|
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 previous
entry 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
©
Z. Sitchin 2002
Reprinted with permission
|
