The Spaceship Of Ezekiel
Decided I will get back into using this blog as much as most people don’t really use Tumblr it makes for a nice way for me to store my own things and share things I come across.
So here is a small section of a document by Josef F. Blumrich. Originally worked on Aircraft for the government and set out to prove what Ezekiel saw saw far from any form of flying craft. After research turns out he couldn’t and has since been a firm believer in it.
If this took your interest the PDF of the rest of the document can be found here -http://puu.sh/hr2e
12th Planet
Just a quick post. A link for Sitchins book “The Twelfth Planet”
As much as the name of the link may be a bit ironic but hey.
http://puu.sh/hoAx
Enjoy.
A modern day translation of “Shem”
Throughout ancient texts, including the bible and other religious texts, we see the word “Shem” which was believed to loosely translate to “name”. Yet recent discoveries lead us to believe that “Shem” was actually a word which when translated to modern day English gives us something closer to “Sky chamber” and was a word used to describe the craft in which “gods” ascended and descended into their heavenly abode. They are described as emitting fire and flames and such drawings of “Shems” have found them to be eerily similar to that of a modern day rocket’s capsule.
These ideas brought to light by Zacharia Sitchin give a whole new meaning to chapters and verses found in these books and seem to completely change the stories told in them. We hear of the nephilm making “Shems” for themselves so that they might return to their home in the heavens and being known as “men of the renown [Shem], we here the tales of Noah’s son, What may of inspired Noah to name his son as such? In the following I will quote and reference many people and texts and will do my best to acknowledge everybody for their work and share where it can be found.
Sitchin tells us that the Mesopotamian texts that refer to the inner enclosures of temples, or to the heavenly journeys of the gods, or even to instances where mortals ascended to the heavens, employ the Sumerian term mu or its Semitic derivatives shu-mu (‘that which is a mu’), sham or shem. Because the term also connoted ‘that by which one is remembered,’ the word has come to be taken as meaning ‘name.’ But the universal application of ‘name’ to early texts that spoke of an object used in flying has obscured the true meaning of the ancient records.
He continues from there to describe the etymology of the term and how it can be traced back to “sky chamber” from the current interpretation of the word being “name”. We see the word Shem being used in conjunction and more commonly with stone sculptures which depict “gods” inside oval rocket-shaped chambers. These are believed to of been used to venerate them in places remote from their temples. These ideas and looks were eventually copied by the kings and rulers and sculptures and depictions began to emerge of THEM in oval rocket shapes. These Shems were always associated with the idea of an eternal heavenly abode, a return to the heavens and the transportation methods of the gods.
Hymns engraved into ancient tablets have a constant reference to “shems” being able able to reach the heavens and earth and in most cases describe them as being radiant, glowing or shining. An example of which was found in a hymn dedicated to the god Ishkur explaining them his “ray-emitting MU” can attain the heights of heaven, which was likewise rendered as “Thy name is radiant, it reaches heaven’s zenith” This ties in very much so with similar words from other religions, the same “shems” are described in other languages and when translated all come to a very similar description, none of which would make any real sense should the translation of today be used.
- The Sumerians called them NA.RU (“stones that rise”).
- The Akkadians, Babylonians, and Assyrians called them naru (“objects that give off light”).
- The Amurru called them nuras (“fiery objects” - in Hebrew, ner still means a pillar that emits light, and thus today’s “candle”).
- In the Indo-European tongues of the Hurrians and the Hittites, the stelae were called hu-u-ashi (“fire bird of stone”).
What are we to make of all this? As most of us are not scholars of Mesopotamian language we can hardly comment definitively on this element of the debate, although it is interesting to note how easy it is to add yet more fuel to the fire to obscure the picture still further.
Constructing and moving megalithic structures.
Generations of explorers, archaeologists, historians, engineers and tourists have been baffled and puzzled over one the great mysteries of ancient prehistory. At its core this incredible anomaly is quite simple. How did ancient cultures move 100, 200 and in certain cases even 400-ton blocks of stone using according to historians nothing more than a basic set of primitive stone age tools at the best of times. Not only move them also accurately position them to tight tolerances, in a lot of cases you would struggle to fit a sheet of regular A4 paper between these giant blocks of stone. The question is simple; the problem is complex.
To understand exactly what we are dealing with here, I think it is best to take a look at our modern machines and building methods of the day to see exactly what we are only just capable of today, then compare to what our ancestors managed thousands of years ago, apparently without the assistance of what we have today. Too often I read descriptions of how the Great Pyramid was built or how the ancient builders managed the megalithic stones in Peru that gloss right over the magnitude of these accomplishments. But sadly, It just doesn’t work, from both a logical and mathematical view. Cutting right to the chase, a modern locomotive engine weighs 200 tons.Take that off the track and give a team of men some ropes and let’s see how far they can shift it, or better yet, Let them attempt to lift said locomotive above their heads in order to place it on some form of stand or platform. The average 18-wheel tractor-trailer is rated to about a 20-ton capacity. Our highways have a legal load-limit of 40 tons, anything over that has to get special permits. I have come to realize after around 2 years of study of the ancient megalithic sites and modern technological capabilities that most people that write on these topics have not done their homework.
Many archaeologists and historians either skip over these problems or they dance around the real issues and simply give some unsupported scenario of how these massive blocks of stone were transported and lifted and yet nobody seems to stop and question these in any way shape or form, just because it is in our history books people choose not to ask questions, despite the logic behind it being incredibly flawed and unbelievably far fetched. There is an unavoidable physical problem that engineers are very aware of and that is the density and relative compactness of stone versus the manpower needed to exert enough force to move or lift it. The two simply do not go together. Even if we scale things way down the problem does not go away.
Let’s take the average 2.5-ton limestone building block that was used to construct the core of the Great Pyramid. The block would be about four-foot long three high and three feet deep. How many men can be positioned around it? I would say no more than eight. Unfortunately, eight healthy well fed and watered men cannot lift up 4,500 lbs. According to your history books and the likes, these giant stone megaliths were built by slaves. Now, these people would of been working for hours and hours every day, day in day out in the heat, not very well fed or watered at all, their physical strength would be near enough non existent at this point. Pulleys and hoists were unknown in the pyramid building era according to your run of the mill Egyptologist or historian. This poses a very simple and practical construction problem to say the least and It only grows worse as we raise the tonnage and the vertical lift.
How did the Egyptians lift 100-ton blocks up forty feet in the air to position them in the Sphinx temple? In addition, how did the Incas so carefully lift up and position their massive polygonal blocks so that they fit like a jigsaw puzzle?
There is an equally serious difficulty that precedes the transport and lifting of megaliths that takes place in the quarry. The only tools the ancient Egyptians had were very small copper chisels and rounded hammer-stones according to historians and Egyptologists. The inflexible and insurmountable problem that the Great Pyramid presents is the fact that 43 blocks of granite weighing from 30 to 70 tons were quarried, lifted out of the bedrock, transported 500 miles and raised 150 vertical feet to the King’s Chamber, we are told that these giant stone blocks were merely cut from the bedrock, transported 500 miles, Over a river I might add, and placed by nothing more than copper tools and man power?
Several years ago Egyptologist Mark Lehner spent five hours in the Aswan quarry with a hammer-stone pounding against the granite bedrock (copper is too soft to cut granite). He was trying to prove that the ancient tools could do the job. He managed to excavate a one-foot square hole one-inch deep for his efforts. The granite blocks in the King’s Chamber were 17’ long and the trench that had to be dug around to them was about 8’ deep. No one has ever shown how these megaliths were undercut and lifted out of the quarry.
These were relatively small blocks compared to the great obelisks that were quarried, transported and then raised up thousands of years ago, many of which still stand. They weigh from 100 to 350 tons. There isn’t an archaeologist or engineer that has the slightest idea how this was done. Our largest modern day, heavy-duty cranes are rated from 100 to 300 tons. We have custom cranes that can lift up to 500 tons. Anyone that believes manpower alone could have moved these monstrous blocks of stone using ropes and manpower is living in a fantasy world.
In fact, Lehner set up an experiment to see if it was possible to quarry, move and lift an obelisk weighing one-tenth of what the largest Egyptian obelisks weighed. It was filmed by NOVA and was an utter failure. The team’s master stonemason could not quarry the 35-ton obelisk so a bulldozer was called in. They could not move it, a truck was called in. These failures represent a turning a point in the long-standing debate. Lehner actually confirmed what a Japanese team funded by Nissan had already learned in 1979, it is not possible to duplicate what the ancients did using primitive tools and methods.
Team Nissan was trying to prove something and they were very confident. But when they could not begin to excavate the blocks of stone they planned on using for their small scale-model of the Great Pyramid with ancient tools they turned to jackhammers. When they tried to ferry the blocks they quarried across the river on a primitive barge, the stones sank. When a boat got them across the river they discovered that the sledges sank in the sand. They called trucks in to move the blocks to the site. Once at the site they could not manipulate the blocks into place and found, to their ultimate embarrassment, that they could not bring the four walls together into an apex despite the deployment of helicopters.
Despite their best attempts, they failed to back up their claims while even using technology that is available to us today, in an attempt to prove how everything could be done by simple man power, turned out to do the complete opposite and do nothing but back up claims by my self and other Ancient Astronaut Theorists.
