Pokotia Monolith

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 12:42 pm

Quit talking in vague circles and tell me if you think the Pokotia monolith is authentic Marduk.

And say it politely.

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 12:47 pm

I must've scared him. After all, I have been ignoring him.

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 12:52 pm

I think it has one symbol on it that is important as far as Sumer goes and its on the arm
but as for it being relevant in any other fashion no not really
for all we know it could have been carved there anytime after columbus
even if it was covered with genuine sumerian script you wouldn't be able to prove it was local and not transplanted

theres plenty of similarities and sumerian connections to be found in mesoamerica
but this isn't it
and you have to look at the timeline
Sumerian script 3500 - 2400bce
Akkadian script 2400 - 500bce
Babylonian 1900bce - 0

south american cultures 1500bce - 1500ace

there is a reason for the similarities in global mythology and in some cases language
but its one of similar genesis and not hyper diffusion

Forum Monk · Post by **Forum Monk** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 12:55 pm

Regarding the inscription on the back, I have seen other reports that it possibly depicts an ancient outburst of the eta carinae variable star. While there appears to be an image of the constellation Crux in the approximate correct orientation with a eta carinae, nothing else on the inscription resembles the other stars in the region. Not even the brighter ones. It appears to me to be coincidence.

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 12:56 pm

If you're suggesting that Pokotia is not authentic, what evidence do you have? It was excavated by an Archeaological team and dated by the strata it came from.

The proto - sumerian script was translated by an Etymologist.

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 12:58 pm

Forum Monk wrote:Regarding the inscription on the back, I have seen other reports that it possibly depicts an ancient outburst of the eta carinae variable star. While there appears to be an image of the constellation Crux in the approximate correct orientation with a eta carinae, nothing else on the inscription resembles the other stars in the region. Not even the brighter ones. It appears to me to be coincidence.

I have a link to that effect Monk. I'll get it shortly.

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 1:00 pm

I'm taking a short break while you're getting evidence Marduk.

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 1:17 pm

The proto - sumerian script was translated by an Etymologist.

whats his name ?

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 1:21 pm

http://www.fortworthastro.com/primefocu ... page4.html

Now to the present day - A pre-Incan Pokotia monolith statue was discovered by a Bolivian archaeology team led by Dr. Bernardo Biados and Freddy Arce on January 4, 2002. Their research in the Pokotia, Tiahuanaco, and Lake Titicaca area is supported by The Honorable H. Enrique Toro, President of the Congress of Bolivia. The final picture at right is a "rubbing" of the script off the back of a stone monolith statue found at Pokotia, Bolivia, which is close to Tiuhuanaco, just below Lake Titicaca. It is quite feasible that the stones could date from 1000 AD, coinciding with the calculated date of the outburst.

Here is the link Monk. Young Astronomers believe they see it, and admit that it is pure conjecture.

FreeThinker · Post by **FreeThinker** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 1:21 pm

I must admit that I am a bit skeptical on this one. The inscriptions do look a little like cuneiform, but they could just as easily be something else. As I have absolutely no ability to translate any ancient writing I will have to wait to see how this unfolds. That said, I wont believe it is an actual cuneiform text until it has been independantly translated by several experts truely capable of actually translating a cuneiform text...and subsequently that those translations all coincide. Not trying to be a wet blanket here but extraodinary claims require extraordinary proofs as they say, and this certainly qualifies as an extraordinary claim. I will remind everyone of the plentiful examples of "writing" in North America that have been "translated" to prove that Egyptians, Phonecians, Chinese, or whoever colonized the Americas. These "translations" never have stood up to the light of critical scholarly examination.

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 1:24 pm

marduk wrote:
The proto - sumerian script was translated by an Etymologist.
whats his name ?

Are you going to start that Business. When you have nothing, you attack other people and nit-pic. That doesn't make your case.

Clyde Winters is the guys name. I'm sure you've looked him up and found something about his education. That's hypocritical.

Evidence!

Digit · Post by **Digit** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 1:30 pm

Come off it Thinker. If you have two or more people working on translations you'll get two or more interpretations. Translating from one language to another can be problematical enough, but when different 'alphabets' and grammar are involved it becomes more of an art than a science.

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 1:34 pm

FreeThinker wrote:I must admit that I am a bit skeptical on this one. The inscriptions do look a little like cuneiform, but they could just as easily be something else. As I have absolutely no ability to translate any ancient writing I will have to wait to see how this unfolds. That said, I wont believe it is an actual cuneiform text until it has been independantly translated by several experts truely capable of actually translating a cuneiform text...and subsequently that those translations all coincide. Not trying to be a wet blanket here but extraodinary claims require extraordinary proofs as they say, and this certainly qualifies as an extraordinary claim. I will remind everyone of the plentiful examples of "writing" in North America that have been "translated" to prove that Egyptians, Phonecians, Chinese, or whoever colonized the Americas. These "translations" never have stood up to the light of critical scholarly examination.

Yeah F/T that would be the late Barry Fell doing the rock art stuff. He ruined his reputation from the beginning. Not So with Winters. And there are not tons of people that can read this script. Sitchen can, but he needs to stay out of this.

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 1:37 pm

BTW F/T, I agree with you. Hang in here with us, this is going to be a long discussion.

But first I'm gonna settle this issue with Marduk.

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 1:42 pm

Clyde Winters is the guys name. I'm sure you've looked him up and found something about his education. That's hypocritical.

what to say about Clyde
well to start with I'm on first name terms with him and have been communicating with him for about three years
he likes my work and has said so, hes even endorsed it

Dr C.A.Winters wrote:“I loved your site. The information and graphics are great. Thanks for the fine article.”

I helped him out with some of his pokotia inscription stuff as the same inscription is written in mile high letters across the Nazca plain, which of course can't be transplanted

etymology Beagle is about finding the origin of a word
Clyde is a linguist not an etymologist
hes an african american and an afrocentric as well and has qualifications in criminal psycology and that is all
I don't agree with everything he believes but I do count him as a friend
so really
if you knew the first thing about me you'd realise that in every way I am more than you know
but still
like you said a long time ago
because I post at the hall of maat i must be dishonest

Archaeologica.org

Pokotia Monolith

hmmmmm...a bit skeptical

Re: hmmmmm...a bit skeptical