Iisus A Fost Crucificat La Constantinopole Si Nu La Ierusalim - Partea IV

TOPIC: Iisus Christos a fost crucificat la Constantinopole si
nu la Ierusalim
Re: Iisus Christos a fost crucificat la Constantinopole si nu
la Ierusalim 21 Feb 2015 04:51 #344
Dovezile geologice care indica ca lantul muntos Himalaya s-a format
extrem de recent din punct de vedere cronologic, de fapt in epoca
omului modern.
www.truthseekersministries.org/files/Vel...arth-in-Upheaval.pdf
I. Velikovsky's least known and, at the same time, best work is Earth
in Upheaval.
Dharanis
NOW ONLINE
Senior Boarder
Posts: 55
In cronologia oficiala, cercetarile efectuate de Dr. Adam Maloof

(Princeton) si Dr. Lonnie Thompson (Ohio State) au aratat ca acum
5.200 de ani (desigur, datarea se face cu metoda catastrofala C14) a
avut loc un cataclism global formidabil.
Adam Maloof (Princeton) and Lonnie Thompson (Ohio State
University) confirm that a stupendous catastrophy occurred some
5200 years ago (of course, they will never accept that this catastrophe
actually happened during the 18th century, as proven and described

here).
www.mayanendoftheworldplanetx.com/Pages/videostudio.html
Princeton University geoscientist, Adam Maloof investigates 2012
Maya prognostications, in response to the many queries he has
received concerning the possibility of an upcoming geographical
poleshift. Dr. Maloof's specialities include paleogeography, the study
of continental plate transmigrations. In these National Geographic
video clips, he travels from the frigid Arctic to the scorching outbacks
of Australia to the dense forrest of Central America, to investigate
geologic evidence and traditions of any pass geographic poleshift.
His research revealed not one but two important discoveries; one
poleshift transpired slowly over a million years( posing no threat to
life on earth) while the other happened abruptly some 5200 years
ago(approximately the end of the Maya's last Great Cycle, when the
last "world" ended.) Perhaps a coincidence, but it was enough for Dr.
Maloof to pursue and study the ancient Maya legacy in greater depth.
A journey that would take him from Dresden Germany, home of the
famous Dresden Codex (one of four codices that survived the
Inquisition) to the ancient ruins of Chi'chen Itza.
To understand how these ancient people with such remarkable
mathematical and astronomical skills, were inclined to prognosticate
the future with such conviction. Their obsession with cycles and
climate change, their beliefs that all major cycles began and ended
with global destruction.
With the aid of notable Paleoclimatologist, Lonnie Thompson from
Ohio State University, they venture to the summit of the Quelccaya
ice caps of the Peruvian Andes at sixteen thousand feet, to unlock
secrets trapped in the glaciers for over five thousands years. While
continents apart, from ice core samples at Mt. Kilimanjaro, Africa to
"Otzi The Iceman" from the Austrian Alps, all corroborate a global
disaster at the end of the last Long Count cycle and provide possible
insight on what may happen at the end of this current Great Cycle.
In noua cronologie radicala a istoriei, aceste evenimente au avut loc

acum cateva sute de ani.
Sa revedem si descrierea disparitiei misterioase a mamutilor.
(again, from Worlds in Collision)

Why did the glaciers of the Ice Age cover the greater part of North
America and Europe, while the north of Asia remained free? In
America the plateau of ice stretched up to latitude 40 and even
passed across this line; in Europe it reached latitude 50; while
northeastern Siberia, above the polar circle, even above latitude 75,
was not covered with this perennial ice.
If we look at the distribution of the ice sheet in the Northern
Hemisphere, we see that a circle, with its center somewhere near the
east shore of Greenland or in the strait between Greenland and Baffin
Land near the present north magnetic pole, and a radius of about
3,600 kilometers, embraces the region of the ice sheet of the last
glacial age. Northeastern Siberia is outside the circle; the valley of the
Missouri down to 39 north latitude is within the circle. The eastern
part of Alaska is included, but not its western part. Northwestern
Europe is well within the circle; some distance behind the Ural
Mountains, the line curves toward the north and crosses the present
polar circle. Now we reflect: Was not the North Pole at some time in
the past 20 or more distant from the point it now occupiesand
closer to America? In like manner, the old South Pole would have
been roughly the same 20 from the present pole.
Billions of tons of ice would have fallen on the polar regions, flashfreezing everything in little more than an instant.
This, at last, would explain the mystery of the mammoths found
frozen where they stood. The mammoth, contrary to belief, was not a
cold region animal, but one which lived in temperate grasslands.
Somehow those temperate regions were frozen in a moment. Some
mammoths have been found frozen in the middle of eating! There you
are munching away and the next thing you know youre an ice lolly.
If this ionized ice did rain down, the biggest build up would have
been nearest to the magnetic poles because they would have had the
most powerful attraction. Again, that is the case. The ice mass in the
polar regions is greater at the poles than at the periphery and yet there
is less snow and rain at the poles to create such a build up.
It is proposed that the carefully documented proofs of the catastrophe
actually describe the end of the last Ice Age, which occurred some
3.500 years ago (and not 5.200 years ago) - [official chronology, of
course; in the new radical chronology, the last Ice Age ended around
1740 AD, exactly the period discovered by Christopher Pfister, the

great Swiss historian.
http://www.immanuelvelikovsky.com/mammoth.pdf (THE
EXTINCTION OF THE MAMMOTH) PAGES 382, 389-390
"The sudden extermination of mammoths was caused by a
catastrophe and probably resulted from asphyxiation or electrocution.
The immediately
subsequent movement of the Siberian continent into the polar region
is probably responsible for the preservation of the corpses.
"It appears that the mammoths, along with other animals, were killed
by a tempest of gases accompanied by a spontaneous lack of oxygen
caused by fires raging high in the atmosphere. A few instances later
their dying or dead bodies were moving into the polar circle. In a few
hours northeastern America moved from the frigid zone of the polar
circle into a moderate zone; northeastern Siberia moved in the
opposite direction from a moderate zone to the polar circle.
Thepresent cold climate of northern Siberia started when the glacial
age in Europe and America came to a sudden end."
http://asis.com/users/stag/starchiv/transcriptions/ST110Velikovsky.ht
ml (exceptionally documented)
The sudden shift in the direction of the axis of Earth would have
meant a slowing down of the velocity of the diurnal rotation of the
Earth, and there would have no way for the Earth to regain the same
velocity of the diurnal rotation as before, after Venus departed to a
different orbit.
http://www.world-mysteries.com/sci_2.htm (superb documentation)
Last Edit: 23 Feb 2015 09:04 by Dharanis. Report to moderator
Quick Reply Reply Quote Edit

Dr. G. Nosovsky explica ce este ciclul metonian (metonic):
www.scribd.com/doc/74886953/Gleb-Nosovsky-Dilema-Pastelui
Nu trebuie s observm cerul sau s facem calcule astronomice de fiecare dat;
realiznd un tabel al lunii pline pentru lunile Martie i Aprilie pentru oricare
Dhara
nis
perioad dat de19 ani, ar trebui s fie suficient ca referin ulterioar. Motivul
este c fazele lunii se repet la fiecare 19 ani n calendarul Iulian, iar reapariia
ciclului rmne neschimbat pentru secole la rnd, dac luna plin cade pe 25
Martie ntr -un an dat, ea va aprea pe data de 25 Martie peste 19 ani, peste 38
(19x2) ani, etc.
Erorile n ciclu vor aprea dup 300 de ani, deoarece dac acoperim 300 de ani
ncicluri de 19 ani, luna plin va ncepe gradual s migreze ctre locaia vecin
din calendar. Aceiai regul se aplic lunii noi i tuturor celorlalte faze ale lunii.
NOW
ONLI
NE
Senior
Board
er
Din nou, cea mai frumoasa, directa, minunata, devastatoare dovada asupra
faptului ca istoria oficiala a fost falsificata in mod grosolan.
Dionysius Exiguus, On Easter (translation from Latin to English)
Posts:
55
www.ccel.org/ccel/pearse/morefathers/fil...xiguus_easter_01.htm
Exiguus assigns the date of March 24, year 563 AD, for the Passover.
www.staff.science.uu.nl/~gent0113/easter/easter_text4a.htm
However, in the year 563 AD, the Passover fell on March 25.
Dr. G.V. Nosovsky:
Ecclesiastical tradition, in accordance with the New Testament, tells that Christ
was resurrected on March 25 on Sunday, on the next day after Passover, which,
therefore, fell in that time on March 24 (Saturday). These are exactly the
conditions used by Dionisius in his calculation of the date of the First Easter.
Dionysius supposedly conducted all these arguments and calculations working
with the Easter Book. Having discovered that in the contemporary year 563 (the
year 279 of the Diocletian era) the First Easter conditions held, he made a 532year shift back (the duration of the great indiction, the shift after which the Easter
Book entirely recurs) and got the date for the First Easter. But he did not know
that Passover (the 14th moon) could not be shifted by 532 years (because of the
inaccuracy of the Metonian cycle) and made a mistake: "Dionysius failed, though
he did not know that. Indeed, if he really supposed that the First Easter fell on
March 25, 31 A.D., then he made a rough mistake as he extrapolated the
inaccurate Metonian cycle to 28 previous cycles (that is, for 532 years: 28 x 19 =
532). In fact, Nisan 15, the Passover festival, in the year 31 fell not on Saturday,
March 24, but on Tuesday, March 27!". [335, pg. 243: I.A. Klimishin, Calendar
and Chronology, in Russian, Nauka, Moscow, 1985]
That is a modern reconstruction of what Dionysius the Little did in the 6th
century. It would be all right, but it presupposes that near Dionysius' date of 563
A.D. the 14th moon (Passover) really fell on March 24. It could be that Dionysius
was not aware of the inaccuracy of the Metonian cycle and made the mistake
shifting Passover from 563 to the same day of March in 31 A.D.
But he could not have been unaware of the date of Passover in the the almost
contemporary year 563! To that end it was sufficient to apply the Metonian cycle
to the coming 30-40 years; the inaccuracy of the Metonian cycle does not show up
for such intervals.
But in 563 Passover (the 14th moon) fell not on March 24, but on Sunday, March
25, that is, it coincided with Easter as determined by the Easter Book.
As he specially worked with the calendar situation of almost contemporary year
563 and as he based his calculation of the era "since the birth of Christ" on this
situation, Dionysius could not help seeing that, first, the calendar situation in the
year 563 did not conform to the Gospels' description and, second, that the
coincidence of Easter with Passover in 563 contradicts the essence of the
determination of Easter the Easter Book is based on.
Therefore, it appears absolutely incredible that the calculations of the First Easter
and of the Birth of Christ had been carried out in the 6th century on the basis of
the calendar situation of the year 563. It was shown in Sec. 1 that the Easter Book,
used by Dionysius, had not been compiled before the 8th century and had been
canonized only at the end of the 9th century. Therefore, the calculations carried
out by (or ascribed to) Dionysius the Little had not been carried out before the
lOth century.
www.chronologia.org/en/es_analysis2/index.html (pages 390 - 401 and 401 - 405)
Exiguus, the central pillar of the official historical chronology, could not have
made such a colossal mistake UNLESS his works/biography were forged/falsified

at least five centuries later in time.
In the official chronology, Bede, Syncellus, Scaliger, Blastares, and Petavius base
their calculations on Exiguus' methods and data.
Deci, Dionisie Exiguul a calculat ca in anul 563 e.n., Pastele iudaic (Passover) va
avea loc pe 24 Martie.
Este absolut imposibil ca Dionisie sa fi facut o asemenea greseala colosala
(deoarece ar fi fost suficient sa aplice ciclul Metonian pentru urmatorii 30-40 de
ani, iar astfel sa obtina o datare precisa), DECAT DACA nu a trait in acea
perioada, iar opera atribuita numelui sau a fost falsificata mult mai tarziu in
istorie.
In anul 563 e.n., data Pastelui Iudaic,in calendarul Iulian, este Duminica, 25
Martie.
Iar Dionisie habar nu avea de greseala catastrofala comisa: este clar ca
falsificatorii istoriei nu stiau de precizia formulelor lui Gauss si au oferit la
intamplare date foarte imprecise cand au inventat biografia si opera lui Dionisie
Exiguul.
Mai mult, in anul 563 e.n., Pastele coincidea cu Pastele Iudaic (Passover), deci o
incalcare a regulilor listate in Cartea despre Pasti.

Doua istorii/relatari falsificate...pe care din ele sa o alegem?
"Comemorarea a 500 de ani de la chemarea la Domnul a
Binecredinciosului Voievod Stefan cel Mare si Sfant, in Sesiunea
solemna a Sfantului Sinod si Adunarii Nationale Bisericesti, a
prilejuit academicianului Virgil Candea prezentarea personalitatii
marelui voievod, ca aparator al Europei crestine din vremea sa. Rolul
lui Stefan cel Mare in lupta impotriva turcilor care amenintau
crestinatatea este recunoscut in epoca. Insusi Papa Sixt al IV-lea il
considera pe domnul Moldovei ca adevarat atlet al credintei
crestine. Pergamentul cu aceasta extraordinara caracterizare se afla
in Arhivele Vaticanului. Gardianul va prezinta faximilul acestui
Dharanis
NOW ONLINE
document si textul semnat de Papa Sixt al IV-lea, la Roma, in data de

13 ianuarie 1477."
Senior Boarder
Numai ca pontiful Sixtus IV mentioneaza, DEJA, o diferenta de cel

putin sapte zile intre calendarul iulian si cel astronomic:
In March 1437 the council of Basle considered a proposal of
Nikolaus von Kues (Cusanus) to omit the last seven days of May
1439 and thus bring back the vernal equinox to 21 March. Pope
Sixtus IV (pope 1471-1484) began preparations for a calendar reform
and invited the astronomer and mathematician Johannes Mller
(Regiomontanus, after his home city of Knigsberg in Franconia) to
come to Rome.
www.ortelius.de/kalender/greg_en.php
Vezi si:
books.google.ro/books?
id=VPDqnGGHpHYC&am...20julian&f=false
Legatura dintre Sixtus IV si Copernic:

books.google.ro/books?id=GGbCTJC8984C&am...pernicus&f=false
(o mentiune clara a diferentei de 11 zile intre calendarul iulian si
calendarul astronomic)
Insa Dr. A. Fomenko si Dr. G. Nosovsky demonstreaza ca opera

atribuita lui Copernic a fost falsificata/inventata cel putin dupa 1600
e.n.:
www.dacia.org/daciarevival/forum/4-dacia...=10&start=10#330
Istoricul bizantin Leo Diaconus consemneaza:
Pe cand imparatul era la razboi in Siria, a avut loc o eclipsa de soare
la solstitiul de iarna, ... pe 22 Decembrie, la ora 4 a zilei, pe cand
Posts: 55
atmosfera era linistita. Intunericul a cazut asupra pamantului si au

aparut toate stelele stralucitoare. ... In acelasi timp ma aflam si eu la
Constantinopol ..."
Traducere din:
"When the Emperor was waging war in Syria, at the winter solstice
there was an eclipse of the Sun such as has never happened apart
from that which was brought on the Earth at the Passion of our Lord
on account of the folly of the Jews. . . The eclipse was such a
spectacle. It occurred on the 22nd day of December, at the 4th hour of
the day, the air being calm. Darkness fell upon the Earth and all the
brighter stars revealed themselves. Everyone could see the disc of the
Sun without brightness, deprived of light, and a certain dull and
feeble glow, like a narrow headband, shining round the extreme parts
of the edge of the disc. However, the Sun gradually going past the
Moon (for this appeared covering it directly) sent out its original
rays, and light filled the Earth again."
Refers to a total solar eclipse in Constantinople of 22 December AD
968.
From: Leo the Deacon, Historiae, Byzantine.
www.mreclipse.com/Special/quotes2.html
Numai ca, data fiind corectia celor 10 zile impusa de pontiful Grigore
XIII in 1582, solstitiul de iarna ar fi trebuit sa cada pe data de 16
Decembrie, in anul 968 (aprox. 11 minute pentru fiecare an solar =
aprox. o zi la fiecare 134 de ani, vezi
www.crystalinks.com/calendarome.html ).
Istoricii moderni nu pot spune ca opera lui Leo the Deacon, Leo
Diaconus, a fost falsificata pentru a explica diferenta monumentala
intre descrierea sa extrem de clara si calendarul gregorian, pentru ca
atunci ar insemna ca toate documentele din acea vreme au fost si ele
falsificate in aceeasi masura. Iar in cronologia oficiala, mentiunea lui
Diaconus este acceptate unanim, fara proteste sau corectii.
Matei Vlastar (1330 e.n.) despre Paste:

Canonul pune dou hotrri cu privire la Pate, dei a ntrebuinat un
astfel de fel de vorbire, ca noi s nu prznuim cu iudeii i s ateptm
echinociul de primvar, cror hotrri au urmat numaidect alte

dou, ca praznicul s-l svrim ndat la cea dinti lun plin dup
echinociu i dup aceasta nu simplu n oricare zi, ci n ziua prim a
sptmnii ndat dup lun plin.
i celelalte hotrri se in cu trie nc i acuma, iar duminica cea
dup lun plin ni se amn adeseori prin aceea c se adaug la
patele legii din fiecare an dou zile i apoi se purcede la duminic.
S-a fcut ns aceasta nu din netiina sau ignorana Prinilor ce au
dat legea aceasta privitoare la Pate, ci cauzele lucrului acestuia se
reduc la cursul lunii, cci deoarece micarea anual se restituie iari
n 365 de zile i n aproape a patra parte de zi, precum s-a zis, iar
cursurile medii ale lunii ce se refer la lungime nu se restituie n 19
ani ntregi, numrai cu adaosul ptrimii, ci fr de trei sexagesime
prime ale unei zile i 37 secunde, din cauza aceasta se face restituirea
numit n 304 ani iari nu ntregi, ci micorai cu zile nici una,
sexagesime prime 57 i secunde 52, adic aproape cu 1 zi, de aceea
corect se afl adugate dou zile dup lun plin la aflarea patelor
legii, neputnd luna plin atinge exact data lunii cea determinat
atunci de Prini, micorndu-se ea, precum s-a zis, n 304 ani
aproape cu 1 zi.
Deci, pana in aproximativ 1330 e.n., ultima conditie a Pastelui fusese
incalcata, iar eroarea de care Vlastar era constient, este de 24 de ore
in 304 ani. Daca Vlastar ar fi stiut ca si Cartea Pastelui a fost
canonizata in 325 e.n., el ar fi observat decalajul de trei zile care se
acumulase intre luna plina calculata si cea reala in mai mult de o mie
de ani.
Dr. G. Nosovsky explica:
UN CALCUL APROXIMATIV A DATEI CND A FOST CREAT
CARTEA PATELUI
Astfel, cunoatem destule, aproape totul, despre Cartea Patelui.
Deci, de ce contextul astronomic al Crii Patelui contrazice datarea
lui Scaliger (pretinsul an 325 E.N.) despre Consiliul de la Nicea unde
a fost canonizat Cartea Patelui?
Aceast contradicie poate fi uor vzut din aproximarea calculelor.
1) Diferena ntre luna plin Pascal i cea real crete cu o rat de o
zi la 300 de ani
2) O diferen de dou zile se acumulase n vremea lui Vlastar, care
este datat aproximativ n anul 1330 E.N..

3) Aadar, Cartea Patelui a fost realizat undeva n jurul anului 730
E.N., deoarece 1330 - (300 x 2) = 730.
Se nelege c, Cartea Patelui putea fi canonizat de Consiliu doar
cndva mai trziu. Dar aceasta nu corespunde deloc cu datarea lui
Scaliger a canonizrii acesteia, ca avnd loc n anul 325 E.N..
S accentum, c Matei Vlastar nsui, nu a vzut nici o contradicie
aici, deoarece el aparent nu este contient de faptul c Consiliul de la
Nicea este datat n pretinsul an 325 E.N.. O ipotez fireasc: aceast
datare tradiional a fost introdus mult mai trziu decat timpurile lui
Vlastar. Cel mai probabil, a fost prima dat calculat n timpul lui
Scaliger.
Consiliul care a introdus Cartea Patelui conform tradiiei moderne
ct i celei medievale, a fost Consiliul de la Nicea nu putea avea loc
nainte de anul 784 E.N., deoarece acesta a fost anul cnd data
calendaristic pentru Patele Cretin a ncetat s mai coincid cu luna
plin a Patelui Iudaic, datorit deplasrii lente astronomice a fazelor
lunare.
Ultima asemenea coinciden a aprut n anul 784 E.N., i dup acel
an, datele Patelui Cretin i ale Patelui Iudaic s-au ndeprtat pentru
totdeauna. Aceasta nseamn c, Consiliul de la Nicea nu putea
canoniza Cartea Patelui n secolul IV E.N., cnd Duminica
calendaristic a Patelui ar fi coincis cu Patele Iudaic de 8 ori n
316, 319, 323, 343, 347, 367, 374 i 394 E.N., si l-ar fi precedat cu
dou zile de 5 ori, ceea ce este strict interzis de a patra regul a
Patelui, n anii 306 i 325 E.N. (deja la un an dup presupusul
Consiliu de la Nicea), precum i n anii 346, 350 i 370 E.N..
Astfel, dac urmm versiunea cronologic consensual, va trebui s
considerm celebrarea primului Pati dup Consiliul de la Nicea ca
fiind n flagrant contrazicere cu trei din cele patru reguli pe care
Consiliul le-a decretat special pentru aceast srbtoare! Pretinsele
reguli sunt nclcate chiar n anul urmtor, dup ce Consiliul le-a
decretat, i sunt nc urmate cu zel i n toate detaliile, la cinci
secole(!) dupa acea.
S reinem faptul c J.J. Scaliger nu ar fi putut observa acest nonsens
evident, pe durata realizrii cronologiei consensuale antice, deoarece
calcularea adevratelor date ale lunii pline pentru trecutul ndeprtat
nu era o problem rezolvat n epoca lui.
Absurditatea menionat mai sus a fost observat mult mai trziu,

cnd nivelul tiinei astronomice a devenit satisfctoare pentru
scopul declarat, dar era deja prea trziu, deoarece versiunea
cronologic a lui Scaliger era deja canonizat, ntrit i botezat
tiinific, cu toate coreciile majore ulterioare interzise.
Potrivit cronologiei oficiale, in anul 325 e.n., solstitiul de iarna ar fi

trebuit sa aiba loc pe 21 Decembrie; in anul 968 e.n., pe 16
Decembrie, iar in 1582, anul in care pontiful Grigore XIII a reformat
calendarul iulian, ar fi trebuit sa cada pe 11 Decembrie.
Numai ca, asa cum am vazut din analiza formidabila facuta de G.
Nosovsky, Sinodul de la Niceea nu se putea intruni inainte de anul
876-877; iar in anul intrunirii acestui Sinod, conform cronologiei
oficiale, solstitiul de iarna a avut loc tocmai pe 21 Decembrie.
Documentul datat 24 Februarie, 1582, emis de pontiful Grigore XIII,
in cronologia oficiala, declara urmatoarele:
Grija noastra nu este numai de a reinstala echinoctiul in locul sau
desemnat cu mult timp in urma, din care a fost decalat in perioada
care a trecut de la Sinodul de la Niceea, cu aproximativ zece zile...
Decalajul insa ar fi fost de doar cinci zile, asa cum putem vedea din
datarea Sinodului de la Niceea.
Scandalul care s-ar fi declansat in urma unei datari imprecise, cu o
deviere de cinci zile, 11 Decembrie in loc de 16 Decembrie, ar fi
facut inconjorul intregii Europe. Deci, documentul datat pe Februarie
1582, a fost redactat mult mai tarziu, cam in acelasi timp in care erau
inventate datarile pentru toate Sinoadele ecumenice.
Neavand la dispozitie formula precisa a lui K.F. Gauss pentru
calcularea lunii pline pentru trecutul indepartat, cei care au redactat
acele canoane si documente pontificale au jucat la cacealma, oferind
reguli ale Pastelui care nu puteau fi indeplinite decat dupa anul 784
e.n.
Iar Sixtus IV nu avea la dispozitie nici macar Vulgata.
Edwin Johnson arata cum nimeni in Europa, inainte de anul 1500
e.n., habar nu avea de existenta Evangheliilor sau a epistolelor
atribuite lui Pavel:

www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm
www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc5446000
3

Damodar Kosambi, istoric indian (1965):
"There is virtually nothing of what we know as historical literature in India...
all we have is a vague oral tradition and an extremely limited number of
documented data, which is of a much greater value to us than that obtained
from legends and myths. This tradition gives us no opportunity of
reconstructing the names of all the rulers. The meagre remnants that we do
possess are so nebulous that no date preceding the Muslim period [before the
VIII century A.D.] can be regarded as precise... the works of the court
chroniclers didn't reach our time... all of this leads some rather earnest and
eminent scientists claim that India has no history of its own".
Alte comentarii facute de D. Kosambi:
"Written memorials of the Indus culture defy decipherment to this day. .. not a
single finding can be associated with an actual person or historical episode. We
don't even know the language that was spoken by the inhabitants of the Indus
valley."
We are told further on that many vital issues concerning the "ancient" history
of India are based on the manuscripts found as late as the XX century. It turns
out, for instance, that:"the main source of knowledge in what concerns the
governmental system of India and the policy of the state in the epoch of
Maghadhi's ascension is the Arthashastra - the book. .. that had only been
found in 1905, after many a century of utter oblivion". It turns out that this
book is basically an Indian version of the famous me-diaeval oeuvre of
Machiavelli. However, in this case the "ancient Indian Arthashastra" couldn't
have been written before the Renaissance. This could have happened in the
XVII-XVIII century, or even the XIX.
Dharanis
NOW
ONLINE
Senior
Boarder
Posts: 55
Cea mai importanta figura istorica a Indiei, imparatul Ashoka, nu a existat

niciodata:
khudi.pk/ashoka-never-existed-radhakantt...posite-king-in-1837/
madhesi.wordpress.com/2008/09/24/did-ashoka-exist/
www.hinduwisdom.info/Yuktibhasa.pdf
Capitolul History of the Calculus indica:
A relevant epistemological question is this: did Newton at all understand the
result he is alleged to have invented? Did Newton have the wherewithal, the
necessary mathematical resources, to understand infinite series? As is well
known, Cavalieri in 1635 stated the above formula (the infinite series
expansion for the sine function) as what was later termed a conjecture. Wallis,
too, simply stated the above result, without any proof. Fermat tried to derive
the key result above from a result on figurate numbers, while Pascal used the
famous Pascals triangle long known in India and China. Though Newton
followed Wallis, he had no proof either, and neither did Leibniz who followed
Pascal. Neither Newton nor any other mathematician in Europe had the
mathematical wherewithal to understand the calculus for another two centuries,
until the development of the real number system by Dedekind.
The next question naturally is this: if Newton and Leibniz did not quite
understand the calculus, how did they invent it? In the amplified version of the
usual narrative, how did Galileo, Cavalieri, Fermat, Pascal, and Roberval etc.
all contribute to the invention of a mathematical procedure they couldnt quite
have understood? The frontiers of a discipline are usually foggy, but here we
are talking of a gap which is typically 250 years.
Clearly a more natural hypothesis to adopt is that the calculus was not invented
in Europe, but was imported, and that the calculus took nearly as long to
assimilate as did zero.
Dr. Joseph George Gheverghese from the University of Manchester said there
was strong circumstantial evidence that the Indians passed on their discoveries
to mathematically knowledgeable Jesuit missionaries who visited India during
the 15th century.
Numai ca si presupusa existenta a scolii de la Kerala acum 500 de ani este tot o
fictiune, inventata la sfarsit de secol XVIII.
Legatura din Matteo Ricci si Christopher Clavius:

faculty.fairfield.edu/jmac/sj/scientists/clavius.htm
Printre criticii lucrarilor lui Clavius se numara nimeni altul decat Joseph
Scaliger, personaj istoric inventat cel putin dupa anul 1750 e.n., iar raspunsul
lui Clavius catre Scaliger poate fi gasit in lucrarea Carmelo Oate Guillens
Christopher Clavius y el Calendario Gregoriano (2000). Reforma
calendarului impusa de pontiful Grigore XIII este si ea bazata pe calculele lui
Clavius (cele zece omise din calendar)...
Deci, Matteo Ricci, iezuitul care ar fi adus rezultatele obtinute de Madhava si
Bhaskara in Italia, nu a existat niciodata, fiind un personaj inventat in acelasi
timp cu plasmuirea reformei calendarului gregoriana.
Iar iezuitii nu ar fi transmis, absolut deloc, aceste rezultate remarcabile si
esentiale, tocmai francmasonilor/templierilor/rozicrucienilor britanici pentru ca
acestia sa emita intaietatea asupra formulelor aduse in Europa chiar de catre
iezuiti.
ckraju.net/IndianCalculus/Bangalore.pdf
The Infinitesimal Calculus:
How and Why it Was Imported into Europe
Newton si Leibniz habar nu aveau cum a fost obtinuta seria MacLaurin a

sinusului:
Wallis, too, simply stated the above result, without any proof. Fermat tried to
derive the key result above from a result on figurate numbers, while Pascal
used the famous Pascals triangle long known in India and China. Though
Newton followed Wallis, he had no proof either, and neither did Leibniz who
followed Pascal. Neither Newton nor any other mathematician in Europe had
the mathematical wherewithal to understand the calculus for another two
centuries, until the development of the real number system by Dedekind.
The next question naturally is this: if Newton and Leibniz did not quite
understand the calculus, how did they invent it?
A key development of pre-calculus Europe, that of generalisation on the basis
of induction, has deep methodological similarities with the corresponding
Kerala development (200 years before). There is further evidence that John
Wallis (1665) gave a recurrence relation and proof of the Pythagorean theorem
exactly as Bhaskara II did.
Deci, a existat o sursa comuna, care a atribuit rezultatele avute la indemana din
analiza matematica, atat indienilor cat si matematicienilor Renasterii.
James Gregory, who first stated the infinite series expansion of the arctangent
(the Madhava-Gregory series) in Europe, never gave any derivation of his
result, or any indication as to how he derived it, suggesting that this series was
imported into Europe.
Cele trei legi atribuite lui Newton, isi au originea/au fost copiate din Vaiseshika
Sutra:
The force on a body is the resultant of gravity and the work done against it. V.S
5.1.13
In the absence of all other forces gravity exists. V.S 5.1.7
Action is opposed by an equivalent opposite reaction - V.S 5.1.16-18
Newton's laws of motion copied from the Naya Vaiseshika Sutra.
Suppose that the mass of an object is 'm' and in time interval 't', the velocity of
the object changes from 'u' to 'v' due to the force acting on it. Then,
Initial momentum = mu
Final momentum = mv
Change in momentum = m(v-u)
Therefore, the rate of change of momentum = m(v-u)/t = ma (from Kanada's

first law)
From Kandas second law,
force is proportional to the rate of change of momentum.
Or, p k ma
Or, p = kma (where k is a constant)
If m=1 and a=1, then
1 = k*1*1 or k = 1
Or, p = ma
Therefore, unit force is the one that produces unit acceleration in an object of
unit mass.
Prashastpada
indianrealist.com/2009/01/26/how-jesuits...rom-india-to-europe/
Calculus is Indias Gift to Europe
In his speech at ICIH 2009, Professor C.K. Raju revealed that calculus was an
Indian invention that was transmitted by Jesuit priests to Europe from Cochin
in the second half of 16th century. Indian infinite series has been known to
British scholars since at least 1832, but no scholar tried to establish the
connection with the calculus attributed to Newton and Leibnitz, he said.
However, what Dr. C.K. Raju does not realize is that the same science of
calculus was also imported to India, in order to create the false impression of
an ancient indian history.
Not so ancient India:
breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=27888#27888
Rezultatele obtinute de mine: analiza matematica utilizata la Gizeh.

www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index....sg1573684#msg1573684
Structura sacred cubit (cotului sacru) a zerourilor functiei Zeta a lui G.F.
Riemann:
Cele mai directe dovezi: piramida de la Gizeh a fost construita inainte de

existenta primului faraon al Egiptului, Menes:
Inaltimea trunchiului de piramida de la Gizeh = valoarea primului zero al
functiei zeta x 10:
Therefore, the builders of the Gizeh Pyramid KNEW the value of the first zero
of Riemann's Zeta function.
However, in order to calculate this value, we need the Riemann-Siegel formula,
considered to be the top achievement in mathematics of the 19th century and
one of the most complex formulas ever (its derivation by G.F. Riemann is
considered to be in the same category with J. Moser's proof of the Twist
Theorem, or the Ramanujan-Hardy asymptotic expansion for the partitions of a
natural number).
mathworld.wolfram.com/Riemann-SiegelFormula.html
michaelberryphysics.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/berry265.pdf
www.gauge-institute.org/riemann/RiemannZetaFunction.pdf
Arhitectii de la Gizeh trebuiau sa cunoasca notiunile de serii Taylor, teorema

lui Rolle si teorema cresterilor finite/mediei (pentru a calcula erorile din
aproximare):
Iar acesti arhitecti dispuneau de tehnologia fulgerului globular, necesara pentru
a transporta, ca un exemplu, blocurile de granit colosale de la Baalbek.
The colossal dimensions of the Baalbek monoliths:
Cum au fost transportate blocurile de la Baalbek:

www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=282261

Cea mai dificila incercare pentru arheologi si istorici este reprezentata de imaginile care
infatiseaza dinozauri in "antichitate", sau in noua cronologie radicala, doar acum cateva
sute de ani, si tocmai la Pompei...si care nu pot fi puse la indoiala.
s8int.com/WordPress/2012/03/24/denial-is...y-roman-nilotic-art/
Pompeii, House of the Physician mosaic, Lexovisaurus depicted
s8int.com/phile/dinolit56.html (foarte bine documentat)
D
h
a
r
a
n
i
s
N
O
W
O
N
L
I
N
E
Both of the images above are from the "Hunt" mosaic discovered in the House of the
physician in Pompeii, Rome. When the images are discussed, it is within academia, not
with the general public. The apology given for the oversized reptiles is that they are
simply nile crocodiles. This is not the case. The crocodiles on these Nile works were
rendered realistically and accurately as shown in this rendering from the Nile Mosaic
below:
S
e
n
i
o
r
B
o
a
r
d
e
r
Note that in the first two images, and in the complete mural below a man is battling a
reptile taller than himself with a shield and a spear. Compare the man, the dinosaur and
the building at the center of the image.
P
o
s
t
s
:
5
5
The creature on the right has a dermal ridge, unlike a crocodile but exactly like certain
dinosaur types.
Sa mergem la Palestrina...
Nici un fel de crocodil...

If you click on the picture you can zoom into various parts of this artwork. To the midright of the picture is a depiction of a dinosaur in some water surrounded by people.
Now many atheist revisionists attempt to beguile the public and say that "This is a
crocodile." This explanation would seem plausible on the surface, however, if you look
in the lowermost lefthand corner you can clearly see crocodiles depicted in the same
picture and they are not the same as the dinosaur depicted in the picture.
Thus we can tell by comparison the dinosaur/dragon in the Palestrina Mosaic is not at all
a crocodile. Some might weakly attempt to say this creature is a snake, but again in the
mosaic, to the top left corner you can clearly see a snake. It is simple to conclude the
dinosaur in the mosaic is its own type of creature.
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/04/Nile_Mosaic.jpg
www.genesispark.com/exhibits/evidence/hi...al/ancient/dinosaur/
www.s8int.com/dinolit2.html
The Nile Mosaic of Palestrina and the hunting mosaic from the House of the Physician are
incredible works that should be well known to the public in their entirety, but if in fact they were
well known, they would be very controversial with respect to the evolutionary timeline.
Pteranodonul Faraonilor
s8int.com/WordPress/tag/was-scepter-was-sceptre/
Super lucrarea semnata Dr. A. Fomenko si Dr. G. Nosovsky: Mysteries of the Egyptian Zodiacs
www.hiddenmysteries.org/freebooks/history/Zodiacs.html (Faraonii existau exact pe timpul
Renasterii)
In urmatorul mesaj, dovezile riguroase din astronomie/astrofizica care ne arata ca aceste imagini
cu dinozauri (Pompei/Palestrina/Egipt) sunt reale...

www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=282311 (full
information on comets' tail dating)
articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/1962PA...]1962PASP...74..106V
Cel mai important specialist in astrofizica cometelor, al secolului XX,
Dr. K. Vshekhsviatsky:
Dharanis
NOW ONLINE
Senior Boarder
Posts: 55
Dr. S.K. Vshekhsviatsky a fost directorul Observatorului Astronomic

de la Kiev...
El a dedus/descoperit sistemul de inele din jurul lui Jupiter.
Lucrarile lui demonstreaza doua lucruri esentiale:
- teoria capturii este complet si absolut falsa, de asemenea inexistenta
norului Oort
- corectitudinea teoriei expulzarii cometelor din planete
Dr. K. Vshekhsviatsky demonstreaza ca Halley's comet nu ar fi putut
sa orbiteze sistemul solar mai mult de 9000 de ani.
PAGE 107: Halley's comet, for example, could not exist as a comet
for more than 120 revolutions.
PAGE 107: Cometa lui Halley, nu ar fi putut exista pentru mai mult de
120 de perioade orbitale.
120 x 75 = 9000 years
articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/1962PA...06V/0000107.000.html
Comets, Small Bodies, and Problems of the Solar System, full article
K. Vshekhsviatsky, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the
Pacific Vol. 74 (1962)
Vshekhsviatsky concludes that comets of short duration originated in
the solar system, were not captured from outside of that systema
point to which the majority of astronomers still adhereand that they
came into existence by explosion from Jupiter and Saturn, and to a
smaller extent by explosion from the smaller planets, like Venus and
Mars.
The age of the Solar System must be less than the estimated upper age
of comets.
From the work Saturnian Comets:
The usual explanation for the Saturnian and Jovian families of comets
is that they had originally traveled on extremely elongated or even
parabolic orbits and, passing close to one of the large planets, were
changed into short-period comets, traveling on ellipsesit is usual to
say that they were captured. However, the Russian astronomer K.
Vshekhsviatsky of the Kiev Observatory, one of the leading
authorities on comets, has brought strong arguments to show that the
comets of the solar system are very youthful bodiesonly a few
thousand years oldand that they originated in explosions from the
planets, especially from the major planets Saturn and Jupiter or their
moons. By comparing the observed luminosity of the periodic comets

on their subsequent returns, he found it failing and their masses
rapidly diminishing by loss of matter to the space through which they
travel; the head of the comet emits tails on each passage close to the
sun and then dissipates the matter of the tails without recovery. Thus
Vshekhsviatsky concluded that comets of short duration originated in
the solar system, were not captured from outside of that systema
point to which the majority of astronomers still adhereand that they
came into existence by explosion from Jupiter and Saturn, and to a
smaller extent by explosion from the smaller planets, like Venus and
Mars.
K. Vshekhsviatsky, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the
Pacific Vol. 74 (1962), p. 106.
"Cand trec prin apropierea Soarelui, cometele formeaza cozi. Se

presupune ca materia cozii nu se reintoarce in capul cometei, ci se
imprastie in spatiu. In consecinta, cometele prin natura lor de corpuri
luminoase trebuie sa aiba o existenta limitata. Daca, de exemplu,
cometa Halley descrie orbita actuala din era precambriana, a format si
pierdut opt milioane de cozi, ceea ce pare improbabil.
Daca dispar, numarul cometelor in sistemul solar trebuie sa scada
constant, si nici o cometa cu perioada scurta nu si-ar fi putut pastra
coada de la inceputul timpurilor geologice. Dar pentru ca exista multe
comete luminoase cu perioada scurta, ele s-au format intr-o perioada
cand planetele si satelitii isi ocupasera deja locul."
In urma lucrarilor publicate de Dr. K. Vshekhsviatsky, alti
astrofizicieni au calculat: cometa Halley nu ar fi putut sa orbiteze
sistemul solar mai mult de 2.500 de ani.
Halley's Comet, official astrophysics information
15 kilometers long, 8 kilometers wide and perhaps 8 kilometers thick.
Based strictly on this data, we have the following results:
Comet Halley, as well as other comets, may have only been orbiting in
its present orbit for only a few thousand years.
Comet Halley may have been in its current orbit for as little as 3,000
years (creation.com/comets-and-the-age-of-the-solar-system )
That is, the age of the entire solar system cannot be more than 2,5003,000 years old - an extraordinary agreement with the results of the
facts that can be deduced from the new chronology subject.
Dr. D. Russell Humphreys:
According to evolutionary theory, comets are supposed to be the same
age as the solar system, about five billion years. Yet each time a comet
orbits close to the sun, it loses so much of its material that it could not
survive much longer than about 100,000 years. Many comets have
typical ages of less than 10,000 years.
Evolutionists explain this discrepancy by assuming that (a) comets
come from an unobserved spherical "Oort cloud" well beyond the
orbit of Pluto, (b) improbable gravitational interactions with
infrequently passing stars often knock comets into the solar system,
and (c) other improbable interactions with planets slow down the
incoming comets often enough to account for the hundreds of comets
observed. So far, none of these assumptions has been substantiated
either by observations or realistic calculations. Lately, there has been
much talk of the "Kuiper Belt," a disc of supposed comet sources
lying in the plane of the solar system just outside the orbit of Pluto.
Some asteroid-sized bodies of ice exist in that location, but they do
not solve the evolutionists' problem, since according to evolutionary
theory, the Kuiper Belt would quickly become exhausted if there were
no Oort cloud to supply it.
Dr. Danny Faulkner:
creation.com/comets-and-the-age-of-the-solar-system (very well
documented)
The standard model of a comet is one in which all of the material
observed is released by an icy nucleus only a few kilometres across.
This model strongly suggests that comets are very fragile, losing
much of their material during each close pass to the Sun. Most comets
follow orbits that take them vast distances from the Sun. If a comets
orbit takes it too far from the Sun, then the comet could easily be
captured by the gravitational attraction of other stars and thus would
be lost to the Solar System. This places a maximum distance from the
Sun that a comet may orbit. If this maximum distance can be
estimated, Kepler's third law of planetary motion can be used to

deduce the greatest possible orbital period that a comet may possess
(about 11 million years). When combined with an estimate of how
many trips around the Sun that a comet can survive, we can estimate
the maximum age of comets. This figure is far less than the adopted
4.6 Ga age of the Solar System. Because no source of creation for
comets has been identified, comets are assumed to be primordial. If
this is true, then the age of the Solar System must be less than the
estimated upper age of comets.
Deci, singura metoda absolut precisa care poate fi utilizata pentru

datarea vechimii sistemului solar/a pamantului, iar aceasta metoda ne
spune un lucru sigur: vechimea intregului sistem solar se masoara in
doar cateva mii de ani, in cel mai bun caz (iar paradoxul soarelui
timpuriu, discutat mai devreme, ne indica acelasi lucru).
Teoria cometei electrice: faptul ca Holmes P17 incalca flagrant legea
gravitatiei atribuite lui I. Newton:
The unpredictable behavior of comets continually contradicts the
tenets of traditional comet theory - to the point that some experts now
wonder if a theory even exists. It's a mystery to me how comets work
at all, said Donald Brownlee, principle investigator of NASA's
Stardust Mission.
One need only review the extraordinary spectacle provided by Comet
Holmes 17P to see how deep the crisis in cometology reaches. In
October of 2007, Holmes suddenly and unexpectedly brightened by a
factor of a million. In less then 24 hours, it grew from a small 17th
magnitude comet to a magnitude of 2.5, so large it was easily visible
to the naked eye on Earth. Holmes' coma continued expanding until
by mid-November of '07 it had become the largest object in the solar
system, vastly larger than the Sun. The coma's diameter had grown
from 28 thousand kilometers to 7 million km.
At the time of Holmes' extraordinary display, the comet was actually
moving away from the Sun, and therefore cooling.
Among the common sense questions posed by the enigma: how does
such a gravitationally minuscule body hold in place a uniform,
spherical coma 7 million kilometers in diameter?
Efectul Allais: precesia axiala nu are nici o legatura cu mecanica

newtoniana: o confirmare superba a faptului ca reforma Gregoriana
este fals documentar/astronomic inventat cel putin 200 de ani mai
tarziu:
Anomalia miscarii pendulului inregistrata de Dr. Maurice Allais

(1954)
theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?...sg1628430#msg1628430
Efectul Allais si anomaliile pendulului lui Foucault:
Confirmarea efectului Allais: 2003 - 2011, si in 1961 la Iasi:
Dr. Maurice Allais despre efectul descoperit in 1954:
Dovezile din genetica/biologia moleculara despre vechimea

pamantului:
forum.teologie.net/viewtopic.php?p=31192
Daca ar fi sa adaugam SI efectul miscarii axiale de precesie
(astronomia oficiala) peste diferenta de zile dintre calendarul iulian si
cel astronomic, atunci discrepanta ar fi si mai mare, calculele aici:
www.aloha.net/~johnboy/chrono.htg/chrono.htm
Nu a existat niciodata nici un fel de reforma gregoriana a
calendarului, iar consecintele sunt extraordinare nu numai in domeniul
datarii precise a evenimentelor din trecut, dar si in astrofizica: nu
exista nici o dovada astronomica/documentara/istorica a existentei
miscarii axiale de precesie a pamantului, de la Hiparh (Hipparchus) la
Napoleon, asa cum am vazut cu dovezi palpabile,
verificabile...miscarea de precesie se datoreaza deplasarii lente a
Soarelui spre vest, intr-un sistem geocentric, de aceea a fost nevoie de
inventarea personajelor Copernic, Kepler, si Galilei pentru a da
impresia unui conflict cu Inchizitia, dar care nu a avut loc niciodata:

Garry Kasparov a fost pasionat inca din anii '90 de subiectul noua
cronologie a istoriei.
Iar discrepantele, anacronismele si mai ales contradictiile evidente

gasite de el, mai ales in ceea ce priveste istoria oficiala a imperiului
Roman, sunt intradevar deosebite.
Pentru inceput, articolul Mathematics of the Past:
Dharanis
web.archive.org/web/20130120191650/http:...w-garry-kasparov.php
In a multiple-volume work History: Fiction or Science? Anatoly T.
Fomenko, one of the key proponents of New Chronology,
acknowledged Kasparovs support several times. An example comes
from Volume 1 (published in 2003), in the introductory essay
History of New Chronology by Fomenko and G. V. Nosovsky:
NOW ONLINE
Senior Boarder
Iar acum analiza superba, semnata G. Kasparov:

www.hiddenmysteries.org/freebooks/histor...okofCivilization.pdf (pg
5 - 22 - de asemenea citate multiple din lucrarea Cartea Civilizatiei)
Un interviu cu G. Kasparov din 2001:
Posts: 55
www.timothytaylor.ca/10/08/23/garry-kasparov-interview-2001
Elementele din tabelul periodic nu ar fi avut cum sa se formeze

absolut deloc in versiunea big bang: o analiza extraordinara a
paradoxului helium flash/helium gap 5/triple alpha process www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index....sg1393324#msg1393324
Imposibilitatea formarii galaxiilor/evolutiei stelare in teoria oficiala:
La pagina 3 din sirul actual de discutii, cea mai directa dovada a
falsificarii Noului Testament:
www.dacia.org/daciarevival/forum/4-dacia...imit=10&start=20
Report to moderator

Avand o memorie excelenta, antrenata pentru a distinge/descoperi
tipare si modele, Kasparov a facut o analiza extraordinara a falsificarii
istoriei imperiului roman luand in calcul toate aspectele: culturale,
stiintifice, sociale, artistice...si mai ales cele demografice.
Dharanis
web.archive.org/web/20130120191650/http:...-garry-kasparov.php#
www.hiddenmysteries.org/freebooks/histor...okofCivilization.pdf (pg
5 - 22)
Si acum o noua dovada a falsificarii istoriei: imposibilitatea existentei
in istoria Evului Mediu a pestei bubonice.
Pentru inceput faptul ca nici o armata de sobolani condusa de Speedy
Gonzales nu ar fi avut cum sa provoace the black plague:
NOW ONLINE
Senior Boarder
www.nature.com/scitable/blog/viruses101/...black_death_actually
Simptomele virusului Ebola si pesta bubonica din istoria evului
mediu:
www.rense.com/general12/bub.htm
In mod straniu, virusul Ebola mentionat de Tucidide:
archive.archaeology.org/9611/newsbriefs/ebola.html
Falsificarea operelor lui Tucidide:
books.google.ro/books?
id=YcjFAV4WZ9MC&am...0fomenko&f=false (pg 97 - 105)
Pentru cei interesati, virusul Ebola (ceea ce este de fapt) a fost
descoperit de Wilhelm Reich acum mai bine de 60 de ani (ceea ce el
numea bacilul-T, sau T-bacilli).
Posts: 55
The Black Plague never happened. There is no way, under any

conspirative scenario, for the Ebola virus to have been brought from
Zair/Congo to Europe and then to have been placed in each and every
well in each and every small village or city.
Fara argumentul pestei bubonice, dovezile lui Kasparov despre
contradictiile demografice ale "antichitatii" sunt si mai pline de
insemnatate.
Falsificarea tapiseriei de la Bayeux:

www.ilya.it/chrono/pages/bayeuxen.htm
Last Edit: 02 Mar 2015 09:02 by Dharanis. Report to moderator

la Ierusalim 02 Mar 2015 09:47 #352
Iar acum dovezile oferite de noua cronologie radicala a istoriei care ne arata
cum a fost falsificata opera atribuita lui Eratostene (Eratosthenes).
www.ilya.it/chrono/pages/erdmessungen.htm (analiza de exceptie a lui Uwe
Topper)
Dharanis
Cei care au falsificat scrierile atribuite lui Eratostene, STIAU DEJA cifra
exacta a razei Pamantului (atat pentru o sfera cat si pentru harta lui Piri Reis,
aceasta raza = 6356.66 km, unde 0.6356 = un cot sacru, one sacred cubit).
The new chronologist Uwe Topper brought new light upon an "ancient"
method used to calculate distances, so we will start with this.
NOW
ONLINE
In school we learned that Eratosthenes (276-194 B.C.), director of the great

library at Alexandria, was the first to determine the size of the earth. Yet his
alleged method does not convince me at all.
Senior
Boarder
The following procedure is described: He assumed that Alexandria and Syene

(now Assuan on the Nile before the first cataract) are situated on the same
meridian and are exactly 5000 stades distant from each other. The latitudinal
difference is given as 712' which is accurate. But these towns don't lie on the
same meridian - Alexandria is 30 eastern longitude and Syene is 33. The
difference of 3 amounts to more than 300 km. We don't know how
Eratosthenes determined these towns are 5000 stades distant (which is close
enough). From these data Eratosthenes calculated the circumference of our
planet to be 252,000 stades, which is astonishingly correct. The stade used in
Egypt is 157,5 m, and thus the earth's circumference 39,690 km which is fairly
correct (today a bit more than 40,000). It means roundabout 110 km distance
between two parallels (today 111 km).
The latitudinal difference between Alexandria and Syene, 712', is exactly a
50th part of the whole circumference. If this had been applied correctly in the
calculation, the circumference would have come to 250,000 stades, or 2000
stades short of what Eratosthenes assumed.
This suggests he knew the outcome in advance and only looked for measures
that let to the right result.
My doubts are reinforced if we consider the length of the stade: 40,000 stades
make the radius of the earth, and 1 of the earth's circumference equals exactly
700 stades. Thus I conclude the stade is a measure deducted from the size of
the earth. If Eratosthenes applied it to measure and calculate the earth, he used
the knowledge that people had used before him. And he had to twist his
mathematical elaboration a bit to arrive at the same result.
Posts: 55
Lucrarea lui Uwe Topper contine patru sectiuni, fiecare dintre ele fiind
explicata in mod exceptional, dovezi care pana acum nu au mai fost luate in
calcul de istorici.
For me the question remains: where did Eratosthenes get his knowledge? That
he himself was not learned is highlighted by other data given in his texts
(Miller p.5): the diameter of the sun is three times that of the earth, its distance
is 51 diameters of the earth, and the moon is 19,5 earth-radii away. All figures
are far wrong.
So if he could not estimate himself, not even nearly, how did he arrive at an
exact result for the earth's circumference?
The problem of the incorrect data used by Eratosthenes, especially the 3
difference in longitude, is brushed aside by Miller's remarks (p.6 and p.25),
that they are corrected by giving the latitudinal difference between Alexandria
and Syene as 7 1/7 . This is not said in the Greek text, but only surmised by
Miller defending Eratosthenes. Miller says Eratosthenes was able to correct his
wrong longitudes by the inexact difference of the latitudes and thus find the
real circumference of the earth. Committing two mistakes and arriving at the
correct result means that he knew the result in advance."
Iar cum raza corecta a pamantului (oricare ar fi teoria acceptata) a fost
masurata DOAR in 1669 cu acuratete cronologia oficiala, desigur), inseamna
ca atat opera lui Eratostene, cat si cea atribuita lui Jean Abbe Picard a fost
falsificata la o data mai tarzie, pe parcusul sec. XVIII (ca si lucrarea
Eratosthenes Batavus (The Dutch Eratosthenes) publicata in 1617, cronologia
oficiala, de catre W. Snel).
Din nou, de vreme ce Copernic il mentioneaza pe Aristarh, iar Eratostene
cunostea in cronologia oficiala rezultatele lui Aristarh, avem o noua dovada a
falsificarii operei atribuite lui Copernic.
"Seventeen hundred years after Eratosthenes' death, while Christopher
Columbus studied what Eratosthenes had written about the size of the Earth, he
chose to believe that the Earth's circumference was much smaller."
Numai ca avem la dispozitie citatele exacte din jurnalul de bord al lui Cristofor
Columb.
CRISTOFOR COLUMB, DESCRIEREA ECLIPSELOR SIMULTANE DE
SOARE/LUNA:
CITATUL IN LIMBA SPANIOLA, ORIGINAL:
www.mgar.net/docs/colon4.htm
Esto que yo he dicho es lo que he odo. Lo que yo s es que el ao de 94
navegu en 24 al Poniente en trmino de nueve horas, y no pudo haber yerro
porque hubo eclipses: el sol estaba en Libra y la luna en Ariete.
TRADUCEREA IN LIMBA ENGLEZA:
This that I have said is what I have heard. What I know is that the year '94 I
sailed in 24 degrees to the west in 9 hours, and it could not be mistake because
there were eclipses: the sun was in Libra and the moon in Ariete.
TRADUCEREA IN LIMBA ROMANA:
Acest lucru pe care l-am spus este ceea ce am auzit. Ceea ce tiu este c in
anul '94 am navigat in 24 de grade catre vest in 9 ore, i aceasta nu ar putea fi
greeal, deoarece erau eclipse: Soarele era in Balanta, iar luna n Berbec.
Imaginea vazuta de Columb:
Now, "Columbus" is NOT describing a selenelion (both the Sun and the
eclipsed Moon can be observed at the same time in the RE theory): he used the
words "hubo eclipses" (were eclipses), there were a solar and a lunar eclipse
occurring at the same time.
Jurnalul de bord complet al lui Cristofor Columb:

www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/columbus1.html
Sectiunea relevanta:
COLUMBUS AND THE FLAT SURFACE OF THE OCEAN
Columbus received the reward offered by the king for being the first one to see
a human signal coming from some unseen land. Let's read his own words:
Thursday, 11 October. Steered west-southwest; and encountered a heavier sea
than they had met with before in the whole voyage. Saw pardelas and a green
rush near the vessel. The crew of the Pinta saw a cane and a log; they also
picked up a stick which appeared to have been carved with an iron tool, a piece
of cane, a plant which grows on land, and a board. The crew of the Nina saw
other signs of land, and a stalk loaded with rose berries. These signs
encouraged them, and they all grew cheerful. Sailed this day till sunset,
twenty-seven leagues.
After sunset steered their original course west and sailed twelve miles an hour
till two hours after midnight, going ninety miles, which are twenty-two leagues
and a half; and as the Pinta was the swiftest sailer, and kept ahead of the
Admiral, she discovered land and made the signals which had been ordered.
The land was first seen by a sailor called Rodrigo de Triana, although the
Admiral at ten o'clock that evening standing on the quarter-deck saw a light,
but so small a body that he could not affirm it to be land; calling to Pero
Gutierrez, groom of the King's wardrobe, he told him he saw a light, and bid
him look that way, which he did and saw it; he did the same to Rodrigo
Sanchez of Segovia, whom the King and Queen had sent with the squadron as
comptroller, but he was unable to see it from his situation. The Admiral again
perceived it once or twice, appearing like the light of a wax candle moving up
and down, which some thought an indication of land. But the Admiral held it
for certain that land was near; for which reason, after they had said the Salve
which the seamen are accustomed to repeat and chant after their fashion, the
Admiral directed them to keep a strict watch upon the forecastle and look out
diligently for land, and to him who should first discover it he promised a silken
jacket, besides the reward which the King and Queen had offered, which was
an annuity of ten thousand maravedis. At two o'clock in the morning the land
was discovered, at two leagues' distance; they took in sail and remained under
the square-sail lying to till day, which was Friday, when they found themselves
near a small island, one of the Lucayos, called in the Indian language
Guanahani. ...Saturday, 13 October. This is a large and level island, with trees
extremely flourishing, and streams of water; there is a large lake in the middle
of the island, but no mountains: the whole is completely covered with verdure
and delightful to behold
The math is simple: 22 leagues = 90 miles. From 10 to 2 hours after midnight
there are 4 hours x 12 miles per hour = 48 miles. The land still was 2 leagues
away, which is 8 miles, added to 48 gives 56 miles or above 90 kilometers. By
his own words, there was not mountain. The ship could be some 3 meters
above the water.
If the water of the ocean was curved, the island would be more than 600
meters below the line of sight of Columbus. Therefore neither he nor the others
could see any light from that far a distance. Columbus and all those experts in
high sea navigation knew these realities common among mariners: the water
surface of the ocean is flat (except for the waves).
La 90 de km, avem o diferenta de altitudine de vreo 637 de metri, pe un
pamant de forma sferica, cu o curbura de aproximativ 158 de metri.
CUM E POSIBIL ca inaltii oficiali ai bisericii catolice sa nu il fi confruntat pe
Copernic cu aceste citate care l-ar fi redus la tacere imediat?
DE CE cardinalul Bellarmine nu i-a amintit lui Galilei exact de aceste citate,
care fi fost binecunoscute in epoca sa?
Eclipsele simultane de Soare si de Luna, documentate de Columb, ar fi
insemnat sfarsitul oricarei dispute pe tema formei pamantului.
Cei mai importanti astronomi ai secolului XIX stiau sau credeau in existenta a
cel putin doua Dark Bodies, adica alte DOUA corpuri ceresti care ar orbita
deasupra (pamantul plat) sau in jurul (pamantul sferic) pamantului, si care ar
cauza eclipsele de Soare si de Luna:
That many such bodies exist in the firmament is almost a matter of certainty;
and that one such as that which eclipses the moon exists at no great distance
above the earth's surface, is a matter admitted by many of the leading
astronomers of the day. In the report of the council of the Royal Astronomical
Society, for June 1850, it is said:--
"We may well doubt whether that body which we call the moon is the only
satellite of the earth."
In the report of the Academy of Sciences for October 12th, 1846, and again for
August, 1847, the director of one of the French observatories gives a number
of observations and calculations which have led him to conclude that,-"There is at least one non-luminous body of considerable magnitude which is
attached as a satellite to this earth."
Sir John Herschel admits that:-"Invisible moons exist in the firmament."
Sir John Lubbock is of the same opinion, and gives rules and formul for
calculating their distances, periods.
Lambert in his cosmological letters admits the existence of "dark cosmical
bodies of great size."
Fotografiile din Antarctica, 2003, realizate de Fred Bruenjes:
www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1...9022&postcount=3
Linkul catre video-urile si fotografiile ISS/Atlantis solar transit:
www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.....msg994892#msg994892
www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1...230&postcount=18
EFECTUL ALLAIS si eclipsa solara:
Last Edit: 02 Mar 2015 10:10 by Dharanis. Report to moderator

la Ierusalim 11 Mar 2015 09:41 #353
Acad. prof. dr. Emilian Popescu:
"Evlavios si smerit, rugator si postitor, invatat si harnic lucrator in Biserica lui Hristos, Cuviosul
Dionisie Exiguul merita sa fie trecut in calendarul crestin si pentru ca este parintele erei
crestine."
acvila30.ro/1-septembrie-sfantul-dionisi...ul-viata/#more-53376
Dr. G.V. Nosovsky:
Despre istorici se presupune c se ocup ei nii cu cronologia. Oricum, fr o educaie
matematic suficient i n cazul studiilor cronologice, suficient nseamn fundamental
istoricii sunt forai s evite soluia i chiar discuia despre problemele destul de complexe ale
cronologiei.
www.scribd.com/doc/74886953/Gleb-Nosovsky-Dilema-Pastelui#
Asa cum vazut mai devreme, toata opera atribuita lui Dionysius Exiguus a fost falsificata cel
putin dupa anul 1100 e.n.:
Deci, Dionisie Exiguul a calculat ca in anul 563 e.n., Pastele iudaic (Passover) va avea loc pe 24
Martie.
Este absolut imposibil ca Dionisie sa fi facut o asemenea greseala colosala (deoarece ar fi fost
suficient sa aplice ciclul Metonian pentru urmatorii 30-40 de ani, iar astfel sa obtina o datare
precisa), DECAT DACA nu a trait in acea perioada, iar opera atribuita numelui sau a fost
falsificata mult mai tarziu in istorie.
In anul 563 e.n., data Pastelui Iudaic,in calendarul Iulian, este Duminica, 25 Martie.
Utilizand formula Pastelui lui K.F. Gauss si conditiile listate chiar de Exiguus si Vlastar, Dr. G.
Nosovsky demonstreaza ca singura data posibila care indeplineste acele reguli este 1095 e.n., 24
Martie.
www.chronologia.org/en/es_analysis2/img410.pdf
Dar Dr. G.V. Nosovsky a mers si mai departe, demonstrand ca opera lui Exiguus nu putea fi
realizata DECAT dupa anul 1620 e.n., care coincide cu datarea scrierilor lui Dionysius Petavius
(the Little, cel Mic, la fel ca si Exiguus (the Small, cel Mic):
books.google.ro/books?id=YcjFAV4WZ9MC&am...20little&f=false
Din nou, folosind datele echinoctiilor listate chiar de Matei Vlastar, Dr. G. Nosovsky ajunge la
urmatoarele concluzii:
Cronologia oficiala, atribuita atat lui Scaliger cat si lui Petavius, a fost alcatuita in graba, de catre
un grup de calugari care lucrau de zor, in acelasi timp, si la "operele" lui Exiguus (modificat din
Petavius), Bede si Vlastar:
De aceea apare cu atat mai ciudat discursul atribuit in cronologia oficiala Patriarhului
Alexandriei, Meletie Pigas, datat 1583:
www.mitropoliaslatioara.ro/calendarul.php#1.8
Protestele sale NU INCLUD cel mai important detaliu: faptul evident ca reforma gregoriana este
calculata gresit (iar Pigas avea la dispozitie scrierile deja binecunoscute ale lui Matei Vlastar pe
tema regulilor de calcul ale datelor Pastelui din trecutul istoric): o diferenta de cinci zile, care nu
este mentionata absolut deloc, nici de catre Pigas si nici de catre Ieremia si Silvestru (sinodul
ecumenic de la Constantinopole, 1583).
Toate aceste proteste au fost inventate si plasmuite de catre falsificatorii istoriei care, fara sa-si
dea seama ca neavand la dispozitie formula Pastelui absolut precisa a lui K.F. Gauss, cronologia
lor contrafacuta va putea fi depistata cu ajutorul formulelor astronomice exacte descoperite dupa
1800 e.n.

Iisus A Fost Crucificat La Constantinopole Si Nu La Ierusalim - Partea IV

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Iisus A Fost Crucificat La Constantinopole Si Nu La Ierusalim - Partea IV

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

TOPIC: Iisus Christos a fost crucificat la Constantinopole si

In cronologia oficiala, cercetarile efectuate de Dr. Adam Maloof

actually happened during the 18th century, as proven and described

In noua cronologie radicala a istoriei, aceste evenimente au avut loc

(again, from Worlds in Collision)

1740 AD, exactly the period discovered by Christopher Pfister, the

Re: Iisus Christos a fost crucificat la Constantinopole si nu

made such a colossal mistake UNLESS his works/biography were forged/falsified

Re: Iisus Christos a fost crucificat la Constantinopole si nu

document si textul semnat de Papa Sixt al IV-lea, la Roma, in data de

Numai ca pontiful Sixtus IV mentioneaza, DEJA, o diferenta de cel

Legatura dintre Sixtus IV si Copernic:

Insa Dr. A. Fomenko si Dr. G. Nosovsky demonstreaza ca opera

atmosfera era linistita. Intunericul a cazut asupra pamantului si au

Matei Vlastar (1330 e.n.) despre Paste:

echinociul de primvar, cror hotrri au urmat numaidect alte

este datat aproximativ n anul 1330 E.N..

Absurditatea menionat mai sus a fost observat mult mai trziu,

Potrivit cronologiei oficiale, in anul 325 e.n., solstitiul de iarna ar fi

atribuite lui Pavel:

Re: Iisus Christos a fost crucificat la Constantinopole si nu

Cea mai importanta figura istorica a Indiei, imparatul Ashoka, nu a existat

Legatura din Matteo Ricci si Christopher Clavius:

Newton si Leibniz habar nu aveau cum a fost obtinuta seria MacLaurin a

Therefore, the rate of change of momentum = m(v-u)/t = ma (from Kanada's

Rezultatele obtinute de mine: analiza matematica utilizata la Gizeh.

Cele mai directe dovezi: piramida de la Gizeh a fost construita inainte de

Arhitectii de la Gizeh trebuiau sa cunoasca notiunile de serii Taylor, teorema

Cum au fost transportate blocurile de la Baalbek:

Re: Iisus Christos a fost crucificat la Constantinopole si nu

Nici un fel de crocodil...

Re: Iisus Christos a fost crucificat la Constantinopole si nu

Dr. S.K. Vshekhsviatsky a fost directorul Observatorului Astronomic

moons. By comparing the observed luminosity of the periodic comets

"Cand trec prin apropierea Soarelui, cometele formeaza cozi. Se

estimated, Kepler's third law of planetary motion can be used to

Deci, singura metoda absolut precisa care poate fi utilizata pentru

Efectul Allais: precesia axiala nu are nici o legatura cu mecanica

Anomalia miscarii pendulului inregistrata de Dr. Maurice Allais

Dovezile din genetica/biologia moleculara despre vechimea

Re: Iisus Christos a fost crucificat la Constantinopole si nu

Iar discrepantele, anacronismele si mai ales contradictiile evidente

Iar acum analiza superba, semnata G. Kasparov:

Elementele din tabelul periodic nu ar fi avut cum sa se formeze

Re: Iisus Christos a fost crucificat la Constantinopole si nu

The Black Plague never happened. There is no way, under any

Falsificarea tapiseriei de la Bayeux:

Re: Iisus Christos a fost crucificat la Constantinopole si nu

In school we learned that Eratosthenes (276-194 B.C.), director of the great

The following procedure is described: He assumed that Alexandria and Syene

Jurnalul de bord complet al lui Cristofor Columb:

Re: Iisus Christos a fost crucificat la Constantinopole si nu

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen