Olmec culture

DougWeller · Post by **DougWeller** » Sat Sep 16, 2006 12:07 pm

Marduk, each of those links just says what I've been saying, and doesn't back up your claim. You tried to tell Professor Bernard Ortiz de Montellano, who knows a lot more about Nahuatl and Mesoamerica than you or I do, that he was wrong over the same thing. It seems to be a case of your beliefs versus the evidence.

I plead guilty to writing Sumerian instead of Babylonian, I know of your obsession with Sumeria and you mentioned Valley of Sumer and a Sumerian goddess and I didn't read the rest very carefully. Big deal.

Your ideas about Sumeria are of course relevant to any discussion of Mesoamerica including this one. Unless I've made another mistake and you don't think anything about Sumeria is relevant to Mesoamerica -- if I'm wrong, I apologise in advance.

Doug

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Sat Sep 16, 2006 12:47 pm

Marduk, each of those links just says what I've been saying, and doesn't back up your claim

you were saying that the word Aztlan is not derived from Azatl Tlan (Tli)
how stupid can you be it clearly is as all those sites i posted said very clearly

You tried to tell Professor Bernard Ortiz de Montellano, who knows a lot more about Nahuatl and Mesoamerica than you or I do, that he was wrong over the same thing.

no because i misspelled it like i did in the first post here Bernard was right

since i have now learned how to actually spell the word he would happily admit i am right.
clearly howevere you are merely going on the conversation with Bernard and haven't done a seconds research on this yourself

so in your case it is a personal belief
and the only one that is in operation here

Your ideas about Sumeria are of course relevant to any discussion of Mesoamerica including this one.

I have no belief that there is a connection between Sumer and Mesoamerica
what are you accusing me of now then ?

been reading the other site again have you Doug
heres a hint
I suggest you actually search for my conclusions at that site before you claim i made any about a direct link between the two cultures

clearly Doug in recent weeks you have tried to denigrate me and ridicule anything i have said on any subject
when you yourself admit you know nothing about them
had you asked for my specific reasons on my claims i would have happily told you but in each case you always started with an assumption and then carried on in ignorance like the laughing stock you made of yourself over the sumerian cuneiform debacle

take it somewhere else
im not interested

DougWeller · Post by **DougWeller** » Sat Sep 16, 2006 1:20 pm

You said "actually in full its atlan tlan tli "

That's wrong. There is no such 'full' form. I wrote "What those sites say is basically "In their language (Nahuatl), the roots of Aztlan are the two words:aztatl tlan(tli) meaning "heron" and "place of," respectively. meaning "heron" and "place of," respectively."

There is no word aztatl tlan(tli), that is an explanation of the etymology of the real word Aztlan, those sites agree with me."
Which is correct. I am arguing that Aztlan derives from two words, you are arguing that the full version of Aztlan is as (I've put in the Z you left out in error).

So far as the Sumerian cuneiform debate is concerned, your victory is in your mind, you had no support, could call up no experts, and could only deride the experts I showed your claims to.

You may have no belief that there is a connection between MesoAmerica and Sumer, but you clearly believe that there is a connection between Sumer and the Americas, eg
http://www.geocities.com/dolph322000/
Where you write "A few years ago a monolith was found near Teotihuacan. It’s called the pokotia monolith and it had a strange inscription on its left side" and then state categorically "It’s a very old form of writing known as Proto cuneiform. It’s Sumerian in origin and hasn’t been used since 3100bce.
Its part of a larger phrase which translated intoEnglish says
"The Diviner proclaims the phenomenal depth of this area , of the deity's power, to entrust man with wisdom" The lines at nazca and the inscription on the pokotia monolith are quite similar in a Sumerian way aren’t they? "

Fortunately I am happily married and have no worries about my wife leaving me, so that nasty jibe is obviously just an attempt to defame.

You claim that my saying that you believe you are a reincarnated Babylonian(sorry about the error where I wrote Sumerian) is an attempt to defame. Do you mean it isn't true, or that in repeating what you proclaim I am defaming you?

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Sat Sep 16, 2006 1:28 pm

You may have no belief that there is a connection between MesoAmerica and Sumer, but you clearly believe that there is a connection between Sumer and the Americas, eg
http://www.geocities.com/dolph322000/
Where you write "A few years ago a monolith was found near Teotihuacan. It’s called the pokotia monolith and it had a strange inscription on its left side" and then state categorically "It’s a very old form of writing known as Proto cuneiform. It’s Sumerian in origin and hasn’t been used since 3100bce.
Its part of a larger phrase which translated intoEnglish says
"The Diviner proclaims the phenomenal depth of this area , of the deity's power, to entrust man with wisdom" The lines at nazca and the inscription on the pokotia monolith are quite similar in a Sumerian way aren’t they? "

saying something is similar in no way applies a direct connection Doug
only you are drawing that conclusion
the name of the site is sumerian similarities
not sumerian connections in mesoamerica

So far as the Sumerian cuneiform debate is concerned, your victory is in your mind, you had no support, could call up no experts, and could only deride the experts I showed your claims to.

what experts
not one was a sumerologist
thats like claiming an expert on roman culture knows anything about greece

laughable

DougWeller · Post by **DougWeller** » Sat Sep 16, 2006 1:45 pm

One of them was an expert that you mentioned before I told you what he'd said about your post. Others may not have had Sumer as their main specialty but they had expertise in Sumerology.
You flatly claim that there is Sumerian on the Pokotia stone - that there is Sumerian writing in the Americas. Isn't that what you wrote?

Your website lists a large number of 'similarities' and on its front page you write
"Somebody famous once said that “a coincidence plus a coincidence plus a coincidence” often turns out to be a fact"

So which is it? Is there Sumerian writing in the Americas? Do you think there was contact?

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Sat Sep 16, 2006 1:56 pm

as i have pointed out time and time again and which you are already aware of
similarities do not a connection make
if you want to read things and draw stupid assumptions from them go ahead
personally i believe that the similarities point to something other than direct contact
but you can carry on deluding yourself its otherwise if it makes you feel better

One of them was an expert that you mentioned before I told you what he'd said about your post. Others may not have had Sumer as their main specialty but they had expertise in Sumerology

none of them were sumerologists Doug
claiming they were just means you're a liar

and assyrologist has no more expertise in sumerology than an english teacher does in french
it might be the same alphabet but it isn't the same language
why don't you try and tell me that Sumerian is an SOV language again
proving that were the case is the only possible chance you have of being correct in that instance
like i said
laughable
the way that you introduced the question at Google groups was at best clearly indicative that you had made your mind up before you had any answer at all
that isn't scientific
its downright poor scholarship and you know it
why don't you find someone who has actually studied the language what they think
or couldn't you find anyone once you mentioned the A word

DougWeller · Post by **DougWeller** » Sat Sep 16, 2006 2:42 pm

Once again,
You flatly claim that there is Sumerian on the Pokotia stone - that there is Sumerian writing in the Americas. Isn't that what you wrote?

As for the alleged Sumerian word, you made it up. It doesn't exist in real life. Feel free to prove me wrong.

And I don't understand your mention of Google Groups.

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Sat Sep 16, 2006 4:35 pm

Once again,
You flatly claim that there is Sumerian on the Pokotia stone - that there is Sumerian writing in the Americas. Isn't that what you wrote?

I am not the first person to claim that they are similar
besides which it is meaningless because its small enough to have been placed there where it could be deliberately found
or didn't you think of that

As for the alleged Sumerian word, you made it up. It doesn't exist in real life. Feel free to prove me wrong.

its not a sumerian word
you just don't get it do you
its a sentence formed by three sumerian words
the very fact that those three words exist and are on the database at EPSD means that they exist in real life
the only discussion is in what order they would be used according to your panel of experts

I have a perfectly reasonable explanation expounded by three very well known sumerologists why Atal (engulf) is more important in a formed sentence than An (God) and Is (mountain)
for your future reference you can use this if you like. you could even ask your so called experts who told you that Sumerian is an SOV language if they are aware of it or not (probably not as they already proved their ignorance)
Atal (Verb) An (Subject) Is(Object)
Sumerian word order patterns
Major patterns: S V, S O V, S A V, S A O V
Minor patterns: O S V, S O A V
Marginal patterns: (S) V O, V S O(in literary texts only)

now i wonder whether a story about a mountain being engulfed by water (quite famous already) would be described as literary
roflmao

but you've already proved to be a complete tosspot when it comes to anything I say
despite the fact that I have been studying the language for the last three years
so
whatever you like Doug
I can't be bothered to tell you any more
you carry on deluding yourself and holding your hands over your ears crying "lalalalalalala i can't hear you"

see if I care

DougWeller · Post by **DougWeller** » Sat Sep 16, 2006 11:58 pm

marduk wrote:
Once again,
You flatly claim that there is Sumerian on the Pokotia stone - that there is Sumerian writing in the Americas. Isn't that what you wrote?
I am not the first person to claim that they are similar
besides which it is meaningless because its small enough to have been placed there where it could be deliberately found
or didn't you think of that

I am not even convinced it is Sumerian. I've been following the discussion with some of the people most involved for years. But anyone reading your web site will, I'm sure, go away thinking that you believe that there is Proto Cuneiform there put there when it was originallyh carved, especially after your comments on similarity to the Nazca lines.

I note that you once again don't give us your opinion.

As for the alleged Sumerian word, you made it up. It doesn't exist in real life. Feel free to prove me wrong.

its not a sumerian word
you just don't get it do you
its a sentence formed by three sumerian words

Ah, now it's a sentence. Over at Ma'at we had this discussion under a subject line which included the phrase 'no such word'. Maybe you should have pointed out in that discussion that I was wrong in saying you thought it was a word. Reviewing that discussion I see that you used 'worded' and then 'phrase'.

the very fact that those three words exist and are on the database at EPSD means that they exist in real life
the only discussion is in what order they would be used according to your panel of experts

It does not mean they were ever used the way you want to use them. Or that the cuneiform could ever end up as the word Atlantis in Greek.

I have a perfectly reasonable explanation expounded by three very well known sumerologists why Atal (engulf) is more important in a formed sentence than An (God) and Is (mountain)
for your future reference you can use this if you like. you could even ask your so called experts who told you that Sumerian is an SOV language if they are aware of it or not (probably not as they already proved their ignorance)
Atal (Verb) An (Subject) Is(Object)
Sumerian word order patterns
Major patterns: S V, S O V, S A V, S A O V
Minor patterns: O S V, S O A V
Marginal patterns: (S) V O, V S O(in literary texts only)

now i wonder whether a story about a mountain being engulfed by water (quite famous already) would be described as literary
roflmao

For readers, Marduk is arguing that there is what he calls the 'Atlantis myth' which involves a mountain being engulfed by water and istems from a "Sumerian myth that has a civilisation destroyed by water by a vengeful god " -- at least I think he is. And that you can find the word Atlantis reflected in in Sumerian and in Nahuatl (although he seems reluctant to admit that he believes in Sumerian influence in the Americas.

but you've already proved to be a complete tosspot when it comes to anything I say
despite the fact that I have been studying the language for the last three years
so
whatever you like Doug
I can't be bothered to tell you any more
you carry on deluding yourself and holding your hands over your ears crying "lalalalalalala i can't hear you"

see if I care

You appear to have joined the happy band of 'language experts' that includes Barry Fell, Clyde Winters, and Z Sitchin. They all claim or claimed to be experts too.

Go find some real Sumerian experts to back up your claim and I might listen. But since I've already seen you apparently claim you know more about Nahuatl than Prof de Montellano, I suspect you will simply carry on saying anyone who disagrees with you is wrong.

Your 'coincidences' website lists a large number of 'similarities' and on its front page you write
"Somebody famous once said that “a coincidence plus a coincidence plus a coincidence” often turns out to be a fact"

So which is it? Is there Sumerian writing in the Americas? Do you think there was contact? Inquiring minds want to know. ':lol:'

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Sun Sep 17, 2006 6:03 am

Ah, now it's a sentence

I don't believe you are that stupid
i linked quite clearly to three seperate words at epsd,
have you ever seen transliterated sumerian text doug
do you actualy know what it looks like
heres an example
re-a-ta ĝi6 an ki-bi-ta /ba\-[an-dim2-ma-ba]
so Atal.An.Is clearly is three words
whereas when you presented this to your experts you said

I've been presented with something which I think is just another
form of silliness, as I've been offered the word ATAL.AN.IS

see who's silliness it is yet ?
nice way to go broadcasting your personal belief when you yourself say

I know nothing about Sumerian, so I don't know if I should put any
credence in this

you know nothing about Sumerian
yet you think it is silliness (qualified to judge suddenly) and you think it is one word and something to do with Platos Atlantis
i remember very well telling you that Platos Atlantis was a story based on an event. yet hey Doug you carry on talking crap and then claiming it as a victory and see what sort of fanclub it will get you
clearly in this case Doug you had made up your mind about Platos work long ago and are now determined to attempt to debunk anything even remotely supporting it
even when in fact it isn't. which is what you did with Atal.An.Is
it doesn't support Plato at all
in fact
it proves its just a highl;y embroidered story based on one single fact.
but you carry on acting a complete twat if you like.
i'm enjoying wtahcing you reverse your stance every time you get a new expert who contradicts the previous one

You have accused me of defaming you.
You claim that my saying that you believe you are a reincarnated Babylonian(sorry about the error where I wrote Sumerian) is an attempt to defame. Do you mean it isn't true, or that in repeating what you proclaim I am defaming you?

you only bought it up as an attempt to damage my credibility
in the same way that someone would bring up Zahis personal beliefs to discredit his expertise. you know its not relevant. the fact that you might like big macs from mcdonalds is in no way relevant to this conversation
should i start calling you ronald mcdonald ?
same thing

Your 'coincidences' website lists a large number of 'similarities' and on its front page you write
"Somebody famous once said that “a coincidence plus a coincidence plus a coincidence” often turns out to be a fact"

its three years old now Doug. And once again you missed the point

So which is it? Is there Sumerian writing in the Americas? Do you think there was contact? Inquiring minds want to know. ''

I don't think there was contact
I used to think that clearly because of the amount of evidence, some of which it turns out is fake or misinterpreted. But i investigated all that evidence myself and made my own mind up rather than relying on dickless scholars like you have
but as it turns out there is a far more rational explanation for a similarity in myth and written language.
one thats aready backed by orthodox belief and by as of yet unseen orthodox data
I do think the sumerians travelled great distances by sea
but i don't think they colonised south america
but I do think they knew it was there
happy now ?

DougWeller · Post by **DougWeller** » Sun Sep 17, 2006 6:28 am

I never thought your words, sentences, phrases, whatever supported Plato's Atlantis, but they do certainly seem to be suggesting an origin for the word Atlantis.

But you do seem to be linking the Americas and Sumeria with them.
And you certainly appear to be saying there was contact between the old and the new worlds if the Sumerians knew America was there. I don't know why you are so coy about all this.

Let me see. Your thinking you are a reincarnated Babylonian has nothing to do with your beliefs about the ancient world, yet someone else allegedly thinking they were abducted by UFOs is something you use to attack their credibility. Sauce, gander, goose.

I admit I am quite capable of writing things I haven't thought through carefully enough (I know what the full stops mean in a2-tal an i$ i(oops, that doesn't look like your version, no full stops, of course I mean Atal.An.Is -- which is more convenient for your hypothesis, right?

Can we agree we can't be sure what Atal means in Sumerian, however you write it?

How about an-i$i -- are you sure that it is ok to put the adjective before the verb? Or are you saying that there are special cases and this is one of them?

And will you admit that the phrase cannot be found in any Sumerian document?

Do you want to explain the $ which replaces the s you put in 'isi'?

How does this phrase become a word which gets loaned by the Egyptians to the Greeks?

When you finish answering those questions, we can play a game.

You've had your phrase, here's mine -- I$i-ra il -- look familiar? I'm sure you can translate it, but should we take it seriously?

Doug

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Sun Sep 17, 2006 8:59 am

yisra'el is the actual hebrew word
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=Israel
but the start doesnt fit
El is more than likely derived from akkadian Ilu or at the very least they are closely related, both are semitic languages and Ilu is attested from 2000bce. Before then they used Dagan in the same linguistic position which had the meaning of totality
try Išme-Dagan. how would you say that in Hebrew
Its very interesting when you find out what that word actually means and what time period and location it was used and what word preceeded it. You start to get a real handle on the bible.

but theres no way on earth that you would have Sarah coming before God so if you are seriously trying to claim that its nonsense

Can we agree we can't be sure what Atal means in Sumerian, however you write it?

quite clearly you should do some research
the

is there purely because the scholars at epsd are unsure whether or not the tal ending refers to clamour or to broad
not because they are unsure whether or not it means engulf

normally there are hundreds of examples of each word used over and over but in this case not so many have been found
it will if it changes at all in future will change to a more precise from of engulf
like submerge or flooded.
but it won't change its meaning because the words they have no idea of the meaning of don't appear at epsd
its a dictionary Doug
how many dictionaries have you seen where a word is listed with the phrase "hmmm we have no fucking idea what this means"

Let me see. Your thinking you are a reincarnated Babylonian has nothing to do with your beliefs about the ancient world, yet someone else allegedly thinking they were abducted by UFOs is something you use to attack their credibility. Sauce, gander, goose.

i don't recall the ever claiming to be qualified at something because of my experience with my memory of the past. In fact I don't recall posting anything about Babylon anywhere at all in that way nor trading on the knowledge the experience bought me. The webiste was a result of therapy suggested by my psycologist. perhaps i should give you her tel number so you can phone her up and criticise her for it

But you do seem to be linking the Americas and Sumeria with them.
And you certainly appear to be saying there was contact between the old and the new worlds if the Sumerians knew America was there. I don't know why you are so coy about all this.

because you don't understand how south america can be in contact with some pacific islands
and how those isalnds can be in contact with other islands to the west
and how those islands can be in contact with the east asian mainland
etc
etc
etc
try not to be so condescending
much of that is already established fact

the orkneys for instance were colonised from scandanavia
the evidence for that is everywhere
but you don't see anyone stating it publically in literature yet unless you get off your ass and look for yourself
theres a lovely picture in a 3200 year old orkney tomb that has what are later known only as pictish symbols on it
http://www.orkneydigs.org.uk/dhl/papers/index.html
but people who read the current established orthodox truth don't know about that
because by the time it filters down to them its already out of date

so heres my point
my research is current and ongoing
your experts who you call upon for your translations are out of date
which is why they were wrong

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Sun Sep 17, 2006 10:41 am

http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20060916/fob2.asp

The scientists regard the marks inscribed in the stone as script because they include 28 distinctive elements, such as signs depicting maize, parallel sets of eyes, and an animal skin. These signs appear in sequences that run across the block

More news from Archaeologica News.

DougWeller · Post by **DougWeller** » Sun Sep 17, 2006 10:42 am

Marduk, your behaviour is disgusting.
You obviously get a kick out of insulting people, but I don't.

Doug

DougWeller · Post by **DougWeller** » Sun Sep 17, 2006 12:48 pm

marduk wrote:
Marduk, your behaviour is disgusting.
You obviously get a kick out of insulting people, but I don't.
I was responding to your insults Douglas

hate being proved wrong don't you
dangerous case of Narcissism there
if you check you'll see that I didn't insult you once in the last post
so you're fabricating that I did
you need help
claiming my behaviour is disgusting is a clear sign that you have some sort of mental problem. everything I said is true and can be proven quite easily
if you can't discuss things rationally without resorting to throwing insults then don't bother

and I'm quite sure that this has nothing to do with Katherine Reece telling you to shut up either right
laughable

I didn't say you insulted me then or that you insulted me. I said 'people'. But you have, true to form, insulted me now. Talking about people's personal problems the way you just did is disgusting. And now it's me with the mental problem.

You regularly insult people, you can't deny that. You've just insulted me in another thread.

Kat was talking about you by the way. If she wanted me to do something she'd tell me directly.

Doug