THE CASE OF
THE ? ? ?
?
ASTRONOMER
This is a sequel to the previous case, that
of the Misplaced Teapot, in which I reported the challenge, in Sky &
Telescope magazine, to my assertion that the depiction on a 4,500 year-old
Mesopotamian cylinder seal (Berlin Museum VA./243) shows
our solar system with the sun in the center and ALL the planets
we know of today, plus one more -- NIBIRU, the home planet of the
Anunnaki.
What the magazine’s article (by Dr. E.
C. Krupp) and artwork (see previous
entry on this website) argued in essence was that this central piece
of evidence by me in my book The Twelfth Planet (1976) is no evidence
at all, because this depiction shows the planet Jupiter (known to the ancients)
passing within the central portion (the “teapot”) of the constellation
Sagittarius (also known in antiquity). Hence: No
extraordinary knowledge, No extraterrestrial teachers, No Anunnaki, No 12th
planet...
But Jupiter,
orbiting the Sun almost precisely in the ecliptic, NEVER moves 11-12 degrees
south to appear in the Teapot!
Hence, No alternative interpretation, and No toppling of this piece
of evidence (one of hundreds of textual and pictorial ancient data in support
of the Sumerian extraordinary knowledge and the Nibiru/Anunnaki
explanation).
After several
fruitless letters and faxes to Sky & Telescope seeking a correction
and an admission of their error, I received a two page letter from Dr. E.C.
Krupp, signed by him with his title Director on official stationery of the
Griffith Observatory, Los Angeles, dated 4 August
2000. It explains that my letter to the magazine was forwarded
to him, but his response was delayed due to absence in Iran.
And what does
the distinguished astronomer say? I quote:
“It is a
delight to hear from you. I
have all of your books, have read most of them, and have listened to you
on the radio a couple of times. I
have of course dedicated thought to the arguments you have
developed. Although your handling
of the data has inspired my skepticism, please let me acknowledge the courtesy
and logic of your complaint about the way I evaluated your Twelfth Planet
notions in my monthly column on astronomy and culture in Sky &
Telescope.”
Well, well –
but what about the impossibility of his assertion of Jupiter being in the
Teapot of Sagittarius? Finally,
the “operative” paragraph:
“You are
correct to point out that I was hasty in offering Sagittarius as an option
for the imagery on the Akkadian cylinder seal
VA/243. Certainly we cannot
regard the figure as an accurate map of the Teapot with Jupiter brewing
inside.”
So, was the
distinguished astronomer “hasty” and not actually plain
wrong? The letter continues:
“If you’ll allow me Saturn, we get a little closer, but
you are right – no tea caddied
planet. My caption highlights
Jupiter, positions it within Sagittarius, and suggests a real
mapping. Your objection is
sustained” (emphasis added).
Does, then, an apology
follow? Not at all, because
the letter continues:
“Of course, there are other candidates
among the stars. A planet could have been in the vicinity of Leo, for example,
enclosed by Regulus, gamma Leonis, zeta Leonis, epsilon Leonis, alpha Cancri,
38 Cancri, delta Cancri, zeta Hydrae, epsilon Hydrae, and iota
Hydra. Given the lack of precision
on the cylinder seal, that set of stars works pretty
well. If they be unacceptable,
however, we can alternatively imagine a planet in a larger
enclosure”...
After jumping from Jupiter to Saturn, and from
Sagittarius to Leo to Regulus to Cancer, the letter to me offers still other
stars in various constellations as alternatives...
But what about the obvious alternative,
that the depiction indeed represents our solar
system? That, in spite of all,
is not an alternative for Dr.
Krupp.
In my respectful response to Dr. Krupp, I
wrote:
“It truly chagrins me that someone like
you, in searching for explanations for the seal’s depictions (you list
some of the most improbable ones in your letter), would not even consider
our solar system as a possibility.
This can only stem from an absolute refusal to accept the Extraterrestrial
nature of the Anunnaki. But
why would someone – I am sure you are included – who would deem
it possible that Man from Earth would one day travel to another planet, deem
it totally unacceptable that someone from another planet might have come
here? If not scientific but
religious objections lie therein, please read my dialogue with a Vatican
theologian on my website SITCHIN.com.
(Dialogue
in Bellaria)
And I signed
my letter: “Looking forward to a dialogue with you.”
As of this date (September 26th), there has
been no response from the magazine to my request for a correction, the
publication of my letter to them in the Letters to the Editor column, or
for the acceptance of an article from me: and no further communication from
Dr. E.C. Krupp – whom I have quoted with respect in my book The Lost
Realms – and whose attitude I could not define in the heading of
this article: Should the missing
word in the title be “Wrong”, “Embarrassed”,
“Reluctant”, or (in his own words) just "Hasty”?
Zecharia
Sitchin
September 2000
Reproduction is permitted if accompanied by the
statement:
© Z. Sitchin 2000
Reproduced by permission.
