Archive for September, 2021

Final conclusion.H symbols on Gobekli Tepe.

September 26, 2021

H symbol is a rare sign from petroglyphs along ages onward.


It is coming to surface only from prehistory, much frequently in later time, when was used in writing. Weird enough it is appearing frequently on T-pillars at Gobekli Tepe in two shapes, H and I. From Wayne Herschel paper

If you try to find a source of inspiration for H sign oŕigin from Earth and Sky will be very hard to find one, especially in such deep past. Could not be a phosphene or instant-out of one’s mind. There were other proposals and explanations for H signs at Gobekli Tepe: – As beeing a pair, two united humans; – H composed of two T-signs(Ray Urbaniak). – This one ăbove, in my view mean two T=me signs, me-me (under+above=cosmos). – The “H”-shaped Luwian symbol is the logogram for PORTA (“gate”; Petra Goedegebuure, personal communication).

Not so many fellows know that the ancestor of latin/greek H letter were folowing signs: – linear elamite signs da,
  • – Old chinese sun/moon ideograms,
  • Linear A sign Pa3
  • Luwian sign porta/door
  • And canaanite-phoenician-old hebrew cheth/heth.

And all theese having in their turn (maybe? I hypothesise) at the origin the sumerian proto-cuneiform sign Ku.

H, Heth and Ku all have the same blueprint/sketch, depending how one is uniting 6 points.


—— But what is much important is the fact that this is the sqetch of the shape of the Orion constellation.This “ladder”-like shape is linked in Egyptian lore with heaven/future life From “Through the hope of new life after death, Osiris began to be associated with the cycles observed in nature, in particular vegetation and the annual flooding of the Nile, through his links with the heliacal rising of Orion and Sirius at the start of the new year.” In old chinese writing is linked with shiny and light.(see the old shape of sun and moon ideograms).Not to pass unnoticed the ‘above’ and ‘under’ ideograms wich are half of a H sign! ——- No wonder that H/Ku shape appeared in PPNA culture of Gobekli Tepe in two instances: as H symbols on pillars and as Ku/Ladder/gate signs in so called port-holes. › 2017/03/20

———- No matter what was first: Biggest on sky, Orion constellation; sumerian Ur “light” (Uru-An-Na, light of heaven),or some ancient sign for door,gate/gateway ========

From › in-plain-sight-…In Plain Sight: The identity of the Twin Pillars of Göbekli Tepe “I venture that, as with the “O” and the “C,” the “H” also represents a celestial figure, and furthermore that a likely candidate would be Orion — a highly visible and widely recognized constellation. Orion can be visualized as an “H.” A row of three bright stars, the readily identifiable “Orion’s belt,” would constitute the crosspiece, with the four most brilliant stars in the constellation serving in pairs as the uprights, forming, roughly in parallel, two imaginary straight lines.There have been a number of technical interpretations of celestial configurations having to do with Göbekli Tepe, many with respect to the positioning of the structures themselves in relation to heavenly events. These have support in the orientation of Stonehenge and other Stone Age monuments in respect to the solstices. My finding the “H” of the moon emblem to stand for Orion is of a different sort, but it does present a perplexity having to do with the time and place of the observer. As it happens, owing to the precession of the equinoxes, in 9000 BC Orion would have been visible in the southern sky at Göbekli Tepe only from the belt up. This, need not necessarily, however, stand in the way of the interpretation. The constellation would have been visible in full in southern Mesopotamia. And there had come into play in the late Upper Paleolithic and Neolithic high levels of intergroup communication and interchange over the whole of the region: “This was a highly connected world. There were multiple channels of communication along which a symbolic repertoire could have spread and been renewed” (Hodder and Meskell, 2011, p. 259). It is therefore by no means implausible that the constellation in full might have become a fixture in the human imagination throughout the region, even though Orion was visible in full in only part of it. Moreover, such a bright and distinctive figure in the night sky as Orion would invite interpretation. Consider that someone today, looking up at Orion, would not, without its being in some way explained, readily conjure up the image of a mighty hunter. That the constellation is seen as such, however, supplies a further ground for the idea of Orion here: Orion is portrayed in myth as a hunting companion of the Great other goddess Artemis — whose emblem was the crescent moon — and who was also goddess of the hunt. Another notably bright star, Sirius, is directly associated with Orion, appearing in a straight line from Orion’s distinctive belt. Called the “Dog Star,” it is linked in legend with Orion as one of his hunting dogs. All taken, these connections should warrant a provisional treatment of the “H” as a symbol for Orion, at least until a surer explanation might present itself. The crescent of the moon newly rising before dawn is oriented toward the eastern horizon from which it arises, as might be a bow bent to send an arrow back in that direction. By contrast, the bow of the crescent of the waxing moon seen before sunset points in the opposite direction, toward the western horizon into which it sinks. The two “C’s” framing the “H” figure on the belt of the moon pillar would accurately replicate, therefore, the positioning of an astral figure such as Orion — or another, the Milky Way, for instance — as standing between the opposed crescents as they might be pondered at break of day and at dusk by ancient scanners of the night sky.”

eugenrau: Related to Orion visibility extension, Kebaran and Natufian cultures extended mainly in southern Mesopotamia. From Gobekli Tepe and rebirth of Sirius

THE PROTOTYPE OF SUMERIAN, OLD CHINESE, PHOENICIAN, LINEAR A AND ALL H-LIKE SIGNS (WICH MENT SHINE, LIGT) IS TO BE FOUND AT GOBEKLI TEPE 9,600 B.C. ! Related to the purpose and meaning of the sign, I suppose that: – was used in death, ancestor cult rituals (seelenloch=soul-hole;see temple portholes) and possible in astronomy/calendrics. – the exact meaning was possible already fergotten even then.At least was not a name for Orion. If guess a meaning of the sign, this could be: “shiny, light”…(heaven gate?) As Gobekli Tepe hunter-gatherers practiced sky burial, it is natural to expect they sought afterlife in the sky. Orion, the biggest visible constellation could have been the gateway, portal through they needed to pass.

Documentation “Gula, also known as Ninkarrak, was the goddess of healing as well as the patroness of doctors. She was known by many names including Nintinuga, Meme, Ninkarrak, Ninisina, and ‘the lady of Isin’, which were originally the names of various other goddesses.”

Göbekli Tepe, the power of life, the will to live.

September 22, 2021

There were a number of ideas and proposals regarding the role and purpose of the Gobekli Tepe cult complex and the significance of the T-pillars. I also searched trying to understand the meaning of the T-shaped pillars, sinthesysed as follows: – the pillars have the shape of Tau-cross or capital letter T. – the sign T had in the Sumerian (proto-cuneiform) writing, a complex meaning, summarized in the word Me: “divine powers”. – Russian schollar V. Yemelianov showed that the etymology of the word Me leads to the end meaning of “will to live” – ​​My conclusion was that the T-shaped pillars, (and maybe even the small stone statuettes), mean “power, spirit, essence of life” . The stone pillars were the house where the spirit of life lived. Proof that there is a real chance that my hypothesis will be confirmed is found in the old religion of the Maori people in New Zealand. From << Mauri 1. (noun) principle of life, life force, vital essence, special nature, material symbol of a principle of life, source of emotions – the quality and essential vitality of a being or entity. It is also used for a physical object, individual, ecosystem or social group in which this essence is located. >> From a previous post of mine: Regarding the T-shaped pillars, “anthropomorphic” is perhaps a little too much for the name. Because the T-pillars did not represent a deity or a man. The people of Gobekli Tepe were animists. In general, temples are houses of the gods. The shape of the pillars is abstract, because it is a house, temple and not the divinity itself. At the same time it is temple and spirit, idol. A stone idol that is inhabited by a spirit, so largely “alive”. From › booksMythical Stone “It is not the stones per se that are worshipped in these cases, but the spirits inhabiting them.”

From Mauri, mana and nature as an ancestor – Sustainable … https: // ›SBN News << Mana refers to an extraordinary power, essence, presence and charisma. It is an ever-present energy and applies to humans, the cosmos and the natural world. When this supernatural force is allowed to flow, all life is improved and invigorated. However, without the Mauri/ life force, the hand cannot flow into a person or object. Mauri is the energy of life that connects and animates all things in the physical world. Without Mauri or the essence of life, the hand cannot flow into a person or object. The actions we take can improve or diminish the Mauri in the same way that caring for our health improves and neglects our health, degrades it. >> From << Te Ara Mauri stone – Te ngahere – forest lore – Te Ara Encyclopedia of New Zealand This Moorish stone was found on Moutohorā (Whale Island) in the Gulf of Plenty. Māori believed that the principle of life or the mauri of a forest, tree or waterway could be concentrated in a stone or other object of protection. >>

Mauri stone – Te ngahere – forest lore – Te Ara Encyclopedia of New Zealand

From << This Moorish stone depicts Horoirangi, a female ancestor from the Rotorua area. It was believed that such stones kept the Mauri (life force) in the areas that provided food. Horoirangi was dug into a rock to preserve the fertility of her people’s lands. The stone was later removed from the rock so that it would not be stolen. >>

Mauri stone – Kaitiakitanga – guardianship and conservation – Te Ara  Encyclopedia of New Zealand

From << A stone Mauri, probably placed by cultivating sweet potatoes or groups of trees in the forest, to maintain the life force of the plants >>

A stone mauri, probably placed by growing sweet-potatoes, or groups of  forest trees, to hold the life-force of the plants Stock Photo - Alamy

From Gobekli Tepe:

Wayne Herschel - Author - The Hidden Records - discovered 35 ancient star  map cases around the world showing human origins from one of three sun  stars near the Pleiades

… see same position of the hands on belly.. From Quora Is Gobekli Tepe older than Jericho? – Quora

Is Gobekli Tepe older than Jericho? - Quora

From Ancient OriginsGöbekli Tepe Shamans and their Cosmic Symbols – Part I | Ancient Origins

Göbekli Tepe Shamans and their Cosmic Symbols – Part I | Ancient Origins
Mauri (Stone Talisman)
Mauri Stones – Lux Deluxe

At Gobekli Tepe :

First Pictorial Representation of Gobekli Tepe Found | Ancient Origins |  Ancient aliens, Ancient civilizations, Ancient humans

From Gobekli Tepe Pillar 43 – Vulture Stone



Losing your head at Göbekli Tepe | The Tepe Telegrams

Göbekli Tepe, puterea vietii, vointa de a trai.

September 21, 2021

Au existat o serie de idei si propuneri privind rolul si scopul complexului cultic de la Gobekli Tepe si a semnificatiei pilonilor T. Am cercetat si eu incercand sa deslusesc semnificatia stalpilor in forma de T. Am facut o serie de observatii si cercetari rezumate in pasii dupa cum urmeaza: – pilonii au forma crucii Tau sau literei T . – semnul T a avut in scrierea sumeriana, o semnificatie complexa, rezumata la Me: “puterile divine“. – Cercetatorul rus V.Yemelianov a aratat ca etimologia cuvantului Me conduce la intelesul “vointa de a trai” – Concluzia mea a fost ca pilonii in forma de T , dar poate si micile statuete de piatra, semnifica “puterea, spiritul, esenta vietii“. Pilonii de piatra au fost casa in care salasluia spiritul vietii. Dovada ca sunt sanse reale ca ipoteza mea sa se confirme se gaseste in vechea religie a poporului maori din Noua Zeelanda. Din << mauri 1.  (substantiv) principiu de viață, forță de viață, esență vitală, natură specială, simbol material al unui principiu de viață, sursă de emoții – calitatea și vitalitatea esențială a unei ființe sau entități. De asemenea, este utilizat pentru un obiect fizic, individual, ecosistem sau grup social în care se află această esență.>> Dintr-o postare de-a mea anterioara: În ceea ce privește stâlpii în formă de T, „antropomorf” este poate puțin prea mult pentru denumire. Deoarece stâlpii în T nu reprezentau o divinitate sau un om. Oamenii Gobekli Tepe-ului erau animiști. in general, templele sunt case ale zeilor. Forma pilonilor este abstractă, deoarece este un templu și nu divinitatea în sine. În același timp templu și spirit, idol. Un idol de piatră care este locuit de un spirit, deci în mare măsură viu . Din › booksMythical Stone “Nu pietrele per se sunt venerate in aceste cazuri, ci spiritele pe care le salasluiesc. “

Din Mauri, mana and nature as an ancestor – Sustainable … › SBN News <<Mana se referă la o putere, esență, prezență și carismă extraordinare. Este o energie mereu prezentă și se aplică oamenilor, cosmosului și lumii naturale. Când această forță supranaturală este lăsată să curgă, toată viața este îmbunătățită și revigorată. Cu toate acestea, fără mauri / forța vieții, mana nu poate curge într-o persoană sau obiect. Mauri este energia vieții care leagă și animă toate lucrurile din lumea fizică. Fără mauri sau esența vieții, mana nu poate curge într-o persoană sau obiect. Acțiunile pe care le întreprindem pot îmbunătăți sau diminua mauri în același mod în care grija pentru sănătatea noastră o îmbunătățește și ne neglijează sănătatea, o degradează.>>

Din << Te AraMauri stone – Te ngahere – forest lore – Te Ara Encyclopedia of New Zealand Această piatră mauri a fost găsită pe Moutohorā (Insula Balenelor) în Golful Plenty. Māori credeau că principiul vieții sau mauriul unei păduri, copaci sau căi navigabile ar putea fi concentrat într-o piatră sau alt obiect de protecție.>>

Mauri stone – Te ngahere – forest lore – Te Ara Encyclopedia of New Zealand


Din << Această piatră de mauri îl înfățișează pe Horoirangi, un strămoș feminin din zona Rotorua. Se credea că astfel de pietre mențin mauri (forța vieții) în zonele care furnizau hrană. Horoirangi a fost săpată într-o stâncă pentru a păstra fertilitatea ținuturilor poporului ei. Mai târziu piatra a fost scoasă de pe stâncă, astfel încât să nu fie furată. >>

Mauri stone – Kaitiakitanga – guardianship and conservation – Te Ara  Encyclopedia of New Zealand

Din << Un mauri de piatră, probabil plasat prin cultivarea de cartofi dulci sau grupuri de copaci din pădure, pentru a menține forța vieții plantelor>>

A stone mauri, probably placed by growing sweet-potatoes, or groups of  forest trees, to hold the life-force of the plants Stock Photo - Alamy

—————– De la Gobekli Tepe: Din

See the same hands position on belly as on mauri stone. Din Quora Is Gobekli Tepe older than Jericho? – Quora

Wayne Herschel - Author - The Hidden Records - discovered 35 ancient star  map cases around the world showing human origins from one of three sun  stars near the Pleiades
Is Gobekli Tepe older than Jericho? - Quora

Din Ancient OriginsGöbekli Tepe Shamans and their Cosmic Symbols – Part I | Ancient Origins

Göbekli Tepe Shamans and their Cosmic Symbols – Part I | Ancient Origins

Mauri (Stone Talisman)
Mauri Stones – Lux Deluxe

—— Gobekli Tepe:

First Pictorial Representation of Gobekli Tepe Found | Ancient Origins |  Ancient aliens, Ancient civilizations, Ancient humans

Din Gobekli Tepe Pillar 43 – Vulture Stone



Losing your head at Göbekli Tepe | The Tepe Telegrams

Revederea vârstei și autenticității tabletelor Tartaria.

September 16, 2021

Chiar eram pe punctul de a scrie un articol cu intentia de a demonstra ca autenticitatea tabletelor de la Tartaria nu se susține, având mai mult de 50 de argumente pentru aceasta, contra numai 10 împotrivă. Dar recitind articolul profesorului iesean Attila Laslo: “Cui bono? Gândul pentru reconsiderarea tabletelor de la Tartaria” în care acesta răspunde acuzațiilor asiriologului Erika Qasim cu privire la arheologi și tabletele în sine.   Qasim, Erika: Die Tărtăria-Täfelchen – eine Neubewertung. In: Das Altertum, ISSN 0002-6646, vol.58, 4 (2013),p. 307–318 Vedeti: ACADEMIE ROUMAINE INSTITUT D’ARCHEOLOGIE « V. PARVAN » DACIA REVUE D’ARCHEOLOGIE ET D’HISTOIRE ANCIENNE NOUVELLE SÉRIE LX 2016 Cui bono? THOUGHTS ABOUT A “RECONSIDERATION” OF THE TĂRTĂRIA TABLETS ATTILA LÁSZLÓ* › …PDF Rezultate de pe web of the Tărtăria tablets – Dacia

Pasajele (dintre cele referitoare la semne) care m-au convins: << În opinia ei (Masson, E. 1984 L ‘écriture dans les civilisations danubiennes néolithiques. Kadmos 23, 2, 89-123. Berlin & New York.), <<…chiar dacă locația, data și condițiile descoperirii tabletelor rămâne nesigura până la clarificări suplimentare, examinarea atentă a tabletelor, existența urmelor de uzura pe suprafața lor, de exemplu, atestă faptul că nu erau falsuri: „… Pe tabletele 1 și 2, observăm semne speciale de uzură, părți ale semnelor puțin decolorate sau frecvente fisuri în jurul gravurilor. Astfel de fenomene mărturisesc vechimea; dacă ar fi falsuri, fabricarea lor ar fi atribuită unui mare expert în domeniu, în același timp o înțelegere fină a scrierilor arhaice pe care România nu le are la cunoștința mea ”53. Un alt fapt poate fi adăugat la aceste observații: în cazul unui fals, falsificatorul s-ar fi străduit să producă un obiect cât mai fidel posibil modelului mesopotamian pe care dorea să-l imite, ar fi avut grijă să aleagă materie primă de calitate, și să respecte formatul tabletelor (care nu ar fi trebuit perforate și arse), să aplice tehnicile de scriere corespunzătoare (prin impresie) și să reproducă unele dintre cele mai caracteristice semne. De asemenea, el ar fi avut grijă să asigure documentația de excavare adecvată pentru a preveni suspiciuni ulterioare cu privire la circumstanțele descoperirii.
Dincolo de aceste argumente logice, observațiile de fapt care atestă autenticitatea (caracterul antic) al
tabletelor, dintre care unele au fost deja menționate mai sus, sunt decisive. De asemenea, trebuie remarcat faptul că existența unei acoperiri calcaroase pe suprafața tabletelor, care a trebuit îndepărtată pentru a face vizibile semnele, a fost o dovadă reală a faptului că obiectele au rămas sub pământ o suficienta de lunga perioada, de timp pentru a putea forma acumularea de calcar. ….. Până la efectuarea unor astfel de analize, observația rezultată din investigațiile microscopice recente pe suprafața tabletelor, conform căreia, în conturul canelat al unora dintre semnele de pe tablete, s-au găsit urme de sol, rămâne decisiv: „Examinarea atentă a tabletelor indică rămășițe de
sol în conturul mai multor semne
[…] Solul amestecat cu roci și minerale poate proveni doar din groapa ritualică. Acesta este un alt element faptic în favoarea afirmației privind autenticitatea artefactelor inscripționate. Prezența solului încapsulat exclude acuzațiile că sunt un fals modern neidentificat de N. Vlassa sau doar un „joc” al descoperitorului ” (sublinierea mea, A. L.). >> eugenrau: A. Laszlo a fost prezent la săpături chiar în ziua în care au fost găsite tablete, dar ciudat, total inexplicabil, nu le-a văzut (!?). Argumentele sale din articolul Qui bono? ….. mi-au schimbat din nou părerea și m-au convins că tabletele nu sunt contrafăcute. (M-am răzgândit înainte, alternativ de mai multe ori, pana a fi convins ca tablitele sunt autentice și nu contrafăcute.) Ca sa fiu sincer, articolul său ar putea fi în principal o reacție reflexă de aparare. Pentru apărarea și susținerea întregii activități a arheologilor participanti atunci la sapaturile sitului Tartaria-Lunca, lucrări care au fost criticate fără milă și au fost avansate grave acuzații.Tabletele nu sunt contrafăcute, dar în același timp nu sunt sumeriene originale, foarte vechi. Tabletele sunt reale, au fost inscriptionate de cineva și în această perspectivă sunt „autentice”. De obicei, un scrib folosea de obicei semnele folosite uzual în timpul și zona sa, ceea ce cu siguranță nu este cazul aici. Dar vă voi arăta dovezile că tablitele nu sunt mai vechi de 2.000 î.e.n. ! Un scrib nu poate nici cunoaște și nici utiliza la un moment dat semne care au fost inventate sute de ani mai târziu. ! … Cum este cazul aici, unde pe tableta rotundă, întregul rând superior conține semne surprinzator de noi : pe partea stângă, un tip de H (o scară cu 3 trepte) și în dreapta, unele D-uri și O-uri. ————- Semne cu exact această formă nu exista printre semnele proto-cuneiforme sumeriene. Sumerienii foloseau semnul proto-cuneiform Ku care are o formă „încasetata”. Din From

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is image-13.png

Semnul următor este GAR, adică ninda = “rație, pâine”

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is image-14.png

———- Deci, dacă consideram ca avem de-a face cu tablete de factura sumeriana, aceste semne nu ar trebui să fie prezente pe tablete. Rețineți faptul că pe tablita, „H” are o formă „deschisă” și bare verticale decalate, iar D este litera noastră /latina de tipar D.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is image-10.png

Prima oara acest semn “H” apare exact în aceeași formă în scrierile hieroglifica Cretana și Lineare A si B (2.000 î.Hr. ca semn Pa3) și mai târziu în vechea scriere canaanita/ feniciana, ca semn Cheth / Heth (1.500 î.Hr.).

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is image-1.png
This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is image-7.png
Above, Linear A sign PA3
This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is image-11.png

Privitor la semne cu forma D, cel mai vechi semn cu forma asemanatoare este:

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is image-4.png
Comparați semnul cuneiform ninda, o logogramă care reprezintă cuvântul sumerian pentru „mâncare” sau „pâine”. Prima imagine este de ninda într-o tabletă din Ur ~ 3000 î.Hr., în timp ce celelalte sunt de ninda într-un fragment al unui text medical din Ninive ~ 650 î.Hr. Mare diferență.

Unii cercetători au spus că „scribul” a imitat semnele sumeriene pentru numere (A.Falkenstein: D = 1 și o = 10), iar alții au spus că semnele D imita reprezentarea rațiilor, pâinilor sau ca secventa DDoc reprezinta fazele lunii (M.Merlini).

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is image-2.png
Khirbet Qeiyafa Ostracon (Iron Age I–II transition) 10 century B.C.
This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is image-3.png

Oricum, scribul cunostea bine semnele care se foloseau deja în jurul său, nu trebuia să inventeze niciunul dintre aceste semne asa, instantaneu „pe loc”. Semnul D a fost folosit pentru litere (D si R) mai târziu în greacă arhaică (850 î.e.n.) și puțin mai târziu in alfabetele Anatoliene. Din Chapter 8 Europe-II – The Unicode Standard, Version 13.0 << Vechile alfabete anatoliene Lycian, Carian și Lydian datează toate din primul mileniu î.e.n. și au fost folosite pentru a scrie diferite limbi indo-europene antice din vestul și sud-vestul Anatoliei >> ———– Deci, semnele de pe tablete nu trebuie să aibă o origine obligatoriu sumeriană și nici scribul să fie un sumerian nativ. Pentru ca altfel, multe din semnele de pe tablete pot fi găsite în toate scrierile Egeene și în scrierile Anatoliene. Deci, locul și timpul originii ar putea fi mai degrabă zona Egee (Creta? 2.000 -500 î.e.n.) sau Anatolia. (200 î.e.n.-500 d.Hr.)

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is image-5.png

AVEM MULTE SEMNE PE TABLETE DIN ALFABETELE ARHAICE GRECEȘTI ȘI ANATOLIENE, INCLUSIV FOARTE PROBLEMATICE, AMBELE SEMNE H si D ! Mă întreb dacă unele pictograme și ideograme (de origine sumeriană) ar fi putut fi transmise de-alungul timpurilor, chiar cu semnificații pierdute dar poate utilizate în ritualuri?

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is image-12.png IMG_1895low.jpg

———— Dacă nu luam semnele „H” și D-s ca fiind arhaice Grecești sau Anatoliene, ci ca semne ce le imita pe cele proto-cuneiforme sumeriene, atunci întregul conținut al tabletelor pare pe de-antregul sumerian. De aceea savanții A.Falkenstein, A.A.Vaiman și R.Kolev le-au interpretat ca si cum ar fi sumeriene. Primii doi, au realizat de la bun inceput că scribul este ezitant, iar semnele nu sunt sumeriene propriu-zis, ci ca-si-sumeriene. Chiar și titlul uneia din lucrări expliciteaza acest aspect: ›izdaniya-1Археологические вести. Спб, 1994. Вып. 3. Аннотации.A. A. Vaiman. On the Quasi-Sumerian tablets from Tartaria. Cu această înțelegere au interpretat tabletele ca fiind sumeriene. A. Falkenstein a remarcat faptul că unele semne nu sunt exact precum cele proto-cuneiforme, ci doar imitat-sumeriene, asemănător-sumeriene. Semnele proto-cuneiforme sumeriene au fost utilizate pentru o perioadă de timp relativ scurtă (3.500-3.000 î.Hr.), apoi de la 3.000 î.Hr. până în 1935 niciun ochi uman nu le-a văzut. Pentru că au stat ascunse privirii, îngropate la câțiva metri sub pământ (sub templu Eanna, Uruk). Astfel, difuzarea acestor semne a fost cumva limitată. Vedeti expansiunea culturii Uruk: Pe harta se vede ca cultura Uruk, descoperitoarea scrisului, nu s-a extins pana in interiorul Anatoliei ori ariei Egeene. ——- Scribul cu siguranță nu era sumerian, mai degrabă negustor din Marea Egee sau Anatolia, (…sau poate cineva dintr-un loc foarte apropiat ?). Falkenstein si Vaiman dar si eu, toti am constatat ca interpretarea semnelor nu conduce la un mesaj consistent; unele semnificații sunt unice, semnificatia reieșind din semnele în sine. – Nu am nicio explicație pentru intenția scribului de a arăta semne asemănătoare celor sumeriene. Sau: – Nu voi înțelege niciodată motivația, ce l-a determinat, ambitia scribului de a arăta cuiva cum a evoluat scrisul de-a lungul timpului sau să arate câte semne sumeriene știe. ——– Am căutat în amanunt, suspectand o multime de persoane, continuand să cercetez în detaliu, și după ce le-am tot cantarit, am ajuns în cele din urmă la aceeași concluzie cu Emilia Masson: „Dacă ar fi fost falsuri, fabricarea lor ar fi fost atribuită unui mare expert în domeniu. , în același timp, un bun cunoscător al scrierilor arhaice pe care, după știința mea, România nu ii are „ eugenrau: … Dacă am cauta cai verzi pe pereti, atunci desigur, putem vedea inclusiv fazele lunii, dar un epigrafist trebuie să respecte niste principii si reguli și să caute semne apartinand unor sisteme de scriere. Așa cum au si făcut în mod firesc savantii Adam Falkenstein și Aizik Abramovich Vaiman.


September 14, 2021

To see how powerful and extended is demic and cultural difussion, I bring it to your attention the sumerian proto-cuneiform sign “ladder with 3 rungs”, Ku: “shine of metals, sacred,silver, precious metal, noble..”

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is image-6.png

wich was probably at the origin of other signs: minoan/linear B sign for bronze

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is image-8.png

 From;                      *140 [] AES bronze/copper ,and chinese signs for sun/moon:

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is image-9.png

Note: Our “ladder” sign on Tartaria round tablet has exact PA3/ cheth shape and not sumerian proto-cuneiform sign Ku shape.Using that sign, the scribe disclosed (intentionally or not) that not used sumerian 3.000B.C. sign(s).

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is image-10.png › japan › j…Japan in Japanese: Nihon · にほん · 日本 | East Asia StudentSo that’s how you write the ni from Nihon in hiragana. … This character

literally means ‘sun’.

? ? ? ? ? ? ?

From › 2017/03/20 Guarded by beasts: a porthole stone from Göbekli Tepe

Göbekli Tepe. A monumental porthole stone from the northwestern hilltop areas (Photo O. Dietrich).

? ? ? ? ? ? ?

Review the age and authenticity of Tartaria tablets.

September 13, 2021

I was about to write an article in order to finaly prove that the authenticity of the Tartaria tablets is not supported, having more than 50 arguments to sustain this, with some 10 against. But I re-read Attila Laslos article: “Cui bono?Thought about reconsideration of Tartaria tablets” in wich he responded to assyoriologist Erika Qasim accusations regarding the archaeologists and tablets itself.   Qasim, Erika: Die Tărtăria-Täfelchen – eine Neubewertung. In: Das Altertum, ISSN 0002-6646, vol.58, 4 (2013),p. 307–318


The passages (out of those regarding the signs) wich convinced me: << In her opinion (Masson, E. 1984 L’ écriture dans les civilisations danubiennes néolithiques. Kadmos 23, 2, 89-123. Berlin & New York. ), <<……even though the location, date and conditions of the discovery of the tablets remain uncertain until further clarifications, the careful examination of the tablets, the existence of the wear traces on their surface, for example, attest to the fact that they were not fakes: “…on observe notamment sur les tablettes 1 et 2 des traces d’usure, des parties de signes un peu effaces ou des fissures fréquentes autour des gravures. De tels fénomènes témoignent en faveur de l’ancienneté ; s’il s’agissait de faux, leur fabrication serait à attributer à un grand expert dans la matière, en même temps fin conaisseur des écritures archaïques qu’à ma conaissance la Roumanie ne possède pas”53. Another fact can be added to these observations: in the case of a fake, the forger would have striven to produce an object as faithfully similar as possible to the Mesopotamian model which he wanted to imitate, would have taken care to choose quality raw material, and to respect the format of the tablets (which should not have been perforated and fired), to apply the corresponding writing techniques (by impression), and to reproduce some of the most characteristic signs. He would also have taken care to ensure the proper excavation documentation in order to prevent later suspicions regarding the circumstances of the discovery.
Beyond these logical arguments, the factual observations attesting to the authenticity (ancient character) of
the tablets, some of which have already been mentioned above, are decisive. It should also be noted that the existence of a calcareous coating on the surface of the tablets, which had to be removed in order to make the signs visible, was an actual proof of the fact that the objects had lain underground for a sufficiently long
period of time to be able to form the lime accumulation.
….. Until such analyses are carried out, the observation resulting from the recent microscopic investigations
on the surface of the tablets, according to which, in the grooved outline of some of the signs on the tablets, traces of soil have been found, remains decisive: “The close examination of the tablets indicates remains of
soil inside the contour of several signs […] The humus mixed with rocks and minerals can only come from the ritual pit‐grave. This is another factual element in favour of the statement concerning the authenticity of the inscribed artefacts. The presence of the encapsulated soil excludes the accusations that they are a modern fake not identified by N. Vlassa, or just a “game” of the discoverer”56 (my underlining, A. L.). >>

A. Laszlo was present at the diggins in the very day in wich tablets were found, but weird, totally unexplained, he did not saw them (!?). His arguments in the article Qui bono?….. turned my opinion again and convinced me that the tablets are not counterfaits. (I changed my mind before many times beeing convinced alternate that are genuine and counterfaits.)To be sincere his article could be mainly an reflex or defensive reaction. To defence and sustain the entire work of archaeologists then in charge at Tartaria site, work wich was criticised without mercy, and were advanced accusations. ————- The tablets are not counterfaits but in the same time not authentic ‘original, very old sumerian.The tablets are real indeed, were inscribed by somebody and in this perspective are “genuine”. Usually an scribe usually used the signs available in his time and area, wich definitely is not the case here.Tablets contain signs used in a large time span and extended area. More than that, there are pure pictographic signs on a tablet, ideograms on another (rectangular drilled) and syllabograms/letters (on that round one).But I will show you the evidence of not beeing older than 2.000 B.C. ! A scribe cannot know and use at a given moment signs wich were invented hundreds years later. ! … Wich is the case here, where on round tablet, entire upper row contain unexpected new signs: on the left side, an H-like (a ladder with 3 rungs) and at the right, some D-s and O-s. These signs with exact this shape not existed in proto-cuneiform by sumerians. ———– Sumerians used the proto-cuneiform Ku sign wich has a “boxed” shape. From

Folowing sign is GAR, meaning ninda = “ration/bread” See › booksTranslation as Scholarship: Language, Writing, and Bilingual …Jay Crisostomo — 2019 · Religion The sign gar, for example, iconically depicted a ration bowl in its original use in the late fourth millennium but …

————- So if we are expecting sumerian-like tablets those signs should not be present on tablets. Keep pleas in mind that “H” has an “open” shape and offset/slanted vertical bars and D is our/latin capital D.

First time this sign apperead in exact same shape for the first time in Cretan hieroglyphics and Linear A (2.000 B.C. as sign Pa3) and later in old canaanite/phoenician, as sign Cheth/Heth (1.500B.C.).
Above, Linear A sign PA3

Above, alphabet_chart_hhet_2.jpg

Regarding D-shaped signs, oldest similar signs (sumerian) are:

Compare the cuneiform sign ninda , a logogram which represents the Sumerian word for “food” or “bread”. The first image is of ninda in a tablet from Ur ~3000 BCE, while the others are of ninda in a fragment of a medical text from Nineveh ~650 BCE. Big difference.

Some scholars said that the “scribe” imitated sumerian signs for numbers (A.Falkenstein: D=1 and o=10) and others said that D’s imitated rations,breads or DDoc are the Moon phases (M.Merlini).

Khirbet Qeiyafa Ostracon (Iron Age I–II transition) 10 century B.C.

Anyway, the scribe knew well that signs, wich allready existed around him, he did not need to invent any of these signs instantly “on the spot“. D sign was used for letters later in archaic Greek (850 B.C.) and a little later Anatolian alphabets.The ladder sign also, for heta/eta by greeks and for e by Anatolians. From Chapter 8 Europe-II – The Unicode Standard, Version 13.0 <<The ancient Anatolian alphabets Lycian, Carian, and Lydian all date from the first millennium bce, and were used to write various ancient Indo-European languages of western and southwestern Anatolia>> ————- So the signs on tablets not must have necessary a sumerian origin, nor the scribe to be a native sumerian. Otherwise many signs on tablets could be found in all Aegean writings and in Anatolian writing.So the place and time of origin could be rather Aegean area (Crete? 2.000 -500 B.C) or Anatolia.(200 B.C-500 A.D.)

FROM ARCHAIC GREEK AND ANATOLIAN ALPHABETS WE HAVE MANY SIGNS ON THE TABLETS AND BOTH VERY PROBLEMATIC H & D SIGNS ! I am asking myself if some pictograms and ideograms (of sumerian origin) could be transmited through ages with lost meanings and used in rituals ? IMG_1895low.jpg

————- If one not take “H” and D-s signs as beeing archaic Greek or Anatolian but imitating sumerian proto-cuneiform signs, then entire tablet’s content appear sumerian-like.That’s why scholars A.Falkenstein, A.A.Vaiman and R.Kolev. First twoo, realised instantly that the writing was not proper sumerian, but sumerian-like. Even the title of a paper explicitated this : › izdaniya-1Археологические вести. Спб, 1994. Вып. 3. Аннотации.A. A. Vaiman. On the Quasi-Sumerian tablets from Tartaria. With this understanding they interpreted tablets as beeing sumerian. A.Falkenstein noted that some signs are not exact like those proto-cuneiform but alike, imitated sumerian, sumerian-like. The proto-cuneiform signs were used for a relatively short period of time (3,500-3,000 BC), then from 3,000 BC until 1935 no human eye saw them. Because they were buried (a few meters underground under Eanna temple, Uruk). Thus, the diffusion of these signs was somehow limited. See Uruk culture expansion: ———– Please see, Uruk culture expansion not reached inner Anatolia or Aegean.The scribe definitely was not sumerian, rather Aegean or Anatolian trader, or even from a much close place. Probably signs interpretation is not conducting to a consistent message; some meanings are single, emerging from the signs itself. – I have no explanation for the scribe intention to show sumerian-like signs. Or: – I will never understand the motivation of the scribe in his ambition to show somebody how writing evolved throughout time, or show (us) how many Sumerian signs he knows. ——– I searched throughly, kept researching in detail and after deep thought, I finally came to the same conclusion as Emilia Masson: “If it was fake, their manufacture would be attributed to a great expert in the field, at the same time a fine connoisseur of archaic writings which to my knowledge Romania does not have ” eugenrau: …If chasing our tails/rainbows of course we can see moon phases, but an epigraphist must follow rules and search for signs of writing. As naturally Adam Falkenstein and Aizik Abramovich Vaiman exactly did.

A.I. + an possible new God ?

September 2, 2021

Recently (in 2021) Elon Musk, on the occasion of announcing the future production of BOT robots, reiterated some of the future implications of artificial intelligence on humanity. In this regard, I have some comments to make.

AI, a possible new divinity/ God ?

He referred to this aspect made statements mainly only related to the future major impact of A.I. on humanity. Thus, he states that no consequences are to be expected in the near future, and the effects will be both positive and negative. It is important that after overcoming the singularity point (level IA = that of human intelligence) it is expected that humanity will enter a period of oscillations, uncertainty and even instability. I also want to refer to that enormous force and impact. As defined:

From Divinity as a quality has two distinct usages:

1. The divine force or power - powers or forces universal or that exceed human capacities
2. The divinity applied to mortals - qualities of individuals who are considered to have a certain access or special relationship with the divine.
AI, is and will be perceived by humans as a force that exceeds human capabilities, and in this acceptance can be an attribute of divinity. There is a tendency that a decision made by a computer (as opposed to that of a human being) should not be subject to doubt or discussion. Then, even if the capabilities were equal, that of AI is overestimated and considered superior. Not to mention that in the future, AI capabilities will far exceed human capabilities.

It is easy to understand, with these definitions and explanations that AI can easily be deified and become a kind of deity.AI, is and will be perceived by humans as a force that exceeds human capabilities, and in this acceptance can be an attribute of divinity. There is a tendency that a decision made by a computer (as opposed to that of a human being) should not be subject to doubt or discussion. Then, even if the capabilities were equal, that of AI is overestimated and considered superior. Not to mention that in the future, AI capabilities will far exceed human capabilities.

RETURNING to some attributes of some primitive societies?

The oldest form of religious manifestation is animism. It also implies the existence of personalities, so kind of "non-human people". That is, entities that are not alive to be perceived as having a soul, a spirit. Be it the mountain, the storm or even the computer. They are perceived as animated by their own spirit. Thus the computer can be perceived extremely easily as an entity with its own spirit, all the more it has thoughts and can make its own decisions. We are not as far away as I will show you. Such as speech comprehension, thinking, and feelings. In fact, some go so far as to perceive their cat or dog as a kind of family member. be perceived as a personality other than human?

Humanoid robots.

Really why humanoids? In modern society we have more and more obese people and the average physical effort is less and less. Thus we can think that due to this aspect there is a tendency of the species to degenerate. Let's make robots like humans, why? The consistent part of human effort today is intellectual in nature, and software companies use AI to eliminate repetitive, automated phases.(E.g. romanian success company UIPath). Otherwise, the so-called physical effort is limited to moving some parts and tools and pressing some buttons. I see these robots as the presence on Earth (after the disappearance of humans) of the old hunter-gatherers of 12,000 years ago. Apart from the humanoid form (I don't see why, should they be familiar to us as relatives?) The eventual human facial conformation will only have the effect of inducing a feeling of strangeness, and even the alienation of people. could have. In the sense that robots are perceived as beings with supernatural abilities, superhumans. Thus they will be able to be idolized, so to become a kind of idol.

What are the bigger chances of extinction of the species: Artificial intelligence or human stupidity?

I know, after overcoming the point of singularity, man can no longer limit or control the level or quality of IA. But as someone rhetorically asks, what will be harder to fight in the future, with the super-intelligence of robots or the classic human stupidity ? Hard to say, I don't have the slightest idea how to make assumptions. That way I can't answer the title question. In fact, it doesn't even matter what we assumed before if one of the variants happens.

Where are we already in the future?

Maybe I will disappoint you a little, in the erotic field. Especially for sex dolls. There are already about 10 companies that produce ultra-realistic reproductions of the human body, equipped with AI capabilities. They can have facial expressions, watch, smile, talk, etc. The culmination is that I found the story of a case in which the husband bought one, has sex with her 3x a week. But also with the wife alternately. The culmination is that the wife knows and agrees with the situation. The problem is actually extreme. Someone might rightly say that reproduction lacks only the soul to be complete if not assimilated, then confused with a human being. But that depends exclusively on the real existence of the soul. And do not feel offended, but it depends on how alienated some of us might be.

A.I. – un posibil nou Dumnezeu ?

September 2, 2021

Recent (in 2021) Elon Musk, cu ocazia anuntarii productiei viitoare a robotilor BOT, a reiterat o parte din implicatiile viitoare ale inteligentei artificiale asupra omenirii. In legatura cu asta, am de facut niste comentarii.

A.I.-o viitoare divinitate/zeitate ?

Dansul a facut referire la acest aspect si in principal a facut doar afirmatii legate de impactul major viitor al A.I. asupra omenirii. Astfel afirma ca nu sunt de asteptat consecinte in viitorul apropiat, iar efectele vor fi atat pozitive cat si negative. Important este ca dupa depasirea punctului de singularitate (nivelul IA=cel al inteligentei umane) este de asteptat ca omenirea sa intre intr-o perioada de oscilatii, incertitudine chiar instabilitate. Eu vreau sa fac referire tot la acea forta si impact enorm. Conform definitiei:Din Divinitatea ca si calitate are doua intrebuintari distincte:

  • 1.Forța sau puterea divină – puteri sau forțe universale sau care depășesc capacitățile umane
  • 2.Divinitatea aplicată muritorilor – calități ale indivizilor despre care se consideră că au un anumit acces sau relație specială cu divinul.

IA, este si va fi perceputa de oameni ca o forta care depaseste capacitatile umane, si in aceasta acceptie poate fi un atribut al divinitatii. Exista tendinta ca o decizie luata de un computer (spre deosebire de aceea a unui om) sa nu fie supusa indoielii si nici discutiei. Apoi chiar daca capacitatile ar fi egale, aceea a IA este supraestimata si considerata superioara.Aceasta se intampla pentru ca oamenii considera ca judecata computerului este neutra !Nemaivorbind ca in viitor, capacitatile IA le vor depasi enorm de mult pe cele umane.

Este usor de inteles, cu aceste definitii si explicatii ca IA poate fi usor divinizata si robotul deveni un gen de divinitate.

Revenirea la unele atribute ale unor societati primitive ?

Cea mai veche forma de manifestare religioasa este animismul. Acesta presupune inafara de oameni si animale si existenta inca a altor personalitati, deci gen de “persoane neumane”. Adica entitati care nu sunt vii sa fie percepute ca avand suflet, spirit. Fie cestea munte, furtuna sau chiar calculator. Ele sunt percepute ca fiind animate de un spirit propriu. Astfel computerul poate fi perceput extrem de usor ca o entitate cu un spirit propriu cu atat mai mult cu cat gandeste si poate lua propriile decizii.Nici acum nu suntem tocmai departe dupa cum va voi arata.Unii dintre ubitorii de animale de companie atribuie animalelor lor calitati umane.Cum ar fi intelegerea vorbirii, gandire si sentimente.De fapt unii merg atat de departe incat isi percep pisica sau caiinele ca un fel de membru de familie.Atunci ce sa ne miram ca un computer care “gandeste” si ia decizii autonom nu ar fi perceput ca o personalitate, alta decat omeneasca ?

Roboti umanoizi.

Chiar de ce umanoizi ? In societatea moderna avem tot mai multi obezi iar efortul fizic mediu este din ce in ce mai mic. Astfel ne putem gandi ca datorita acestui aspect exista o tendinta de degenerescents a speciei. Sa facem roboti asemanatori oamenilor, de ce? Partea consistenta a efortului omenesc este astazi de natura intelectuala, iar firmele de soft folosesc IA pentru a elimina fazele cu caracter de automatism, repetitive. (Vezi firma romaneasca de succes UIPath).Altfel asa-zisul efort fizic se rezuma la deplasarea unor piese si unelte si apasarea unor butoane. Eu vad acesti roboti (o gluma amaruie..)ca fiind prezenta pe Pamant (dupa disparitia oamenilor) a vechilor culegatori-vanatori de acum 12.000 de ani. In afara formei umanoide (nu vad de ce, sa ne fie familiari ca si un fel de rude ?) eventuala conformatie faciala umana nu va avea ca efect decat inducere unei puternice senzatii de stranietate, si chiar alienarea oamenilor.Daca alineatele precedente au avut tangenta cu religia si acesta ar putea avea.In sensul ca robotii sa fie perceputi ca fiinte cu capacitati supranaturale, superoameni. Astfel vor putea fi idolatrizati, deci sa devina un gen de idoli.

Ce sanse sunt mai mari sa ne duca extinctia speciei: Inteligenta artificiala sau prostia umana ?

Stiu, dupa depasire punctului de singularitate, omul nu mai poate nici limita si nici controla nivelul sau calitatea IA.Cineva intreba odata retoric: “cu ce va fi mai greu sa te lupti in viitor, cu super- inteligenta robotilor sau cu clasica prostie omeneasca?”Greu de spus, nu am nici cea mai vaga idee sa pot face supozitii.Astfel nu pot raspunde intrebarii din titlu.De fapt nici nu mai are importanta ce am presupus noi inainte daca una dintre variante se va fi intamplat.

In ce domeniu suntem deja in viitor ?

Poate o sa va dezamagesc putin, in domeniul erotic.Mai precis in cel al papusilor pentru sex.Deja exista in lume spre 10 firme care produc reproduceri ultrarealistice ale corpului omenesc, dotate cu capacitati AI.Pot avea mimica, urmaresc cu privirea, zambesc, vorbesc, etc.Culmea este ca am gasit relatarea unui caz (India)in care sotul si-a cumparat una, face sex cu ea de 3x pe saptamana…. Dar si cu sotia /alternativ.Culmea este ca sotia stie si nu are nimic impotriva.Problema este de fapt extrem de delicata si serioasa.Cineva ar putea afirma indreptatit ca papusii nu i-ar lipsili decat sufletul ca sa fie daca nu complet asimilata, atunci confundata cu o fiinta omeneasca.Dar asta nu depinde exclusiv de existenta reala a sufletului.Si sa nu va simtiti jigniti, ci depinde de cat de alienati am putea fi unii dintre noi.