Cubfan64 said:
I don't understand why filemaker hasn't offerred at least a couple documented references for these professional folks who are interested in studying the area he mentions.
In my opinion, he can't offer documented references for any professionals because there isn't anyone studying the area. There is simply nothing to study.
He is, once again, offering up more empty claims while ignoring all the members who asked for previous evidence, such as the "flyover" photos. Then he has the unmitigated audacity to scream "WINNER" even though he has accomplished nothing and proven nothing. Phil seems to be under the mistaken impression that unsupported claims are evidence.
I am offended. Phil is playing us all for fools.
What really bothers me is his constant promotion of
pseudoscience, presented as fact, such as the misinformation about the Sumerians. (And just what the
[bleep] do they have to do with this anyway?)
filemaker01 said:
We already know at Sumerians, 4000 - 3000 BC knew and drew on many walls all the planets which is to some a big mystery.
No big mystery: the Sumerians didn't draw all the planets. They were completely unaware of most of the planets we know today, as they had no telescopes.
Watching "Ancient Aliens" is not scientific research I'm afraid. This nonsense is based on fiction writer Zecharia Sitchin's misinterpretations of cuneiform text and Sumerian drawings.
What is depicted in this Sumerian image is
not the sun and planets. It is not the sun, it's another star surrounded by other stars. The Sumerians had a very specific depiction of our sun, and this isn't it. All experts agree on this. You can read all about it here:
VA243 Seal PDF file from the
Sitchin Is Wrong website
Dr. Heiser wrote this a long time ago, when he was a Ph.D. candidate. He has since gotten his Ph.D. and has quite an impressive list of credentials as an expert in this field.
Mike Heiser earned an M.A. (1998) and Ph.D. (2004) in Hebrew Bible and Ancient Semitic Languages from the University of Wisconsin-Madison. His dissertation was entitled, "The Divine Council in Late Canonical and Non-Canonical Second Temple Jewish Literature" (English translation: the dissertation dealt with the presence of a pantheon in the Hebrew Bible and the binitarian nature of ancient Israelite religion and Judaism, a backdrop for the the belief in the deity of Christ in the New Testament). Before going to the UW-Madison, Mike also earned an M.A. in Ancient History from the University of Pennsylvania (1992; major fields, Ancient Syria-Palestine and Egyptology). Mike can do translation work in roughly a dozen ancient languages, among them Biblical Hebrew, Biblical Greek, Aramaic, Syriac, Egyptian hieroglyphs, Phoenician, Moabite, and Ugaritic cuneiform. He has also studied Akkadian and Sumerian independently.
And Sitchen's credentials? He has none. He studied economics. He has no training, education, or experience in ancient languages or in ANY scientific field. Yet millions of people have bought his books, and his nonsense.
To get back on topic... well, I take that back. This thread has been off topic for over a year. It never really was about the gold legend. In the very first post Phil was wanting to "save the canyon" because of a non-existent "Valley Of The Chiefs", a burial mound for which there is no evidence and which contradicts what is known about Apaches.
So let's get back to the latest topic, the effigies. Phil once challenged me to prove they don't exist. I will do exactly that.
Credit:
http://www.snotahaycanyon.com/
In this image Phil has simply drawn a butterfly where nothing exists. The hills between the wings are directly connected to the hills in the left wing. You have to ignore that fact to believe in his butterfly. The right wing is even worse. It doesn't exist on the landscape. This USGS image shows it even more clearly:
But it gets even weirder....
Here you see Phil has drawn two different effigies on the same exact capture in Google Earth. I didn't even have to adjust the images to create this animation: it's the same exact image. He just drew two different effigies on it.
And the two effigies contradict one another. They overlap.
The other effigies are much the same, though not quite as obvious. The "bison" is chopped up by valleys, the swan has no wings.
I think I've proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that at least two effigies don't exist. In the absence of any supporting evidence for the others, it's safe to assume they don't exist either.
Now, I may be fairly new to this forum, but I am by no means new to forums. One thing I know: this thread does not qualify as a discussion, at least not from Phil's standpoint. He has intentionally ignored members since long before I joined. He insults anyone who disagrees, while never providing any good reason to agree. This thread is an insult to every good TNet member who has taken the time to post their views and to listen respectfully to others views.
And it isn't really about a lost gold legend.
Nothing in this thread makes any sense to me, and I suspect that the majority of readers agree (judging by the many comments).
I would suggest, no,
urge, that the moderators move this thread to the non-sense forum. I think that's the appropriate place for it. I offer one final quote from Phil as evidence for this:
filemaker01 said:
Ten of the original Adams party men after finding the canyon went to a colony towards Fort Wingate to fetch supplies only they returned with so much ammunition and weapons and other stuff that when Chief Nana saw the goods, he ordered the men killed for trespassing on Apache soil against the current then treaty. Adams buried the men where he found them in the ravine where a friend of mine found their remains as well as old supplies and more in the gulch...
Phil's "friend" found human remains and artifacts at Phil's location? And there's no newspaper article? No mention on the internet? No police blotter entry?
Does that claim make any sense to anyone here? Any sense at all?
