THE CASE OF THE ???? ASTRONOMER

This is a sequel to the previous case, that of the Misplaced Teapot, in which I reported the challenge, in Sky & Telescope Magazine, to my assertion that the depiction on a 4,500 year-old Mesopotamian cylinder seal (Berlin Museum VA./243) shows our solar system with the sun in the center and ALL the planets we know of today, plus one more — NIBIRU, the home planet of the Anunnaki.

What the magazine’s article (by Dr. E. C. Krupp) and artwork (see “The Case of the Misplaced Teapot” on this website) argued in essence was that this central piece of evidence by me in my book The Twelfth Planet (1976) is no evidence at all, because this depiction shows the planet Jupiter (known to the ancients) passing within the central portion (the “teapot”) of the constellation Sagittarius (also known in antiquity). Hence: No extraordinary knowledge, No extraterrestrial teachers, No Anunnaki, No 12th planet…

But Jupiter, orbiting the Sun almost precisely in the ecliptic, NEVER moves 11-12 degrees south to appear in the Teapot! Hence, No alternative interpretation, and No toppling of this piece of evidence (one of hundreds of textual and pictorial ancient data in support of the Sumerian extraordinary knowledge and the Nibiru/Anunnaki explanation).

After several fruitless letters and faxes to Sky & Telescope seeking a correction and an admission of their error, I received a two page letter from Dr. E.C. Krupp, signed by him with his title Director on official stationery of the Griffith Observatory, Los Angeles, dated 4 August 2000. It explains that my letter to the magazine was forwarded to him, but his response was delayed due to absence in Iran.

And what does the distinguished astronomer say? I quote:

“It is a delight to hear from you. I have all of your books, have read most of them, and have listened to you on the radio a couple of times. I have of course dedicated thought to the arguments you have developed. Although your handling of the data has inspired my skepticism, please let me acknowledge the courtesy and logic of your complaint about the way I evaluated your Twelfth Planet notions in my monthly column on astronomy and culture in Sky & Telescope.”

Well, well – but what about the impossibility of his assertion of Jupiter being in the Teapot of Sagittarius? Finally, the “operative” paragraph:

“You are correct to point out that I was hasty in offering Sagittarius as an option for the imagery on the Akkadian cylinder seal VA/243. Certainly we cannot regard the figure as an accurate map of the Teapot with Jupiter brewing inside.”

So, was the distinguished astronomer “hasty” and not actually plain wrong? The letter continues: “If you’ll allow me Saturn, we get a little closer, but you are right – no tea caddied planet. My caption highlights Jupiter, positions it within Sagittarius, and suggests a real mapping. Your objection is sustained” (emphasis added).

Does, then, an apology follow? Not at all, because the letter continues:

“Of course, there are other candidates among the stars. A planet could have been in the vicinity of Leo, for example, enclosed by Regulus, gamma Leonis, zeta Leonis, epsilon Leonis, alpha Cancri, 38 Cancri, delta Cancri, zeta Hydrae, epsilon Hydrae, and iota Hydra. Given the lack of precision on the cylinder seal, that set of stars works pretty well. If they be unacceptable, however, we can alternatively imagine a planet in a larger enclosure…”

After jumping from Jupiter to Saturn, and from Sagittarius to Leo to Regulus to Cancer, the letter to me offers still other stars in various constellations as alternatives… But what about the obvious alternative, that the depiction indeed represents our solar system? That, in spite of all, is not an alternative for Dr. Krupp.

In my respectful response to Dr. Krupp, I wrote:

“It truly chagrins me that someone like you, in searching for explanations for the seal’s depictions (you list some of the most improbable ones in your letter), would not even consider our solar system as a possibility. This can only stem from an absolute refusal to accept the Extraterrestrial nature of the Anunnaki. But why would someone – I am sure you are included – who would deem it possible that Man from Earth would one day travel to another planet, deem it totally unacceptable that someone from another planet might have come here? If not scientific but religious objections lie therein, please read my dialogue with a Vatican theologian on my website SITCHIN.com. “Dialogue in Bellaria”

And I signed my letter: “Looking forward to a dialogue with you.”

As of this date (September 26th), there has been no response from the magazine to my request for a correction, the publication of my letter to them in the Letters to the Editor column, or for the acceptance of an article from me: and no further communication from Dr. E.C. Krupp – whom I have quoted with respect in my book The Lost Realms – and whose attitude I could not define in the heading of this article: Should the missing word in the title be “Wrong”, “Embarrassed”, “Reluctant”, or (in his own words) just “Hasty”?

—Zecharia Sitchin, September 2000

Reproduction is permitted if accompanied by the statement:
© Z. Sitchin 2000
Reprinted by permission.

Original source: THE CASE OF THE ???? ASTRONOMER (Sitchin.com)

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s