el calendario musulmán sea confiable. Después de todo, la Gran Bulgaria era un estado musulmán.
@кто здесь? @
Нет, я математиков всерьёз не воспринимаю:https://lj.rossia.org/users/is3/36699.html
Для меня это одна шайка, на академическом прикорме.
Могу конкретно указать на передовые фронты современного исторического ревизионизма, если интересует эта тема.
zlax Фоменко - Носовский?
Нет, я математиков всерьёз не воспринимаю:https://lj.rossia.org/users/is3/36699.html
Для меня это одна шайка, на академическом прикорме.
Но у них поменьше было – кажется, чуть больше трёх столетий.
Могу конкретно указать на передовые фронты современного исторического ревизионизма, если интересует эта тема.
@Ognik
От рака, в больнице или дома? Я точно не знаю. Какая конкретно причина, не знаю.
Мне думается, что причина, какой бы не была она официально, на самом деле та же, что и у Задорнова, Данилова, Жарниковой...
От рака, в больнице или дома? Я точно не знаю. Какая конкретно причина, не знаю.
@Trocatintas
I do not confuse.
Even more, i could say that the Romanoff Empire in Eurasia existed yet 102 years ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_flags_and_insignia#Double-headed_eagle
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Roman_Empire
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanov_Empire
Not to be confused with Roman Empire or Western Roman Empire.
That's what it says right on top on the wikipedia article you just shared.
I do not confuse.
Even more, i could say that the Romanoff Empire in Eurasia existed yet 102 years ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_flags_and_insignia#Double-headed_eagle
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Roman_Empire
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanov_Empire
Perhaps you are correct, @ivan. the 'J' is for 'Jesus'.
Interesting stuff, the connection between the Romans and the Romanoff family.
Interesting stuff, the connection between the Romans and the Romanoff family.
"Roman" was a common naming scheme in many cultures, that considered themselfs heirs of the Imperium Romanum, the country "Romania" bears that name until today. The title "Tzar" for the russian Emperor was derived from "Ceasar" which was not only the name of Gaius Ijulius but also one of the titles of the roman Princeps.
The roots of many words we use today come from thousands of years of indo german heritage. Such as the Russian "город" (town), is akin the german "Garten" (graden) that is derived from the latin "hortus" and the latin comes from the ancient iranian "hrt".
The majority of the people from northern Africa to Murmansk and from Ireland to India share an common lingual heritage from people, that lived west of the Caspian See some 5000 years ago.
Thats, what "multicultural" means...
The roots of many words we use today come from thousands of years of indo german heritage. Such as the Russian "город" (town), is akin the german "Garten" (graden) that is derived from the latin "hortus" and the latin comes from the ancient iranian "hrt".
The majority of the people from northern Africa to Murmansk and from Ireland to India share an common lingual heritage from people, that lived west of the Caspian See some 5000 years ago.
Thats, what "multicultural" means...
@ivan zlax "Show digital scan of some the dates " I show you nothing, lazy monkey man, learn for yourself.
@Hartmut Noack
I repeat:
Please prove it for me if you are not lie. Show me digital scan or photos of some documents or artifacts with the dates of chinese, indian and even mayan calendars for the grigorian year 999.
If you can not do this, respectively, your statement is false. So you're just trying to cheat me.
Please do not ignore my request again. If you can’t confirm your words, please just say so that you tried to deceive me. Thank you in advance for this.
I repeat:
The european, christian/roman calendar can be compared to the dates of chinese, indian and even mayan calendars and the respective archeological records and historical documents. The results are clear: the roman republic fell 2050 years ago, all the events reported since about 3000 years happened as recorded. Not a single year is missing.
Please prove it for me if you are not lie. Show me digital scan or photos of some documents or artifacts with the dates of chinese, indian and even mayan calendars for the grigorian year 999.
If you can not do this, respectively, your statement is false. So you're just trying to cheat me.
Please do not ignore my request again. If you can’t confirm your words, please just say so that you tried to deceive me. Thank you in advance for this.
I show you nothing, lazy monkey man, learn for yourself.
This is because you have lied to me. You never checked such things, but simply trusted the authorities. And i checked, a few years ago - there are simply no such documents and artefacts that were not exposed as fakes.
Your power to believe exceeds your power to learn in orders of magnitude, my good @ivan zlax
@Hartmut Noack
My religion absolutely forbids me to believe in anything. Looks like you're starting your game in projection again.
In any case, taking into account what i said earlier:
Please prove it for me if you are not lie. Show me digital scan or photos of some documents or artifacts with the dates of chinese, indian and even mayan calendars for the grigorian year 999.
If you can not do this, respectively, your statement is false. So you're just trying to cheat me.
Means you were just trying to cheat me.
You cannot give a single example even with one of these calendars. I studied the Mayan and Chinese calendars and chronologies, i know for sure. But the Indian calendar was developed only 70 years ago. Obviously, you are completely incompetent in the matter in which you tried to seem an expert.
But what about yourself, are you cheating yourself or not?
In other words, did you tried to cheat me intentionally or unintentionally?
Your power to believe exceeds your power to learn in orders of magnitude, my good @ivan zlax
My religion absolutely forbids me to believe in anything. Looks like you're starting your game in projection again.
In any case, taking into account what i said earlier:
Please prove it for me if you are not lie. Show me digital scan or photos of some documents or artifacts with the dates of chinese, indian and even mayan calendars for the grigorian year 999.
If you can not do this, respectively, your statement is false. So you're just trying to cheat me.
Means you were just trying to cheat me.
You cannot give a single example even with one of these calendars. I studied the Mayan and Chinese calendars and chronologies, i know for sure. But the Indian calendar was developed only 70 years ago. Obviously, you are completely incompetent in the matter in which you tried to seem an expert.
But what about yourself, are you cheating yourself or not?
In other words, did you tried to cheat me intentionally or unintentionally?
You studied nothing, @ivan zlax you only purchased some Bullshit made up to fool you by charlatans.
@Hartmut Noack
I repeat your words:
And do show a refutation:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_national_calendar
Usage started officially at 1 Chaitra 1879, Saka Era, or 22 March 1957.
I have been studying various calendar systems for several years:
https://ussr.win/channel/zlax?f=&tag=calendar
From this i can conclude that you have deceived me and after are trying to deceive the rest (with emotional references of bulls, fools and charlatans).
Please, answer did you tried to cheat me intentionally or unintentionally?
You studied nothing, @ivan zlax you only purchased some Bullshit made up to fool you by charlatans.
I repeat your words:
The european, christian/roman calendar can be compared to the dates of chinese, indian and even mayan calendars and the respective archeological records and historical documents. The results are clear: the roman republic fell 2050 years ago, all the events reported since about 3000 years happened as recorded. Not a single year is missing.
And do show a refutation:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_national_calendar
Usage started officially at 1 Chaitra 1879, Saka Era, or 22 March 1957.
I have been studying various calendar systems for several years:
https://ussr.win/channel/zlax?f=&tag=calendar
From this i can conclude that you have deceived me and after are trying to deceive the rest (with emotional references of bulls, fools and charlatans).
Please, answer did you tried to cheat me intentionally or unintentionally?
The study of many calendars encouraged me by Saint Mordecai the Foul experience:
https://ncc-1776.org/tle2016/tle853-20160103-05.html
@Hartmut Noack, i writing programs for converting calendar systems. In my publications i use different calendar systems about last 5 years.
For instance, in my multicultural calendars the date on which I began writing this article looks as shown below :
Poundian—19 Artemis, 72 p.s. U.
Thelemic—19 September, Anno XC
'Pataphysical—12 Absolu, 122 E.P.
French Revolutionary—Le Travail, 202
Islamic—12 Rabi-2, 1373 A.H.
Gregorian—19 September 1994 C.E.
Erisian—43 Bureaucracy, 3178 y.C.
Chinese—15th day of the 8th month, Year of the Dog 4692
Mayan—6 Reed, 5106
Hebrew—14 Tishri, 5755 A.M.
Illuminati—43 Beamtenherrschaft, 5994 A.L.
A few quick, and valuable lessons, immediately leap out of this chronolog.
...
The Chinese calendar makes more sense than any of the others, but I find it too complex to explain in full. You look it up, eh? Meanwhile, rest satisfied that we now live in the year 4692, and you don't have to worry about any damned Millenium for another 308 years.
I find the Mayan calendar even more perplexing, but keep it on my letters because I like the names of the days: Crocadile, Night, Snake, Deer, Jade, Monkey, Reed, Eagle, Thought, Storm, Wind, Net, Death, Rabbit, Dog, Tooth, Jaguar, Wax, Knife, Hunter. Sort of sounds like my last acid trip. This year counts as 5106 of this cycle, but numerous cycles roll on and on and do not necessarily end in 2012 Gregorian, whatever you may have heard; that may just mark the opening of another mega-cycle.
https://ncc-1776.org/tle2016/tle853-20160103-05.html
@Hartmut Noack, i writing programs for converting calendar systems. In my publications i use different calendar systems about last 5 years.
Impressive, yet your skill dont serve you well. We talk about differences in the number of times, our good old earth has traveled around our sun. Calendars are just the notation method for this event, that takes usually about 365 days.
According to the chines notation in the imperial annals of China General Ban Chao ordered his vice Gan Ying to Rome in the year 97 of our western notation. He did not arrive in Rome, because the Parthers convinced him not to. In 166 Marcus Aurelius sent roman ambassadors to China, some say, that these where only merchants. Anyway, there are dozens of documents, of both sides, that prove, that Rome and China had contact in the first 2 centennia of our notation, chinese documents are in accord, both calendars say, that these contacts took place about 2100 to 1800 years from now. There are similar synchronities with indian documents.
And no: I wont find these documents for you.
According to the chines notation in the imperial annals of China General Ban Chao ordered his vice Gan Ying to Rome in the year 97 of our western notation. He did not arrive in Rome, because the Parthers convinced him not to. In 166 Marcus Aurelius sent roman ambassadors to China, some say, that these where only merchants. Anyway, there are dozens of documents, of both sides, that prove, that Rome and China had contact in the first 2 centennia of our notation, chinese documents are in accord, both calendars say, that these contacts took place about 2100 to 1800 years from now. There are similar synchronities with indian documents.
And no: I wont find these documents for you.
@Hartmut Noack, anyway, please do not be irresponsible.
Please, answer to my question:
Did you tried to cheat me intentionally or unintentionally?
Please, answer to my question:
Did you tried to cheat me intentionally or unintentionally?
You answer first: have you ever heard of the term "silk road"?
BTW: all the silly "they have stolen hundreds of years!" stories have one thing in common: they are blatantly eurocentric. The first look upon chinese, indian, persian documents debunks them all as bonkers. Europe is not the world.
BTW: all the silly "they have stolen hundreds of years!" stories have one thing in common: they are blatantly eurocentric. The first look upon chinese, indian, persian documents debunks them all as bonkers. Europe is not the world.
@Hartmut Noack
Yes.
So, please, answer to my question:
Did you tried to cheat me intentionally or unintentionally?
You answer first: have you ever heard of the term "silk road"?
Yes.
So, please, answer to my question:
Did you tried to cheat me intentionally or unintentionally?
Durante la edad media hubo un jaleo tremendo. Ni unidades de medida, ni unidades de tiempo. Las medidas, con el mismo nombre, se referían a pesos y longitudes diferentes en cada reino. Un ejemplo, en las portadas de las iglesias se ponía una longitud que marcaba la norma en ese reino.
Con el tiempo pasaba lo mismo, se tomaba un evento importante o los años de reinado de cada rey o de una estirpe.
Así que, con errores, actualmente, Occidente se encuentra en 2019. Eso sí, podríamos encontrarnos realmente en 2023 o el 2025 ya que Jesús parece que nació antes de "su nacimiento". ?
Con el tiempo pasaba lo mismo, se tomaba un evento importante o los años de reinado de cada rey o de una estirpe.
Así que, con errores, actualmente, Occidente se encuentra en 2019. Eso sí, podríamos encontrarnos realmente en 2023 o el 2025 ya que Jesús parece que nació antes de "su nacimiento". ?
Chillon Castle, Swiss Confederation:
λ699? Or J699?
@Hartmut Noack
So i will use your terminology:
You said:
But Indian calendar usage started officially at 1 Chaitra 1879, Saka Era, or 22 March 1957 C.C.
This is not like a mistake and inaccuracy (entangle Indian calendar with the Tamil or Hindu calendar), considering that i asked you to confirm the words in just one year, but you absolutely refuse to do this, i want to ask you:
Hartmut, do you try to fool me intentionally or unintentionally?
λ699? Or J699?
@Hartmut Noack
Stop being pathetic. Simply act like a full grown person, accept, that you where fooled.
So i will use your terminology:
You said:
The european, christian/roman calendar can be compared to the dates of chinese, indian and even mayan calendars and the respective archeological records and historical documents. The results are clear: the roman republic fell 2050 years ago, all the events reported since about 3000 years happened as recorded. Not a single year is missing.
But Indian calendar usage started officially at 1 Chaitra 1879, Saka Era, or 22 March 1957 C.C.
This is not like a mistake and inaccuracy (entangle Indian calendar with the Tamil or Hindu calendar), considering that i asked you to confirm the words in just one year, but you absolutely refuse to do this, i want to ask you:
Hartmut, do you try to fool me intentionally or unintentionally?
@Victor Gabriel
Es importante entender que la cuenta del tiempo (días y años) en los calendarios gregoriano y juliano no es de la fecha del nacimiento de Cristo, sino de otro día:
https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circuncisión_de_Jesús
Creo que la fe ciega en este calendario y la falta de voluntad para someterlo a revisión se basa en esta experiencia traumática.
Así que, con errores, actualmente, Occidente se encuentra en 2019. Eso sí, podríamos encontrarnos realmente en 2023 o el 2025 ya que Jesús parece que nació antes de "su nacimiento". ?
Es importante entender que la cuenta del tiempo (días y años) en los calendarios gregoriano y juliano no es de la fecha del nacimiento de Cristo, sino de otro día:
https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circuncisión_de_Jesús
Creo que la fe ciega en este calendario y la falta de voluntad para someterlo a revisión se basa en esta experiencia traumática.
@Виктор Габриэль,
Иисус родился во время, ему предназначенное. Это определённые люди пытаются во все времена изменить времена и Закон. Так сказано в Библии о "малом роге", кажется.
Но то, что предопределено Богом не в состоянии изменить люди. На Руси говорят: "Сколь верёвочке не виться, а конец будет."))
поскольку, кажется, Иисус родился до «своего рождения». ?
Иисус родился во время, ему предназначенное. Это определённые люди пытаются во все времена изменить времена и Закон. Так сказано в Библии о "малом роге", кажется.
Но то, что предопределено Богом не в состоянии изменить люди. На Руси говорят: "Сколь верёвочке не виться, а конец будет."))
@Хартмут Ноак,
Корень любого слова должен иметь своё значение, объяснение, как и слова, от него образованные. Что Вы можете сказать об индоиранском корне hrt? Каково его значение? Для чего его создали, когда применяют? А что означают:
Корни многих слов, которые мы используем сегодня, происходят из тысячелетий индогерманского наследия.
Корень любого слова должен иметь своё значение, объяснение, как и слова, от него образованные. Что Вы можете сказать об индоиранском корне hrt? Каково его значение? Для чего его создали, когда применяют? А что означают:
немецкий "Garten" (graden), который происходит от латинского "hortus",? Мне будет полезно знать больше о других языках, кроме русского.
@Ognik
Я когда на англосаксонском это читал - даже не обратил внимание... а на русском вот это вот понятие "индогерманское" наследние - сразу бросилось в глаза.
https://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/dic_fwords/17112/ИНДОГЕРМАНСКИЕ
Выходит, славяне - это индогерманцы по этой терминологии...
Это похоже на то, что у немцев где-то всё-таки предустановленна программа Четвёртого Рейха, как у кого-то о Третьего Храма.
upd. Ира, вы если обращаетесь к иностранцу - пишите его имя лучше оригинальной латиницей. Многие иностранцы не понимают кириллицу, часто не могут понять что вы к ним обращаетесь в этом случае.
Корни многих слов, которые мы используем сегодня, происходят из тысячелетий индогерманского наследия.
Я когда на англосаксонском это читал - даже не обратил внимание... а на русском вот это вот понятие "индогерманское" наследние - сразу бросилось в глаза.
https://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/dic_fwords/17112/ИНДОГЕРМАНСКИЕ
Выходит, славяне - это индогерманцы по этой терминологии...
Это похоже на то, что у немцев где-то всё-таки предустановленна программа Четвёртого Рейха, как у кого-то о Третьего Храма.
upd. Ира, вы если обращаетесь к иностранцу - пишите его имя лучше оригинальной латиницей. Многие иностранцы не понимают кириллицу, часто не могут понять что вы к ним обращаетесь в этом случае.
@ivan zlax
пишите его имя лучше оригинальной латиницей.- Я пишу то, что вижу в ленте. Как чел себя подаёт, так и обращаюсь. Ещё что перепутаю в латинице, тогда ещё хуже. Есть опыт печальный.))
Выходит, славяне - это индогерманцы- там у них целая секта есть, в которой - да, арийцы - это высшая каста - ничего нового. Где-то в WP видела. Если найду скину ссылку.
Иван, вот ссылка:https://svardat.wordpress.com/2018/05/31/expiation/
@ivan zlax You say: "But Indian calendar usage started officially at 1 Chaitra 1879, Saka Era, or 22 March 1957 C.C."
So, you think, that the indian civilisation did not measure days and years before? And/or did not write a date on its documents? Its the civilisation we have to thank for the decimal notation and the concept of the number zero....
For starters you may have a look upon the buddhist calendar: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhist_calendar
It begins 2556 years ago, that is its "year 0" set to begin in a full moon night when Siddharta Gautama died to become a demigod according to tradition. And of course, the indian historians did not only know the number zero(they invented it), they also used negative numbers to describe the time gone by since events in the past for thousands of years and in mythology in millions of years.
So, when the Tarangini chronic mentions some event such as a report about roman merchants for its year 650 and the same merchants are mentioned in roman documents for around 100 in the julian calendar there you have the synchronicity.
Its fairly simple, I'd say.
So, you think, that the indian civilisation did not measure days and years before? And/or did not write a date on its documents? Its the civilisation we have to thank for the decimal notation and the concept of the number zero....
For starters you may have a look upon the buddhist calendar: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhist_calendar
It begins 2556 years ago, that is its "year 0" set to begin in a full moon night when Siddharta Gautama died to become a demigod according to tradition. And of course, the indian historians did not only know the number zero(they invented it), they also used negative numbers to describe the time gone by since events in the past for thousands of years and in mythology in millions of years.
So, when the Tarangini chronic mentions some event such as a report about roman merchants for its year 650 and the same merchants are mentioned in roman documents for around 100 in the julian calendar there you have the synchronicity.
Its fairly simple, I'd say.
Interesting idea, that 1000 years were added to our calendars at some point.
Back in the year 100, no one was saying "this is year 100" because the Romans were still trying to tamp down the Christians, and the Christian calendar was not part of written history then. The Roman Catholic Church would not be founded for another 3 or 4 centuries. The Coptic Christians were just a bunch of crazy radicals running around the Mediterranean, and not writing Roman history.
And yet, the 12th century has a written and built history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/12th_century
Back in the year 100, no one was saying "this is year 100" because the Romans were still trying to tamp down the Christians, and the Christian calendar was not part of written history then. The Roman Catholic Church would not be founded for another 3 or 4 centuries. The Coptic Christians were just a bunch of crazy radicals running around the Mediterranean, and not writing Roman history.
And yet, the 12th century has a written and built history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/12th_century
@J R there are no 1000 years added anywhere. Just consider: that would mean, that the era of Octavian Augustus would have been a mere 1000 years ago. A tousand years ago was the time, when Europe reconsolidated under the descendants of germanic warlords, who had destroyed the roman empire, East Rome was in its prime as "Byzanz", there where 300 years of Islam already and the muslims had conquered northern Africa, Persia and Arabia.
All the history known to us was written by dozens of civilisations in numerous calendars. The roman calendar, that was adapted by christianity the same as the roman writing and language, is just one of many systems to record time as it goes by.
Arabs, Indians and others had their own systems based on their very own key years of reference. And they watched us and wrote down, what they saw, in their systems. and all these records can be compared and the result is: the reign of Augustus was 2000 years ago.
BTW: in the year 100 the christian sect was irrelevant for roman politics, it had not even formed as we know it today, basically it was a strange sect whithin the known judean religion. And even the judean religion was quite different from the judean religion we know today.
All the history known to us was written by dozens of civilisations in numerous calendars. The roman calendar, that was adapted by christianity the same as the roman writing and language, is just one of many systems to record time as it goes by.
Arabs, Indians and others had their own systems based on their very own key years of reference. And they watched us and wrote down, what they saw, in their systems. and all these records can be compared and the result is: the reign of Augustus was 2000 years ago.
BTW: in the year 100 the christian sect was irrelevant for roman politics, it had not even formed as we know it today, basically it was a strange sect whithin the known judean religion. And even the judean religion was quite different from the judean religion we know today.
То, что я говорю, основано на чем-то, кроме разговоров, цитирования, обсуждения каждого термина, слова и выражения в социальной сети - скучно, когда вы воспринимаете шутливые комментарии и мало интересуетесь их пониманием.
@Ognik Да уж. Отыскали арийство в аринастве:
ХРИСТОС НОРДИЧЕСКИЙ
Защищено: Православное иудохристианство – наш расовый враг!
Это содержимое защищено паролем. Для его просмотра введите, пожалуйста, пароль:
@J R
Mass consciousness holds true to the idea of authenticity of a Christian relic known as the Shroud of Turin that is an ancient length of linen cloth bearing the image of a man who appears to have long been unshaven. In past decades, some researchers even went as far as to claim this to be the result of Leonardo’s first experiment with photography where he pictured himself. However, a research conducted independently by three laboratories has pretty exactly estimated that the cloth is only some seven hundred years old, so that the church itself has stopped claiming its authenticity (although, Roman Catholics, Eastern orthodox Christians and many Protestants acknowledged its authenticity as long as thirty years ago):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shroud_of_Turin#Radiocarbon_dating
Pope of Rome decided to preserve the chronology, but refused to authenticate, probably the most valuable Christian relic.
Look:
https://is3.livejournal.com/77937.html
1.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Çatalhöyük
2.https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/Turkish-President-Erdogan-Accuses-US-of-Supporting-ISIS-20171117-0005.html
3.https://www.livescience.com/61989-famed-archaeologist-created-fakes.html
Today some history looks well written and built. But tomorrow - it may be not.
Back in the year 100, no one was saying "this is year 100" because the Romans were still trying to tamp down the Christians, and the Christian calendar was not part of written history then. The Roman Catholic Church would not be founded for another 3 or 4 centuries. The Coptic Christians were just a bunch of crazy radicals running around the Mediterranean, and not writing Roman history.
Mass consciousness holds true to the idea of authenticity of a Christian relic known as the Shroud of Turin that is an ancient length of linen cloth bearing the image of a man who appears to have long been unshaven. In past decades, some researchers even went as far as to claim this to be the result of Leonardo’s first experiment with photography where he pictured himself. However, a research conducted independently by three laboratories has pretty exactly estimated that the cloth is only some seven hundred years old, so that the church itself has stopped claiming its authenticity (although, Roman Catholics, Eastern orthodox Christians and many Protestants acknowledged its authenticity as long as thirty years ago):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shroud_of_Turin#Radiocarbon_dating
Pope of Rome decided to preserve the chronology, but refused to authenticate, probably the most valuable Christian relic.
And yet, the 12th century has a written and built history:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/12th_century
Look:
https://is3.livejournal.com/77937.html
1.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Çatalhöyük
2.https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/Turkish-President-Erdogan-Accuses-US-of-Supporting-ISIS-20171117-0005.html
3.https://www.livescience.com/61989-famed-archaeologist-created-fakes.html
Today some history looks well written and built. But tomorrow - it may be not.
@Ognik статья. Секретничают, небось там под паролем снова свои арийские планы по изничтожению своих расовых врагов строят.
Фигня. Если хотите, я скопирую для Вас статью в файл. Но там, правда, не душком, а настоящим вонизмом несёт
Hmmm.... It not looks like 1633, it looks like j633
@Hartmut Noack
So, you think, that the indian civilisation did not measure days and years before?
No. Vedic civilization, Hindu civilization, Buddhist civilization, Tamil civilization, the Mughal civilization - they all used other calendars.
The Indian calendar, mentioned by you, was recently introduced and it is not used much. It seems that you do not understand subject at all what you are trying to look like a specialist.
And/or did not write a date on its documents?
Yes, for about 70 years of the existence of this calendar, few documents have been published using it. In modern India, the Hindu, Tamil or Gregorian calendars are more commonly used.
It begins 2556 years ago, that is its "year 0" set to begin in a full moon night when Siddharta Gautama died to become a demigod according to tradition.
That means nothing.
Today is 7527 year after World Creation according to Slavic Calendar.
Please answer, do you believe in this as in your Christ and Siddharta?
I doubt it. This selective faith - when you believe in what is profitable for you, and do not believe in what is not profitable - says that you are trying to manipulate others. I'm trying to figure out why you are doing this - intentionally or unwittingly.
Its fairly simple, I'd say.
If it is simple, then you would have long ago confirmed your initial statement with my request for the provision of annals or artifacts for the year 999 in at least one of the listed calendars. But instead, you persistently try to translate the topic.
A tousand years ago was the time, when Europe reconsolidated under the descendants of germanic warlords, who had destroyed the roman empire
It looks like you have national German firmware preinstalled. Please, answer did you serve in army?
All the history known to us was written by dozens of civilisations in numerous calendars. The roman calendar, that was adapted by christianity the same as the roman writing and language, is just one of many systems to record time as it goes by.
No, it is not. The current chronology has been modulated primarily by the Jesuits, in order to proclaim a logical justification for the dominance of German aristocratic dynasties (Hapsburg, Oldenburg, Windsor, Glücksburg, Romanoff, etc) throughout Europe and the rest of the world.
You cannot confirm your first words by referring to any verifiable document or artifact, but at the same time you are actively continuing to promote your convictions. And also strongly translate the topic to other parties. And also you strongly trying translate the topic to other directions.
Hartmut, please answer me, do you try to fool me intentionally or unintentionally?
@Ognik
Нет, благодарю, немецкое арийство меня особо не интересует.
А вот христианским арианством я интересуюсь:
https://is3.soundragon.su/ru/208
Фигня. Если хотите, я скопирую для Вас статью в файл. Но там, правда, не душком, а настоящим вонизмом несёт
Нет, благодарю, немецкое арийство меня особо не интересует.
А вот христианским арианством я интересуюсь:
https://is3.soundragon.su/ru/208
Я так понимаю, это не принятие Иисуса, как имеющего божественную природу? Другими словами - Иисус не Сын Божий?
@Ognik, нет, это церковные иерархи так перевернули изначальную идею ариан о том, то все дети божие и могут как исус творить чудеса и исцелять других. Последнее кстати у них неплохо получалось, судя по сохранившейся информации, именно с этим была связана их особая популярность в народе.
Я не в этом направлении топаю. Но по этому поводу: ведь, и ведическое учение говорит о том, что люди со временем могут стать Богами? Библия же наоборот, говорит, что грех человека состоит в том, что он захотел стать как боги. Во всяком случае, на том этапе своего развития, когда был еще не готов к этому. Я так думаю, что не было бы смысла самой христианской доктрины, если бы Иисус не был Богом. Речь бы шла о замкнутом круге, о бесконечном движении по кругу. А с появлением Иисуса у человека есть шанс вырваться из этого круга и стать родоначальником нового вида материи.))
Сложно всё это. Я периодически впадаю в ступор, когда нахожу что-то новое к тому, что уже как-то выстроилось в моем воображении.))
Сложно всё это. Я периодически впадаю в ступор, когда нахожу что-то новое к тому, что уже как-то выстроилось в моем воображении.))
@Ognik
Какое именно из ведических учений? Сейчас их много разных имеется в достатке. Интересовался браминским. Реставрированные ведические учения примерно как арийство и прочии расалогии - мало интересуют, малоэффективные модели это, согласно моему личному опыту.
Согласно браминским учениям, вроде не припомню того как люди становились богами, если только полубоги, ракшасы всякие и прочие бастарды от богов и людей. Там в этом смысле всё было строго, на этом держалась кастовая система...ведь это так любая чернь царём себя возомнить могла бы.
Но по этому поводу: ведь, и ведическое учение говорит о том, что люди со временем могут стать Богами?
Какое именно из ведических учений? Сейчас их много разных имеется в достатке. Интересовался браминским. Реставрированные ведические учения примерно как арийство и прочии расалогии - мало интересуют, малоэффективные модели это, согласно моему личному опыту.
Согласно браминским учениям, вроде не припомню того как люди становились богами, если только полубоги, ракшасы всякие и прочие бастарды от богов и людей. Там в этом смысле всё было строго, на этом держалась кастовая система...ведь это так любая чернь царём себя возомнить могла бы.
@кто здесь?
не только нашего
@ivan zlax скажите, уважаемый: это особенность вашего инстанса, что ответить можно только в корень?
не только нашего
Математики же в книгах .. Втирают теже самые вещи слово в слово (по сабжу) .. Уже давно ж не новость, вроде..... Видимо метематики тоже малоэффективны ))))))
@Eenan, увлекаешься почитыванием математиков?
https://share.naturalnews.com/posts/1642022#fa6b8b60350901376b150cc47a07853c
https://share.naturalnews.com/posts/1642022#fa6b8b60350901376b150cc47a07853c
@ivan zlax ну так. почитывал когда-то... этож тема еще с советских времён ... я еще даже не родился... про 1=i(j) там точно где-то я читал... и где-то в видео тоже по-моему говорили об этом... но это всё как бы давно понятно что вся история это по сути журналистика... со всеми вытекающими...
@ivan zlax I do not try to fool you and I do not really intend to convince you. I just like to debunk nonsense. The Societas Jesu was founded 500 years ago, they did not change anything in the Gregorian calendar.
You say: "The Indian calendar, mentioned by you, was recently introduced and it is not used much."
Who cares? It does not matter for the subject of our discussion. All calendars of all times and nations are used to do just one thing: to record the real event of the earth rotating around the sun. Its all about measurment. If you like, you can calculate a UNIX timestamp for the voyage of general Ban Chaos adjudant towards rome, it would tell the same as the julian, gregorian, chinese, indian or mayan calendar: that the voyage took place about 1950 years ago.
You then ask the silly question: "Today is 7527 year after World Creation according to Slavic Calendar. Please answer, do you believe in this as in your Christ and Siddharta?"
First: the slavic calendar is just the roman calendar with different names for months and some other modifications.
Then: the world was not created, it developed naturely after a singularity became unstable about 13,8 Billion years ago.
I am an atheist, calendars and chronics are no matter of faith, they are just what they are: recorded events in time.
You say: "The Indian calendar, mentioned by you, was recently introduced and it is not used much."
Who cares? It does not matter for the subject of our discussion. All calendars of all times and nations are used to do just one thing: to record the real event of the earth rotating around the sun. Its all about measurment. If you like, you can calculate a UNIX timestamp for the voyage of general Ban Chaos adjudant towards rome, it would tell the same as the julian, gregorian, chinese, indian or mayan calendar: that the voyage took place about 1950 years ago.
You then ask the silly question: "Today is 7527 year after World Creation according to Slavic Calendar. Please answer, do you believe in this as in your Christ and Siddharta?"
First: the slavic calendar is just the roman calendar with different names for months and some other modifications.
Then: the world was not created, it developed naturely after a singularity became unstable about 13,8 Billion years ago.
I am an atheist, calendars and chronics are no matter of faith, they are just what they are: recorded events in time.
1795? It look like "i.795"
@Hartmut Noack
I do not try to fool you and I do not really intend to convince you.
Who are you trying to convince, if not me? Yourself?
If you do not try to fool me, this means that somebody fooled you, and you try to continue this tradition.
A human will better allow himself to be deceived again and again, than he will admit to himself that he has been deceived.
I just like to debunk nonsense.
It doesn't seem like you have any experience with this. While all your "debunking" demonstrate your low level of competence in the issues discussed.
The Societas Jesu was founded 500 years ago, they did not change anything in the Gregorian calendar.
Where did you get this information? Have you studied historical fakes, monastic orders, chronologies?
I studied it, i have a lot of evidence, and not only artifacts and documents ~300 years old in support of my revisionist statements.
Who cares? It does not matter for the subject of our discussion.
Yes, it is. It is just demonstrates level of your competency and the falsity of your beliefs and knowledge of the past. How can anybody could trust you in general, if in small things you broadcast misinformation?
All calendars of all times and nations are used to do just one thing: to record the real event of the earth rotating around the sun.
This is a false statement. I will not refute it. I will simply say that only a sincere fanatic of the western atom-planetary model of the world order could say so.
the voyage of general Ban Chaos adjudant towards rome, it would tell the same as the julian, gregorian, chinese, indian or mayan calendar: that the voyage took place about 1950 years ago.
This is the fake. And this fake was developed quite recently:
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Ban+Chao&case_insensitive=on&year_start=1500&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CBan%20Chao%3B%2Cc0
Your idea of the world is based on hoaxes. Tell me, do you also sincerely believe in the long-thousand-year history of Stonehenge?
First: the slavic calendar is just the roman calendar with different names for months and some other modifications.
According to the Western fakes and manipulative "Indo-German" terminology - it maybe.
But according revisionist Slavic tradition, it was the opposite. Slavs-Etruscans taught the Romans civilization. And the Macedonian Slav Alexander, it is clearly confirmed.
Your prejudiced pro-western model of the world does not take into account even Arkaim and Kostenki. And also does not take into account the influence of the Khazar Kaghanat on the history of modern Western civilization.
Therefore, it is better ‘not to know’, not to understand. This way, the ‘pie’, or call it ‘carrot’, would not be lost.
The ‘ignorance’in the West, I believe, is subconsciously ‘self-inflicted’. With knowledge, comes responsibility. With responsibility, an obligation to act (because not to act would be clearly immoral). All this could only lead to the loss of privileges.
I am an atheist, calendars and chronics are no matter of faith, they are just what they are: recorded events in time.
Do not try to fool yourself. You are atheist who live in Christian Era, you are atheis who use Christian Calendar, your atheistic year (год, god - on Russian) and chronology starts on religious holiday of Circumcision of Christ.
You can deceive yourself, Christian atheist, but not me.
If you want, i can tell you exactly how you were deceived and made an unwitting missionary to the theory of Western supremacy.
@ivan zlax you live in a bubble, you hae created by consuming nonsense that was produced by charlatans. Your views are shared by your little sect only, because they dont reflect reality but try to set up a new pseudo reality, it would be nice fantasy, if it would not claim to be real.
Slavic people are a part of the indogerman family, Etruskians have transfered knowledge to the romans but by 90% the roman civilisation has learned from the hellenistic culture. Alexander of Macedon was greek as greek can be. He was a graecan nationalist.
Do you ever wondered, why all the world accepts what you childishly call "atom-planetary model"? Because it works. If you accept that "model" you can say precisely, when the next equinotium will happen, you can send spaceships to other planets and as sattelites around earth etc because it works. And it does work, because it does not depend on any fantasy of some birthday of some religious leader but on facts.
You know nothing Ivan, because you feel uncomfortable with the truth, because you want your own truth. Alas, there is only but one reality and it does not care for the feelings of people about slaves or romans or germans or ashanti.
Slavic people are a part of the indogerman family, Etruskians have transfered knowledge to the romans but by 90% the roman civilisation has learned from the hellenistic culture. Alexander of Macedon was greek as greek can be. He was a graecan nationalist.
Do you ever wondered, why all the world accepts what you childishly call "atom-planetary model"? Because it works. If you accept that "model" you can say precisely, when the next equinotium will happen, you can send spaceships to other planets and as sattelites around earth etc because it works. And it does work, because it does not depend on any fantasy of some birthday of some religious leader but on facts.
You know nothing Ivan, because you feel uncomfortable with the truth, because you want your own truth. Alas, there is only but one reality and it does not care for the feelings of people about slaves or romans or germans or ashanti.
BTW: in the year 100 the christian sect was irrelevant for roman politics, it had not even formed as we know it today, basically it was a strange sect whithin the known judean religion. And even the judean religion was quite different from the judean religion we know today.
@Hartmut Noack, that was my point. A casual observation of the 12th century shows that it is clearly different from the 2nd century. Historians weren't writing about 'year 100' in the year 100. Almost nobody knew it was year 100. But by the year 1100, Europe was being built up, and historians were using the Julian calendar, originating on the estimated year of Jesus' birth. Today's Gregorian calendar only differs from it by a few days.
@J R hmmm actually the Julian calendar did not origin from the birth of the Nazarene, Gaius Ijulius Caesar has ordered to develop that calendar in what we call today "45 B.C." long before the birth of Jesus. The christian church simply put a mark on the date, when Jesus was born according to tradition and called it "year 0". It no problem also, to set the first day of the year to some arbitrary date, as long as the year is still 364 days and a leap day is properly calculated and applied. The latter was an improvement, that came with the gregorian calendar, that is a derivative of the julian.
It's commonly referred to as the 'Julian calendar'. The origin date was changed by Christians, but before that could happen, the Christians must have been important enough to do it. So it would have been after Constantine, in the 4th century.
That was why I chose the 2nd century for my comparison. Christians were an unimportant minority in the 2nd century, and they were running Europe by the 12th. They were trying to stem the tide of Muslims by then. . .
That was why I chose the 2nd century for my comparison. Christians were an unimportant minority in the 2nd century, and they were running Europe by the 12th. They were trying to stem the tide of Muslims by then. . .
@Eenan Если Вы дружите с цифрами, возможно, Вас заинтересует вот это:
https://plus.google.com/u/1/102965343083037538232/posts/bwerJ4338Vg?hl=ru
https://plus.google.com/u/1/102965343083037538232/posts/bwerJ4338Vg?hl=ru
Hmm. It not looks like 1735, it looks like i735
@Hartmut Noack
you live in a bubble, you hae created by consuming nonsense that was produced by charlatans.
Ah, again you try to start you personal projections. This will not help you in this case. No one here will not let you say the last word, resorting to censorship. Unless of course, these will not be words of repentance. In the case of repentance i could give you a chance.
You will have to either silently accept the fact that I will say (and this means to run away from responsibility once again), or endlessly try to justify your claims to Western crypto-colonial superiority.
Your views are shared by your little sect only, because they dont reflect reality but try to set up a new pseudo reality, it would be nice fantasy, if it would not claim to be real.
Looks like another projection. I have never been a member of any sects or churches. I observe sects and churches, talked with sectarians and clerics, but i myself am not a member of any of them.
Slavic people are a part of the indogerman family
Indogermanic family are racist terminology (or maybe rassistische or russistische terminologie). Racists usually use racist terminology, non racists usually use Indo-European terminology. I think you just happened to be mistaken twice, and you are not a supporter of this racist terminology.
Do you ever wondered, why all the world accepts what you childishly call "atom-planetary model"?
It seems that you have a very narrow view of the world, formed by the mass media:
Not the whole world accepted. You're wrong again. You do not familar with the topics that you are trying to declare with a smart view.
Although the statement "the entire consumer world", maybe it would be correct in this case.
If you accept that "model" you can say precisely, when the next equinotium will happen, you can send spaceships to other planets and as sattelites around earth etc because it works.
You are again demonstrating your incompetence. Holidays of the wheel of the year was known to most of the pagans of the world, before the arrival of Christians and atoms.
You know nothing Ivan,
I agree.
because you feel uncomfortable with the truth, because you want your own truth.
I disagree. I feel myself very comfortable - i have everything what i want. 10 years ago i wanted to become autonomous and grow food on my own (or exchange with neighbors). Now i have achieved this. Since i abandoned the cash and the mass product shops - i felt comfortable. In the meantime, when i was dependent on money and store supplies — i was feel uncomfortable.
Alas, there is only but one reality and it does not care for the feelings of people about slaves or romans or germans or ashanti.
Earlier, i offered you something:
i can tell you exactly how you were deceived and made an unwitting missionary to the theory of Western supremacy
You did not answer. So you do not want to know. It looks like everything is exactly as in the last reposted article:
But why? Isn’t knowledge the greatest adventure? Isn’t ‘democracy’ a farce, if almost all people see the world with the same eyes?
The conclusion that I am lately arriving at, is: they do not search, they do not compare and ‘they do not want to know’ because they are scared.
Scared of discovering reality, which would in turn force them to act; to at least shed some of the basic privileges the citizens of the colonizing countries, enjoy.
@ivan zlax
Я не углублялась в учения браминов и родноверов. Но из того, что пишут в сети, я так поняла, что ведисты верят в то, что при человек, приложив определенные усилия со своей стороны, и пройдя все круги развития, станет богом. Думаю, имеется в виду, достигнет божественного уровня развития. Хотя, я очень смутно себе это представляю. Как, например, лист, пройдя годичный круг своего развития, весной может возродиться цветком на том же дереве? Или на другом? Моего воображения не хватает, чтобы постигнуть это.
Согласно браминским учениям, вроде не припомню того как люди становились богами, если только полубоги, ракшасы всякие и прочие бастарды от богов и людей. Там в этом смысле всё было строго, на этом держалась кастовая система...ведь это так любая чернь царём себя возомнить могла бы.
Я не углублялась в учения браминов и родноверов. Но из того, что пишут в сети, я так поняла, что ведисты верят в то, что при человек, приложив определенные усилия со своей стороны, и пройдя все круги развития, станет богом. Думаю, имеется в виду, достигнет божественного уровня развития. Хотя, я очень смутно себе это представляю. Как, например, лист, пройдя годичный круг своего развития, весной может возродиться цветком на том же дереве? Или на другом? Моего воображения не хватает, чтобы постигнуть это.
Hmm... It not looks like 1824, it looks like J824 (this artifact was made less than 200 years ago)
@Hartmut Noack
hmmm actually the Julian calendar did not origin from the birth of the Nazarene
The christian church simply put a mark on the date, when Jesus was born
The countdown of both the Julian and Gregorian calanders does not start from the birth of the Nazarene, but from the Brit milah for King of the Jews.
You again demonstrate your incompetence. And i know why this is. I want to point you straight to this. But first, please answer, do you know who the Moel is and what does he traditionally do?
@Ognik
Это совершенно разные традиции.
Брамины - это традиционная, индоиранская.
Родноверы - националистический нюэйдж, новодел.
Это похоже на обычный нюэйдж.
В ведический период это было недопустимо, согласно писаниям. Божественный ранг мог выпасть только по статусу рождения.
Пост-ведийское учение адвайты вполне конкретно описывает подобные темы.
Я не углублялась в учения браминов и родноверов.
Это совершенно разные традиции.
Брамины - это традиционная, индоиранская.
Родноверы - националистический нюэйдж, новодел.
Но из того, что пишут в сети, я так поняла, что ведисты верят в то, что при человек, приложив определенные усилия со своей стороны, и пройдя все круги развития, станет богом.
Это похоже на обычный нюэйдж.
Думаю, имеется в виду, достигнет божественного уровня развития.
В ведический период это было недопустимо, согласно писаниям. Божественный ранг мог выпасть только по статусу рождения.
Как, например, лист, пройдя годичный круг своего развития, весной может возродиться цветком на том же дереве? Или на другом?
Пост-ведийское учение адвайты вполне конкретно описывает подобные темы.
@ivan zlax of course you feel comfortable. Nothing is more comfortable than a nice replacement of reality tailored to your wishes by a bunch of criminal liars.
You say: "Not the whole world accepted."
Yes, only the 99% who are not completely deprived from the rest of humanity. Only the people, who are smart enough, to accept facts.
You then ask: "***But why? Isn’t knowledge the greatest adventure? Isn’t ‘democracy’ a farce, if almost all people see the world with the same eyes?"
That is indeed an interesting question.
We all have the same eyes, and we all live in the same world. Truth lies in the eye of the beholder, reality is the eye of the beholder.
The world does not care for the way, we see it. We are ill adviced, if we do not measure the quality of what we take as "true" by taking that truth to a test by reality.
Democracy is not a farce, it is so far, the best we (all the world, including everyone on the planet) have achieved to set up collaboration. The latter is a do or die prerequisite for humans. If we dont cooperate, we are lost.
Democracy does not mean, that we could somehow vote for or against the laws of nature. It means, that we can vote for politicians that offer different ways to approach that very laws of nature.
The Number on that Pillar is 1824. Learn to read indian numbers.
You say: "Not the whole world accepted."
Yes, only the 99% who are not completely deprived from the rest of humanity. Only the people, who are smart enough, to accept facts.
You then ask: "***But why? Isn’t knowledge the greatest adventure? Isn’t ‘democracy’ a farce, if almost all people see the world with the same eyes?"
That is indeed an interesting question.
We all have the same eyes, and we all live in the same world. Truth lies in the eye of the beholder, reality is the eye of the beholder.
The world does not care for the way, we see it. We are ill adviced, if we do not measure the quality of what we take as "true" by taking that truth to a test by reality.
Democracy is not a farce, it is so far, the best we (all the world, including everyone on the planet) have achieved to set up collaboration. The latter is a do or die prerequisite for humans. If we dont cooperate, we are lost.
Democracy does not mean, that we could somehow vote for or against the laws of nature. It means, that we can vote for politicians that offer different ways to approach that very laws of nature.
The Number on that Pillar is 1824. Learn to read indian numbers.
Hmm, it not looks like 1524, it looks like i.524
Albrecht Dürer, meanwhile.
@Hartmut Noack
Nothing is more comfortable than a nice replacement of reality tailored to your wishes by a bunch of criminal liars.
I see you try project your vision again. I asked you not to do it. Please do not.
Yes, only the 99% who are not completely deprived from the rest of humanity. Only the people, who are smart enough, to accept facts.
You seem to know nothing about others. There are many people who disagree with your colonial model, even in Europe and the USA. Try to learn about the Flat Earth Society... although everything what i am telling you is that you don’t need it. The only thing you need is to say your last word in favor of your criminal colonial masters.
You then ask: "***But why? Isn’t knowledge the greatest adventure? Isn’t ‘democracy’ a farce, if almost all people see the world with the same eyes?"
That is indeed an interesting question.
No. I did not ask. I use this quote. It is not my questions. Be careful.
Democracy is not a farce, it is so far, the best we (all the world, including everyone on the planet) have achieved to set up collaboration.
Set up westenr domination and expluatation.
That's what you say honestly, i see. You are engaged in the promotion of the system, due to which you can quietly exploit and live at the expense of others.
Everything like in quoted article:
Some would, but only very few. The tremendous majority wouldn’t.
Mostly, the fact is not always that the ‘population in the West is brainwashed’. That would really be quite a good scenario: and something relatively easy to correct.
The problem is much greater: The inhabitants of the West do not want to know, because deep inside, they do not want the system to change. They don’t want the world order to be modified.
It is about you.
The latter is a do or die prerequisite for humans. If we dont cooperate, we are lost.
What you call co-operation and the spread of democracy is for others a war, debt bondage, an aggressive policy of privatization.
Your cooperation is a democratic transfer of European waste electronics to Gahna, for example. You will die if you do not deceive and exploit others. You can not otherwise.
Democracy does not mean, that we could somehow vote for or against the laws of nature. It means, that we can vote for politicians that offer different ways to approach that very laws of nature.
It looks like propaganda of democratic government agent. Beautiful words that hides dirty work.
The Number on that Pillar is 1824. Learn to read indian numbers.
As you wish:
In this case it looks like 9823, not 1824.
@ivan zlax You say: Albrecht Dürer, meanwhile.
Try to find any document from any time after 1000 that is written whithout any sign, that looks like "1" be it "i" or "I" in front. Why should Dürer write "i524" if the year was "524"?? The year was not 524, it was 1524. 1524 years after the date, that the church had set for the birth of the Nazarene, calculated by using the reformed julian calendar called the gregorian calendar. That is -14066611200 UNIX, or 18 Nisan 5284 hebrew.
If the year, Dürer wrote this would have been 524, there would have been 524 years time for 500 years precisely recorded history of the roman empire, followed by 200 years of Migration Period, the precisely recorded violent christianisation of Europe, the rise and consolidation of Islam and all the events, that happened in that time in the Qin and Song empires, the rise of the Mongols etc etc.
And there is radiocarbon also...
You claim is simply stupid. The same as stupid as the flat earth madness.
You have nothing that faintly hints to it let alone prove it. You choose to separate from mankind. What have they done to you?
Try to find any document from any time after 1000 that is written whithout any sign, that looks like "1" be it "i" or "I" in front. Why should Dürer write "i524" if the year was "524"?? The year was not 524, it was 1524. 1524 years after the date, that the church had set for the birth of the Nazarene, calculated by using the reformed julian calendar called the gregorian calendar. That is -14066611200 UNIX, or 18 Nisan 5284 hebrew.
If the year, Dürer wrote this would have been 524, there would have been 524 years time for 500 years precisely recorded history of the roman empire, followed by 200 years of Migration Period, the precisely recorded violent christianisation of Europe, the rise and consolidation of Islam and all the events, that happened in that time in the Qin and Song empires, the rise of the Mongols etc etc.
And there is radiocarbon also...
You claim is simply stupid. The same as stupid as the flat earth madness.
You have nothing that faintly hints to it let alone prove it. You choose to separate from mankind. What have they done to you?
https://books.google.fr/books?id=c2LRwc9gSRIC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q
Hmmm. This not look like 1630. It looks like:
Anno cIɔ Iɔc xxx.
Cum privilegio.
@Hartmut Noack
Why should Dürer write "i524" if the year was "524"??
"anno isus524"
it was 1524. 1524 years after the date, that the church had set for the birth of the Nazarene
No it is not. If this were so, then today would be the 8th of April, 2019, not 1st. Your calendar does not begin with the Birth of Christ.
If the year, Dürer wrote this would have been 524, there would have been 524 years time for 500 years precisely recorded history of the roman empire, followed by 200 years of Migration Period, the precisely recorded violent christianisation of Europe, the rise and consolidation of Islam and all the events, that happened in that time in the Qin and Song empires, the rise of the Mongols etc etc.
Don't forget king Arthur and Beowulf.
You have nothing that faintly hints to it let alone prove it. You choose to separate from mankind. What have they done to you?
They tried to deceive me. Only because they were deceived by others. I didn't buy it.
In any case, i answered all your questions. Now i ask you to answer mine, please do not ignore my question again:
But first, please answer, do you know who the Moel is and what does he traditionally do?
There isn't enough evidence to justify this position. I can't see it. The calendar is the same calendar we have been using for centuries, like other major calendars from other great civilizations. So what, if someone dotted a '1' in an old manuscript? Or used a 'J', which was not really a letter in the Roman alphabet?
And as for the notion that the 1000 years somehow justified some aggression by the empire, I don't think that was necessary either.
Europe had been in an almost continuous state of war since Roman times. And when the US was founded, it was populated by the most aggressive and ambitious maniacs from Europe. These people (or their descendants) have been running the show all my life, since WWII, and were clearly behind the Civil War and the genocidal conquest of the Native Americans.
And as for the notion that the 1000 years somehow justified some aggression by the empire, I don't think that was necessary either.
Europe had been in an almost continuous state of war since Roman times. And when the US was founded, it was populated by the most aggressive and ambitious maniacs from Europe. These people (or their descendants) have been running the show all my life, since WWII, and were clearly behind the Civil War and the genocidal conquest of the Native Americans.
I do not know who that Moel is, it might well be, that this is because he is so irrelevant, that he is not even in Wikipedia.
It might be true also, that people, especially westeners, have decieved you to make money on your expense. But the reaction, to trust nobody but a few charlatans, who make their money by telling you, that the earth is flat or that there are 1000 years missing in european history, is immature.
It might be true also, that people, especially westeners, have decieved you to make money on your expense. But the reaction, to trust nobody but a few charlatans, who make their money by telling you, that the earth is flat or that there are 1000 years missing in european history, is immature.
@J R ahh, thanks for pushing me to recognize the "J" in regard of Alphabets. Indeed the "J" greek: Ιώτα was not only used as a letter in late medieval latin but also as a synonym for something very small or "the smallest", because it was the smalles letter in the greek alphabet. Now we have the reason for the use of "J" or "i"(the minuskel for i and j was the same). The jota stands for "the smallest" which makes it a logical choice to write the smallest natural number: 1.
@J R
It is becouse of the proprietary preinstalled services:
https://is3.soundragon.su/110
Parental control of the owner.
The Faked Millennium is the first step into the abyss of uncertainty.
Stumbling into this abyss, you risk not returning to the usual and satisfactory state of certainty.
No. It is the feudal fake, probably, Europe was a trade confederation in the main part of civilized time, Hansa is not the only example.
There isn't enough evidence to justify this position. I can't see it.
It is becouse of the proprietary preinstalled services:
https://is3.soundragon.su/110Parental control of the owner.
So what, if someone dotted a '1' in an old manuscript? Or used a 'J', which was not really a letter in the Roman alphabet?
The Faked Millennium is the first step into the abyss of uncertainty.
Stumbling into this abyss, you risk not returning to the usual and satisfactory state of certainty.
Europe had been in an almost continuous state of war since Roman times.
No. It is the feudal fake, probably, Europe was a trade confederation in the main part of civilized time, Hansa is not the only example.
Traditional:
1706?
I·706·
@Hartmut Noack
The reason is different. And the article is:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moel
Just you are pleased that you are in a fake reality. It suits you. You have a favorable position in this reality, you do not want to lose your European privilege.
You are wrong, lie, substitute concepts (involuntarily, but voluntarily), you do it easily. You're used to it. This is your ordinary practice, it seems its has become a habit.
Your scientific Christian year and era begin not at equinox, not on the day of Birth of Christ. And 7 days after carnal birth. Your starting point of the era, and the first day of the year, every year is the day of the Circumcision of Christ:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision_of_Jesus
I pointed out to you a little about your mistake. And you continue to substitute concepts, and argue that your era begins from the day of birth, not from the day of circumcision. This is not because you are not smart. For a different reason. This reason can be tried to call just three words: collective traumatic experience.
Moel is one who, according to tradition, sucks blood from a boy's penis on Brit Mila:
You could check it by yourself:https://www.google.ru/search?q=brit+mila+moel+sucking+blood&tbm=isch
This event is the beginning of your era, which lasts 2019 years as you assure me.
I am ready to prove that this is a fraud not only in pictures. But i’ll say right away that not only the millennium was faked. The faked in your view of the past, and therefore the present - is much more than pictures with weird plots.
Your chronology begins with an event that you most would not like to think about.
1706?
I·706·
@Hartmut Noack
I do not know who that Moel is, it might well be, that this is because he is so irrelevant, that he is not even in Wikipedia.
The reason is different. And the article is:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moel
Just you are pleased that you are in a fake reality. It suits you. You have a favorable position in this reality, you do not want to lose your European privilege.
You are wrong, lie, substitute concepts (involuntarily, but voluntarily), you do it easily. You're used to it. This is your ordinary practice, it seems its has become a habit.
Your scientific Christian year and era begin not at equinox, not on the day of Birth of Christ. And 7 days after carnal birth. Your starting point of the era, and the first day of the year, every year is the day of the Circumcision of Christ:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision_of_JesusI pointed out to you a little about your mistake. And you continue to substitute concepts, and argue that your era begins from the day of birth, not from the day of circumcision. This is not because you are not smart. For a different reason. This reason can be tried to call just three words: collective traumatic experience.
Moel is one who, according to tradition, sucks blood from a boy's penis on Brit Mila:
You could check it by yourself:https://www.google.ru/search?q=brit+mila+moel+sucking+blood&tbm=isch
This event is the beginning of your era, which lasts 2019 years as you assure me.
I am ready to prove that this is a fraud not only in pictures. But i’ll say right away that not only the millennium was faked. The faked in your view of the past, and therefore the present - is much more than pictures with weird plots.
Your chronology begins with an event that you most would not like to think about.
@ivan zlax OK, so its the Mohel, the Rabbi, who performs the circumcission. I find it perfectly plausible, that that circumcission could be the date set as the "birth" of the Nazarene, he was a jew and rituals like the circumcission where considered the beginning of life in many cultures.
I only do not understand, why this should be relevant.
I mean: the man is dead. For nearly 2000 years now, given, that the tradition is at least trustable in his time of birth or circumcission. Other details are more or less doubtful such as the birth at Bethlehem(he was from Nazareth and the reasons, why his parents should have traveled to Bethlehem are unconfirmed, also Bethlehem was the town of the house of David, so to present a new king of the jews is easier, if he is born there...
What I am trying to say is: Jesua ben Miriam of Nazareth is important for christians but irrelevant for date measurement.
One last time: calendars are about measuring timespans. The refence day is arbitrary and only used, to set a basis for the number, a year is labeled with. Just like UNIX timestamp is zeroed at 1.1.1970. All calendars can be synchronised with others, at least all solar based ones. And the lunar ones can be projected. Since the reference point, that the church has set arbitrary in the julian calendar, we counted 2019 rounds of earth around the sun. You may accept that or not, it is plain truth. And writing "1" as "jota" may be snobbish but it is perfectly plausible. More plausible than your fantasms of "1000 years deleted" by orders of magnitude.
I only do not understand, why this should be relevant.
I mean: the man is dead. For nearly 2000 years now, given, that the tradition is at least trustable in his time of birth or circumcission. Other details are more or less doubtful such as the birth at Bethlehem(he was from Nazareth and the reasons, why his parents should have traveled to Bethlehem are unconfirmed, also Bethlehem was the town of the house of David, so to present a new king of the jews is easier, if he is born there...
What I am trying to say is: Jesua ben Miriam of Nazareth is important for christians but irrelevant for date measurement.
One last time: calendars are about measuring timespans. The refence day is arbitrary and only used, to set a basis for the number, a year is labeled with. Just like UNIX timestamp is zeroed at 1.1.1970. All calendars can be synchronised with others, at least all solar based ones. And the lunar ones can be projected. Since the reference point, that the church has set arbitrary in the julian calendar, we counted 2019 rounds of earth around the sun. You may accept that or not, it is plain truth. And writing "1" as "jota" may be snobbish but it is perfectly plausible. More plausible than your fantasms of "1000 years deleted" by orders of magnitude.
and, there wasn't really a thousand years between Jesus' birth and the Bris. it would have only made a few months' difference.
anyway, like @Hartmut Noack said, it's a more or less arbitrary point in time. It wasn't even on the calendar until several centuries later, so a few months would not have made a difference.
anyway, like @Hartmut Noack said, it's a more or less arbitrary point in time. It wasn't even on the calendar until several centuries later, so a few months would not have made a difference.
Publishing stamp of Lodewijk Elsevier:
1597?
I.597
and
Anno cIɔ. Iɔ. xcvii.
@Hartmut Noack
It was an example of how you unwittingly try to replace concepts. I have pointed out to you several times that your era does not begin with Birth. You kept calling circumcision as birth.
Of course, when you try to maintain your Western superiority - accuracy in dates and events is not important. All you need is that you retain your privileges relative to the rest of the world.
Again you are lying for the sake of your Western advantages.
Well, or again substitute concepts, falling for the manipulation of your religious hierarchs.
No, this is a pure lie. You can not justify it relying on official sources. But I'm sick of refuting your lies. I will only indicate where you are fooling others there.
1597?
I.597
and
Anno cIɔ. Iɔ. xcvii.
@Hartmut Noack
I only do not understand, why this should be relevant.
It was an example of how you unwittingly try to replace concepts. I have pointed out to you several times that your era does not begin with Birth. You kept calling circumcision as birth.
What I am trying to say is: Jesua ben Miriam of Nazareth is important for christians but irrelevant for date measurement.
Of course, when you try to maintain your Western superiority - accuracy in dates and events is not important. All you need is that you retain your privileges relative to the rest of the world.
Since the reference point, that the church has set arbitrary in the julian calendar, we counted 2019 rounds of earth around the sun.
Again you are lying for the sake of your Western advantages.
Well, or again substitute concepts, falling for the manipulation of your religious hierarchs.
You may accept that or not, it is plain truth.
No, this is a pure lie. You can not justify it relying on official sources. But I'm sick of refuting your lies. I will only indicate where you are fooling others there.
@ivan zlax You say: "You kept calling circumcision as birth." ...and I dont care, because its irrelevant.
Nobody can say, what relation the day 10 days after winter solstice 2019 rounds around the sun ago may or may not have for Jesua be Miriam of Nazareth, it is highly unlikely, that the man was born, circumcised or weaned on that day, he most likely was already 4 or 7 years old.
Its just a arbitrary reference date, that had not even any influence on the calendar as such. Feel free to interprete the day as thou wishest, I have no problem whith that.
The only thing that counts is, that real events, such as the birth of Lucius Annaeus Seneca or the chinese Empress Shi happened 2019 years ago.
Nobody can say, what relation the day 10 days after winter solstice 2019 rounds around the sun ago may or may not have for Jesua be Miriam of Nazareth, it is highly unlikely, that the man was born, circumcised or weaned on that day, he most likely was already 4 or 7 years old.
Its just a arbitrary reference date, that had not even any influence on the calendar as such. Feel free to interprete the day as thou wishest, I have no problem whith that.
The only thing that counts is, that real events, such as the birth of Lucius Annaeus Seneca or the chinese Empress Shi happened 2019 years ago.
1609?
٨609.
@Hartmut Noack
You say: "You kept calling circumcision as birth." ...and I dont care, because its irrelevant.
This is an example of your lies or substitution of concepts. I pointed out a mistake to you several times; you still continued to use this "generally accepted" substitution of concepts. Saying that your era and year (russian "год", sounds as "god", means "year") begins on a circumcision, not a day of birth. Your new atheist год is the 8th day after birth.
In addition, it is so relevant that even now, when you learned that your year does not begin on Christmas, but in circumcision - you will still consciously make mistakes and deceive yourself and others. After all, it is well known that if you begin to draw attention to this uncomfortable starting point of reference for your era and your every year, you will be misunderstood. And what others think of you is the most important thing for you. You better continue to use the substitution of concepts, as do all around you. Just for only anybody did not think badly about you. To this end, every sincere Westerner selflessly deceives himself and others in many fundamental concepts. On this builds the system of post-colonial privileges of Western Europeans.
it is highly unlikely, that the man was born, circumcised or weaned on that day, he most likely was already 4 or 7 years old.
I would say otherwise: if any Jesus was, then he was born not 2,000 years ago, but less than 800.
This is indicated by the scrupulous scientific analysis of many Christian shrines of the late 20th century. The churches, instead of changing their calendar, decided to abandon the authenticity of the shrines. The fact that they revered for centuries in the 20th century all this turned out to be fakes. Since the analysis of artifacts showed that they were ~700 years old and not 2,000.
Its just a arbitrary reference date, that had not even any influence on the calendar as such. Feel free to interprete the day as thou wishest, I have no problem whith that.
Do not try to cheat me. You have problems with it. Othewrwise try to make post about this article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision_of_JesusOn your native language, please. Or try to make German wiki article about this Great Christian Holiday.
You cannot. You are forbidden of that.
At the same time, I do not interpret anything. I just do not take into account civilized prohibitions based on the collective traumatic experience. This is the official data about Moel and the Circumcision of Christ.
The only thing that counts is, that real events, such as the birth of Lucius Annaeus Seneca or the chinese Empress Shi happened 2019 years ago.
This is another lie that you can not confirm.
You really struggle hard not to get the concept, @ivan zlax.
Rest assured, the vast majority of us westeners could not care less for weather the 1st of january in year 1 is celebrated, because some demimythological person was born, circumcised or weaned that day.
Nothing about that has even a faint chance to cause a trauma in fact nobody really cares. Everybody, who has at least some interest in that, does know, that that reference day is absolutely not the birthday of the Nazarene, who was born at lest 4 years before and he was most likely born in Nazareth and his mother was sure no virgin.
Its most probably true, that the church set christmas as a replacement of the traditional Sol Invictus.
I will not read that artice, because it is not relevant for our discussion here. But I'd like to point your attention on these articles:
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/100
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/500
Of course I recommend to read all the other years articles from 1 to 1000 as well. All this is proven fact, proven by documents, artifacts and radiocarbon.
And its by 100% irrelevant, for what illusionary event the reference year "1" was set for.
Rest assured, the vast majority of us westeners could not care less for weather the 1st of january in year 1 is celebrated, because some demimythological person was born, circumcised or weaned that day.
Nothing about that has even a faint chance to cause a trauma in fact nobody really cares. Everybody, who has at least some interest in that, does know, that that reference day is absolutely not the birthday of the Nazarene, who was born at lest 4 years before and he was most likely born in Nazareth and his mother was sure no virgin.
Its most probably true, that the church set christmas as a replacement of the traditional Sol Invictus.
I will not read that artice, because it is not relevant for our discussion here. But I'd like to point your attention on these articles:
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/100
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/500
Of course I recommend to read all the other years articles from 1 to 1000 as well. All this is proven fact, proven by documents, artifacts and radiocarbon.
And its by 100% irrelevant, for what illusionary event the reference year "1" was set for.
1546?
JS46...JeSu46
@Hartmut Noack
You really struggle hard not to get the concept, @ivan zlax.
Your projections are funny.
Rest assured, the vast majority of us westeners could not care less for weather the 1st of january in year 1 is celebrated, because some demimythological person was born, circumcised or weaned that day.
Do not try to cheat me, westener. You have problems with it. Othewrwise try to make post in diaspora about this article on your Native language:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision_of_JesusOr try to make German wiki article about this Great Christian Holiday.
For you, this is unacceptable. You will look for any excuses, just not to confirm your words with a deed. So for me, your words are worth nothing. You are trying to prove the consistency of your false history not for me, but above all for yourself and others.
Nothing about that has even a faint chance to cause a trauma in fact nobody really cares. Everybody, who has at least some interest in that, does know, that that reference day is absolutely not the birthday of the Nazarene, who was born at lest 4 years before and he was most likely born in Nazareth and his mother was sure no virgin.
Tell me more about this, atheist, whom all this does not care.
Its most probably true, that the church set christmas as a replacement of the traditional Sol Invictus.
This is the influence of Mithraism, probably.
But Christmas is not the main holiday - the Novy God is the start of a new year. In both Gregorian and Julian calendars. Novy God is Circumcision of Christian demigod.
I will not read that artice, because it is not relevant for our discussion here. But I'd like to point your attention on these articles:
You will not read that article, because of your collective traumatic experience. Do not try to cheat me. It is relevant - we speak about gregorian years, that starts on this day, not on winter solstice.
Of course I recommend to read all the other years articles from 1 to 1000 as well. All this is proven fact, proven by documents, artifacts and radiocarbon.
No. You lie. I checked. Show me at least one document or artifact that is reliably more than 1019 years old. You can not. You don't know what you're talking about. You are a liar.
And its by 100% irrelevant, for what illusionary event the reference year "1" was set for.
With each comment, i show more examples of fraud. You do not show anything, just refer to your absolute authorities based on fakes and traumatic experience. There is no reliable document which is more than 1019 years old. You can not show anything. All you can do is chat with empty words with trying to justify the inherited superiority.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Aureus_of_St._Emmeram
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folchard_Psalter
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_Palace,_Ingelheim
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ine_of_Wessex
They didn't stamp the date on coins or write much during the dark ages. And they were busy being invaded by Byzantines, Vikings, Ottomans, etc. Anyway, if I showed you a coin with a date like 'DCCXLI' on it, you would say it is fake.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folchard_Psalter
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_Palace,_Ingelheim
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ine_of_Wessex
They didn't stamp the date on coins or write much during the dark ages. And they were busy being invaded by Byzantines, Vikings, Ottomans, etc. Anyway, if I showed you a coin with a date like 'DCCXLI' on it, you would say it is fake.
@J R
How to establish a reliable dating of this code? Will you show a scientific analysis of this artifact? I am sure there was no such analysis.
This is a late fake.
On secularisation in 1811 it was given to the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek in Munich (catalogue reference Clm 14000).
I see only 200 years of reliable history. All that was before is a deception.
This mentioning prove this:
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Codex+aureus&case_insensitive=on&year_start=1200&year_end=2000&corpus=20&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t4%3B%2CCodex%20aureus%3B%2Cc0%3B%2Cs0%3B%3BCodex%20aureus%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BCodex%20Aureus%3B%2Cc0%3B%3Bcodex%20aureus%3B%2Cc0
(try to check word 'Roman' for example for comparison)
Also pay attention to mentioning of author:
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Emmeram&case_insensitive=on&year_start=1500&year_end=2000&corpus=20&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CEmmeram%3B%2Cc0#t1%3B%2CEmmeram%3B%2Cc0
See the huge pillar in 1780? This is a clear sign of late hoax. 1750 nobody knew about the author of this book. But in 1780 the number of mentions increased dramatically.
I see only last 100 years mentioning:
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Folchart-Psalter&case_insensitive=on&year_start=1500&year_end=2000&corpus=20&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CFolchart%20-%20Psalter%3B%2Cc0
And only 150 years mentionong of author:
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Folchart%2C+Folchard&case_insensitive=on&year_start=1500&year_end=2000&corpus=20&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CFolchart%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CFolchard%3B%2Cc0
(try to check word 'tain' for example for comparison)
How was the dating established?
I see German books know only 200 last years about this:
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Ingelheimer&case_insensitive=on&year_start=1500&year_end=2000&corpus=20&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CIngelheimer%3B%2Cc0
I see British English know only 300 years about this Kaiserpfalz:
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Ingelheim&case_insensitive=on&year_start=1500&year_end=2000&corpus=18&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t4%3B%2CIngelheim%3B%2Cc0%3B%2Cs0%3B%3BIngelheim%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BINGELHEIM%3B%2Cc0
Oops, Germans know only last 200 years about Wessex.
Please show me proven artifacts or documents. And not like these.
Of course. I recommend that you familiarize yourself with this work in order to understand why the Germans have so much of ancient history, unlike other nations:
https://ussr.win/cloud/zlax/potsecret/forgeryreplicafictionintro.pdf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Aureus_of_St._Emmeram
How to establish a reliable dating of this code? Will you show a scientific analysis of this artifact? I am sure there was no such analysis.
This is a late fake.
On secularisation in 1811 it was given to the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek in Munich (catalogue reference Clm 14000).
I see only 200 years of reliable history. All that was before is a deception.
This mentioning prove this:
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Codex+aureus&case_insensitive=on&year_start=1200&year_end=2000&corpus=20&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t4%3B%2CCodex%20aureus%3B%2Cc0%3B%2Cs0%3B%3BCodex%20aureus%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BCodex%20Aureus%3B%2Cc0%3B%3Bcodex%20aureus%3B%2Cc0
(try to check word 'Roman' for example for comparison)
Also pay attention to mentioning of author:
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Emmeram&case_insensitive=on&year_start=1500&year_end=2000&corpus=20&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CEmmeram%3B%2Cc0#t1%3B%2CEmmeram%3B%2Cc0
See the huge pillar in 1780? This is a clear sign of late hoax. 1750 nobody knew about the author of this book. But in 1780 the number of mentions increased dramatically.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folchard_Psalter
I see only last 100 years mentioning:
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Folchart-Psalter&case_insensitive=on&year_start=1500&year_end=2000&corpus=20&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CFolchart%20-%20Psalter%3B%2Cc0
And only 150 years mentionong of author:
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Folchart%2C+Folchard&case_insensitive=on&year_start=1500&year_end=2000&corpus=20&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CFolchart%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CFolchard%3B%2Cc0
(try to check word 'tain' for example for comparison)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_Palace,_Ingelheim
How was the dating established?
I see German books know only 200 last years about this:
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Ingelheimer&case_insensitive=on&year_start=1500&year_end=2000&corpus=20&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CIngelheimer%3B%2Cc0
I see British English know only 300 years about this Kaiserpfalz:
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Ingelheim&case_insensitive=on&year_start=1500&year_end=2000&corpus=18&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t4%3B%2CIngelheim%3B%2Cc0%3B%2Cs0%3B%3BIngelheim%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BINGELHEIM%3B%2Cc0
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ine_of_Wessex
Oops, Germans know only last 200 years about Wessex.
Please show me proven artifacts or documents. And not like these.
They didn't stamp the date on coins or write much during the dark ages. And they were busy being invaded by Byzantines, Vikings, Ottomans, etc. Anyway, if I showed you a coin with a date like 'DCCXLI' on it, you would say it is fake.
Of course. I recommend that you familiarize yourself with this work in order to understand why the Germans have so much of ancient history, unlike other nations:
https://ussr.win/cloud/zlax/potsecret/forgeryreplicafictionintro.pdf
@Hartmut Noack
How you dated it? Show me the date on this stone. Or a scientific report on the analysis for the dating. This stone was found about 100 years. So it is so old.
Show proof that it oldest.
@ivan zlax how about a document cast in stone 3700 years old?
How you dated it? Show me the date on this stone. Or a scientific report on the analysis for the dating. This stone was found about 100 years. So it is so old.
Show proof that it oldest.
@ivan zlax You are silly enough to ask: "How to establish a reliable dating of this code? Will you show a scientific analysis of this artifact? "
I say: what makes you think, that all the world must show you anything? If you doubt the dating, find proof against it. You may show us that then, as of now, you showed nothing.
Ahhhh the "I524" thing you think was something? No, comment on the "i" for "Iota".
I say: what makes you think, that all the world must show you anything? If you doubt the dating, find proof against it. You may show us that then, as of now, you showed nothing.
Ahhhh the "I524" thing you think was something? No, comment on the "i" for "Iota".
Of course, there where no humans available to note the Rex, when it lived, Thank the heavens there is C14: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiocarbon_dating
Of course carbon dating runs out of steam for anything more than a few thousand years old. The dinosaurs required other dating methods like potassium-argon analysis of mineral crystals in the same strata with them. There are quite a number of different dating methods. There is also tree-ring dating for things made of wood.
+1 @J R, C14 is but one method of datiing findings in archeology and paleontology/geology. All these Methods are veryfied by basic science that is: physics, chemistry, biology and math. And they measure just one thing: how many years have passed, after this item was made/burned/fossilised etc.
Of course, I can take @ivan zlax's argument a bit further.
the Universe was created by the Flying Spaghetti Monster last Tuesday. And any rocks, fossils, radioactive isotopes, tree rings, supernova observations, or newspapers from the week before, were created at the same time, just to screw around with you. In fact, the Flying Spaghetti Monster creates the Universe again every Tuesday.
You can't prove me wrong, because anything you show as evidence is a fake.
the Universe was created by the Flying Spaghetti Monster last Tuesday. And any rocks, fossils, radioactive isotopes, tree rings, supernova observations, or newspapers from the week before, were created at the same time, just to screw around with you. In fact, the Flying Spaghetti Monster creates the Universe again every Tuesday.
You can't prove me wrong, because anything you show as evidence is a fake.
@J R RAMEN.
ANNO MLXIX / Anno 1606?
Ot looks like: ANNO LXIX. Anno i606.
@Hartmut Noack
You are silly enough to ask: "How to establish a reliable dating of this code? Will you show a scientific analysis of this artifact? "
"You are silly enough to ask [my question]" - means i am silly for you as i understand:
https://www.activistpost.com/2017/04/25-rules-disinformation.htmlNumber five. Again and again. This is the main method that remains for you.
I say: what makes you think, that all the world must show you anything?
I do not think so. You are trying to prove something to me. But you fail with your mission.
If you doubt the dating, find proof against it. You may show us that then, as of now, you showed nothing.
I could show you some kind of reconstructions on the military area:
https://gorojanin-iz-b.livejournal.com/64046.html
Ahhhh the "I524" thing you think was something? No, comment on the "i" for "Iota".
Maybe "Iotasus"?
@ivan zlax I got another example for you, this one is from 67 Million years B.C. :
...
Of course, there where no humans available to note the Rex, when it lived, Thank the heavens there is C14:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiocarbon_dating
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiocarbon_dating#Errors_and_reliability
Radiocarbon dating is generally limited to dating samples no more than 50,000 years old, as samples older than that have insufficient C14 to be measurable.
Radiocarbon dates are generally presented with a range of one standard deviation (usually represented by the Greek letter sigma as 1σ) on either side of the mean. However, a date range of 1σ represents only 68% confidence level, so the true age of the object being measured may lie outside the range of dates quoted.
Errors in procedure can also lead to errors in the results. If 1% of the benzene in a modern reference sample accidentally evaporates, scintillation counting will give a radiocarbon age that is too young by about 80 years.[78]
You are funny: in support of your insolvent model, you give me references, the contents of which refute your previous statement.
But no, this is not funny. After all, you do this not for fun, but to justify your privileged colonial position on this planet. Not. This is not funny at all.
@J R
You can't prove me wrong, because anything you show as evidence is a fake.
You haven't shown anything yet. Unfortunately.
Yeah, of course I made the mistake, to mention C14 in the case of the dinosaur. I had the plan, that you may read the article about C14 to find out, that every finding in the last 50K years can be dated sufficiently precise whith that. That plan worked out well.
The fotos are entirely unrelated to the Hammurabi Artifact. Though the first picture is interesting. It clearly show the landing site of a Vorlon shuttle ship. If you should ever meet a Vorlon, I am afraid, it will be a disappointing for both sides, You know: the Vorlons only ever ask you, who you are... and you would give no sound answer.
The fotos are entirely unrelated to the Hammurabi Artifact. Though the first picture is interesting. It clearly show the landing site of a Vorlon shuttle ship. If you should ever meet a Vorlon, I am afraid, it will be a disappointing for both sides, You know: the Vorlons only ever ask you, who you are... and you would give no sound answer.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonehenge#1901%E2%80%932000
Wikipedia does not claim that Stonehenge is the original structure.
And I do not attempt to show you any evidence for several reasons: 1. I don't care to do any new research. Therefore, if Wikipedia doesn't have it, I will not find it. 2. Very few physical objects (especially ones in the possession of humans) can survive 1000 years. There are fires, wars, floods, other natural disasters. And things are occasionally stolen, vandalized, and mutilated by humans. 3. Even gravestones have a limited life. You can not read an inscription in marble or limestone after 50 years. The stone simply dissolves in the rain. Granite lasts longer, perhaps 100 or 150 years, as the silicate minerals in granite are more durable. If you can read the grave marker of an ancient king, that marker was placed in the 20th or 21st century by historians.
So, no, I am not going to try to convince you, @ivan zlax. You have your version of reality and I have mine. But I would think that a lot more people would have noticed, if 1000 years of history were inserted or deleted. It would not be possible to cover up such a large discrepancy, in my opinion.
Wikipedia does not claim that Stonehenge is the original structure.
And I do not attempt to show you any evidence for several reasons: 1. I don't care to do any new research. Therefore, if Wikipedia doesn't have it, I will not find it. 2. Very few physical objects (especially ones in the possession of humans) can survive 1000 years. There are fires, wars, floods, other natural disasters. And things are occasionally stolen, vandalized, and mutilated by humans. 3. Even gravestones have a limited life. You can not read an inscription in marble or limestone after 50 years. The stone simply dissolves in the rain. Granite lasts longer, perhaps 100 or 150 years, as the silicate minerals in granite are more durable. If you can read the grave marker of an ancient king, that marker was placed in the 20th or 21st century by historians.
So, no, I am not going to try to convince you, @ivan zlax. You have your version of reality and I have mine. But I would think that a lot more people would have noticed, if 1000 years of history were inserted or deleted. It would not be possible to cover up such a large discrepancy, in my opinion.
@J R you say "Granite lasts longer, perhaps 100 or 150 years, " You sure? I can read 500 year old and older original inscriptions carved even in sandstone everywhere around here in ye olde germany. Around the corner is a cemetry with inscriptions 100 years old clearly readable. The Hammurapi artifact is 4000 years old and the laws cast in basalt are still readable.
Like everything else "your mileage may vary". Thinking about Mississippi, where some relatives are buried. Modern history there only goes back to the US Civil War, in ~1865. There is a lot of rain in Mississippi. A few people lived along the coast and up the river 300 years ago, but my relatives lived ~100 miles inland.
After 20 years or so, a piece of marble (CaCO3) will have a coating of crystals, like granulated sugar. The inscriptions will lose their sharp edges. Eventually the inscriptions are rounded indentations, barely legible. After a few more decades, they cannot be read. Perhaps the marble can last 80 or 100 years. I am not certain what the failure mode is for granite. It becomes covered with lichens in Mississippi. Basalt is an even harder stone than Granite, of course.
After writing that, I realized that there are things in Egypt which are still there from 4000-5000 years ago. But it does not rain frequently in Egypt.
After 20 years or so, a piece of marble (CaCO3) will have a coating of crystals, like granulated sugar. The inscriptions will lose their sharp edges. Eventually the inscriptions are rounded indentations, barely legible. After a few more decades, they cannot be read. Perhaps the marble can last 80 or 100 years. I am not certain what the failure mode is for granite. It becomes covered with lichens in Mississippi. Basalt is an even harder stone than Granite, of course.
After writing that, I realized that there are things in Egypt which are still there from 4000-5000 years ago. But it does not rain frequently in Egypt.
1630?
cIɔ.Iɔc.xxx.
@Hartmut Noack
Yeah, of course I made the mistake, to mention C14 in the case of the dinosaur. I had the plan, that you may read the article about C14 to find out, that every finding in the last 50K years can be dated sufficiently precise whith that. That plan worked out well.
Do not try to fool me again. You made another mistake, because you have no experience in this topic. You refer to your authorities without even getting to know them in advance. The article you sent clearly states that radiocarbon analysis of artifacts is unreliable. You are trying to preach, to be a missionary of the scientifically grounded western superiority. But you are not familiar with this topic. I have been doing independent study of all this for about 10 years:
Material from layers where dinosaurs are found carbon dated at 34,000 years old. – R. Daly Earth’s Most Challenging Mysteries, 1972, p. 280
A freshly killed seal was carbon dated as having died 1,300 years ago. SOURCE: Antartic Journal. Vol. 6. 1971. Page. 211.
Shells from living snails were carbon dated as being 27,000 years old. SOURCE: "Science" Vol. 224, 1984. Pages 58-61
Living mollusk shells were dated up to 2,300 years old. Science vol. 224, 1984, pp. ,code>58-61
“One part of the Vollosovitch mammoth carbon dated at 29,500 years and another part at 44,000.”. Troy L. Pewe: “Quaternary Stratigraphic nomenclature in unglaciated Central Alaska” Geological survey professional paper #862 US GOV printing office 1975, pg. 30.
“Structure, metamorphism, sedimentary reworking, and other complications have to be considered. Radiometric dating would not have been feasible if the geologic column had not been erected first.". O'Rourke, J.E., "Pragmatism versus Materialism in Stratigraphy," American Journal of Science, vol. 276 (January, 1976) p. 54.
“Contrary to what most scientists write, the fossil record does not support the Darwinian theory of evolution because it is this theory (there are several) which we use to interpret the fossil record. By doing so, we are guilty of circular reasoning if we then say the fossil record supports this theory.”. West, Dr. Ronald (Kansas State Univ.) “Paleontology and Uniformitarianism” Compass 45:216, May 1968
The fotos are entirely unrelated to the Hammurabi Artifact.
You run away from questions that i ask you, you run away from my requests. I try to answer your every question, take into account your every request. You can not confirm the authentic dating of the black stone given by you. The fact that you referred to the radio-carbon method means that you find some connection between the dating of the stone and the radio-carbon analysis. This characterizes you as a complete ignoramus in the topic under discussion. You do not need to have special knowledge to understand that the radio-carbon method is not applicable to stones.
You need to justify the lie in which you live - just because you still write to me there. Your privileged position vis-à-vis the majority of the human population of this planet rests on this global historical lie.
It is vital for you to preserve your supreme position, it seems that you are ready to use all known methods of disinformation and sophistry to preserve your virtual superiority.
Though the first picture is interesting. It clearly show the landing site of a Vorlon shuttle ship. If you should ever meet a Vorlon, I am afraid, it will be a disappointing for both sides, You know: the Vorlons only ever ask you, who you are... and you would give no sound answer.
Yes, i see you now behave like a comedian. Looks like you're starting to give back positions. Instead of lying and denying yourself with another references to academic sources, you start trying to ridicule the statements of the interlocutor. This is progress.
The Hammurapi artifact is 4000 years old and the laws cast in basalt are still readable.
You are lie. You never seen or read it. Nowhere on this stone is the date recorded in Arabic numerals in the Gregorian calendar.
You can only make loud statements that you can not confirm.
@J R
No, sorry. You do not have your own reality. You have an alien reality formed by western feudal authorities.
I have already mentioned. 1000 years is just the first step. Further there will be even more uncertainty and Chaos, much more:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leningrad_Codex
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Firkovich#Forgery_Accusations
You have your version of reality and I have mine.
No, sorry. You do not have your own reality. You have an alien reality formed by western feudal authorities.
But I would think that a lot more people would have noticed, if 1000 years of history were inserted or deleted. It would not be possible to cover up such a large discrepancy, in my opinion.
I have already mentioned. 1000 years is just the first step. Further there will be even more uncertainty and Chaos, much more:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leningrad_Codex https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Firkovich#Forgery_Accusations
No, sorry. You do not have your own reality. You have an alien reality formed by western feudal authorities.
And this is part of your belief system. Let's not think too much about it, or I'll be going back to the FSM for advice. Remember, next Tuesday, the Universe will be created anew.
Just to humor you, I did a web search to see if I can find out why the writers of these old documents dotted their '1's and/or used what appears to be a 'J' for the millineum. I did not find direct answers to this query (and it's worth noting that there are other dots and unknown pen/brush strokes around the dates), but I did find an interesting page on calendars.
Apparently, the "birth of Jesus" was placed on the calendar in the year 523. And that date was immediately disputed.
Jesus was born under the reign of king Herod the Great, who died in 750 AUC, which means that Jesus could have been born no later than that year. Dionysius’ calculations were disputed at a very early stage.
So you probably won't find a western Christian coin or gravesite with a date less than DXXIII on it. . .
http://www.webexhibits.org/calendars/year-history.html
... hundreds of years later, monks were the only ones with any free time for scholarly pursuits – and they were discouraged from thinking about the matter of "secular time" for any reason beyond figuring out when to observe Easter. In the Middle Ages, the study of the measure of time was first viewed as prying too deeply into God’s own affairs – and later thought of as a lowly, mechanical study, unworthy of serious contemplation. ... The "new" calendar, as we know it today, was not adopted uniformly across Europe until well into the 18th century.
So in your mythology, it was apparently adopted in the 8th century.
Interestingly, the old Roman calendar was based on another mythological date, the founding of Rome. It was when the young imperialists, who were raised by a wolf, were weaned or something like that. I don't think the wolves had a Bris ceremony, sort of doubt it. . .
@J R
No, sorry. I am orthodox erisian apostle, i can not to believe anything.
What is the FSM in this case?
No it is not. In my mythology, it's not at all what you imagine. I have not described it here.
There is evidence that Rome was founded by the Etruscan (in Russian, the Etruscans sound as "этрусски", "etrussky", “these are Russians”). There is some evidences that the Etruscans was Slavs. But this is too humiliating for Western self-consciousness, therefore there is nothing in common between the castles of Milan and the castle of Kolomna, and in general there is no need to put an end to the issue of Etruscans, this is a controversial topic requiring discussion. Unlike everyone else. It was not fact of my mythology. But i could show you some sources for such of model.
And this is part of your belief system.
No, sorry. I am orthodox erisian apostle, i can not to believe anything.
Let's not think too much about it, or I'll be going back to the FSM for advice.
What is the FSM in this case?
So in your mythology, it was apparently adopted in the 8th century.
No it is not. In my mythology, it's not at all what you imagine. I have not described it here.
Interestingly, the old Roman calendar was based on another mythological date, the founding of Rome. It was when the young imperialists, who were raised by a wolf, were weaned or something like that. I don't think the wolves had a Bris ceremony, sort of doubt it. . .
There is evidence that Rome was founded by the Etruscan (in Russian, the Etruscans sound as "этрусски", "etrussky", “these are Russians”). There is some evidences that the Etruscans was Slavs. But this is too humiliating for Western self-consciousness, therefore there is nothing in common between the castles of Milan and the castle of Kolomna, and in general there is no need to put an end to the issue of Etruscans, this is a controversial topic requiring discussion. Unlike everyone else. It was not fact of my mythology. But i could show you some sources for such of model.
"этрусски", haha!
Popular historical accounts (over here) tend to say about the Etruscans "we don't know much about the Etruscans, here are some pictures of ruins on an island in the Mediterranean" and then they move on to the Romans.
Popular historical accounts (over here) tend to say about the Etruscans "we don't know much about the Etruscans, here are some pictures of ruins on an island in the Mediterranean" and then they move on to the Romans.
@J R
Moreover, in the Russian Federation there is a special academician - Chudinov, he simulates schizophrenia with the promotion of this topic - "Etruscan - EtoRussy". On the state salary discredits this connection.
This material looks like less biased:
https://cogniarchae.com/2015/12/02/slavic-and-etruscan-cognates-sarmatian-and-albanian-connection/
"этрусски", haha!
Moreover, in the Russian Federation there is a special academician - Chudinov, he simulates schizophrenia with the promotion of this topic - "Etruscan - EtoRussy". On the state salary discredits this connection.
This material looks like less biased:
https://cogniarchae.com/2015/12/02/slavic-and-etruscan-cognates-sarmatian-and-albanian-connection/
Well , my good brother in faith @ivan zlax you may or may have not get the devine teachings of Eris all wrong,
I hereby grant you excommunication.
cincerely, your pope.
I hereby grant you excommunication.
cincerely, your pope.
@Hartmut Noack, show me you certification documents, pope.
I could show you my documents - i am certificated alt linux specialist and dean of alt university. Also i am five years documented erisian apostle: https://is3.soundragon.su/about
You are not the first who tries to make me anathema. At first they were russian discordians from:http://discordium.ru/
Then the US discordians in irc banned me, because of @Modernist Microfiche Minotaur's initiative.
And now: the Pope of Chomutov? It seems you said you are from there or surroundings. Tell me what town or region you are from or show certification confirming your pope status pleesa. For reporting purposes, i need to register it in bureaucratic procedure. This is the third case.
Or you again try to cheat me? The main thing is not to make concessions?
I could show you my documents - i am certificated alt linux specialist and dean of alt university. Also i am five years documented erisian apostle:
https://is3.soundragon.su/aboutYou are not the first who tries to make me anathema. At first they were russian discordians from:http://discordium.ru/
Then the US discordians in irc banned me, because of @Modernist Microfiche Minotaur's initiative.
And now: the Pope of Chomutov? It seems you said you are from there or surroundings. Tell me what town or region you are from or show certification confirming your pope status pleesa. For reporting purposes, i need to register it in bureaucratic procedure. This is the third case.
Or you again try to cheat me? The main thing is not to make concessions?
@Hartmut Noack
Please do not call me brother of faith. I am not your brother in faith. I have no one brother in faith.
In any case, you did not say the city in which you live and did not show your pope certificate, which means that you tried to deceive again. This case will not register.
Concessions have never been an option, brother in faith. I hereby take the One Hundred.
Please do not call me brother of faith. I am not your brother in faith. I have no one brother in faith.
In any case, you did not say the city in which you live and did not show your pope certificate, which means that you tried to deceive again. This case will not register.
@Ognik
Вот тут, к примеру утверждается о кончине Хрусталёва:
"Почему после этого фильма про настоящую историю христианства внезапно заболел и скончался Алексей Хрусталёв?"
https://cont.ws/@altairhantengr/1067008
Причём, это не единственный источник с подобным утверждением.
Но, как оказалось, это дезинформация. Вот тут жж этого автора:
https://terrasancta.livejournal.com/
Он активен до сих пор.
Есть вероятность, что Алексей Хрусталёв - это не настоящее имя человека, а проект для продвижения темы "Франция - колыбель христианства"
Я слышал об Алексее Хрусталёве, кажется, кто-то в комментариях Андрею Степаненко раскрывал его модель.
Слышал он молодым скончался. Знаете подробности причин кончины? Ведь если не ошибаюсь он прямо из Франции вещал?
Вот тут, к примеру утверждается о кончине Хрусталёва:
"Почему после этого фильма про настоящую историю христианства внезапно заболел и скончался Алексей Хрусталёв?"
https://cont.ws/@altairhantengr/1067008Причём, это не единственный источник с подобным утверждением.
Но, как оказалось, это дезинформация. Вот тут жж этого автора:
https://terrasancta.livejournal.com/Он активен до сих пор.
Есть вероятность, что Алексей Хрусталёв - это не настоящее имя человека, а проект для продвижения темы "Франция - колыбель христианства"
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/09/Gedachtenistafel_van_de_Heren_van_Montfoort.jpg
https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gedachtenistafel_van_de_heren_van_Montfoort
1608?
j608
https://laradelage.ussr.win/1072
https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gedachtenistafel_van_de_heren_van_Montfoort
1608?
j608
https://laradelage.ussr.win/1072The dates shown in the painting - 1770 and J608 - according to the official version are years of restoration in 1770 and 1608 respectively.
What's wrong with...?
Art historians claim that the swords were painted later. So are the text and the dates. Accordingly, without swords and inscriptions, it is not clear who these people are. Especially since they're not on the list of noble families in Holland. Although Count Willem IV, who led this battle, is on the list. His kin was interrupted by the date of this battle.
Conversation Features
Loading...