Opinions on Zecharia Sitchin's Books and Theories

  • Thread starter demosthenes_001
  • Start date
In summary, the conversation touches on the topic of Zecharia Sitchin's books and theories, which claim that ancient myths are actually historical and scientific texts. Sitchin believes that gods from another planet created humans through genetic engineering and that these gods ultimately destroyed themselves with nuclear weapons. However, his claims have been widely discredited by experts and even other pseudohistorians consider him a crackpot. Only a select few can decipher ancient cuneiform texts, leaving room for interpretation and potential manipulation of information.
  • #1
demosthenes_001
13
0
has anyone else taken a look at zecharia sitchin's books and theories? if so, what is your opinion on it?

it seems to be a very intriguing theory of the origin of humans.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
This should be in the S&D forum
 
  • #3
OY. :bugeye:

"Zecharia Sitchin, along with Erich von Däniken and Immanuel Velikovsky, make up the holy trinity of pseudohistorians. Each begins with the assumption that ancient myths are not myths but historical and scientific texts. Sitchin's claim to fame is announcing that he alone correctly reads ancient Sumerian clay tablets. All other scholars have misread these tablets which, according to Sitchin, reveal that gods from another planet (Niburu, which orbits our Sun every 3,600 years) arrived on Earth some 450,000 years ago and created humans by genetic engineering of female apes. Niburu orbits beyond Pluto and is heated from within by radioactive decay, according to Sitchin. No other scientist has discovered that these descendents of gods blew themselves up with nuclear weapons some 4,000 years ago. Sitchin alone can look at a Sumerian tablet and see that it depicts a man being subjected to radiation. He alone knows how to correctly translate ancient terms allowing him to discover such things as that the ancients made rockets. Yet, he doesn't seem to know that the seasons are caused by the Earth's tilt, not by its distance from the sun."

http://skepdic.com/sitchin.html
 
  • #4
It also didn't help him any when the world didn't end last May...
 
  • #5
Yeah, even other crackpots think Sitchin is a crackpot.
 
  • #6
i think there's litterally only around 2 people that can decipher cuniform* (*spelling?) if that, so really you could make it mean what ever you wanted and no one could contradict you.
 
  • #7
TheStatutoryApe said:
Yeah, even other crackpots think Sitchin is a crackpot.
I coined a term in another thread: second order crackpot. That's what you are if you're such a crackpot that other crackpots consider you a crackpot. You can use it, but you'll need to send me $1 for each use of the term. :biggrin:
 

What are Zecharia Sitchin's theories?

Zecharia Sitchin was an author and researcher who proposed the theory of ancient astronauts, which suggests that extraterrestrial beings visited Earth in ancient times and influenced human civilization. He also claimed that ancient myths and texts from cultures around the world contain evidence of these visitors.

Are Zecharia Sitchin's theories scientifically accepted?

No, Zecharia Sitchin's theories are not widely accepted by the scientific community. Many scientists and archaeologists have criticized his interpretations of ancient texts and lack of evidence to support his claims.

What evidence does Zecharia Sitchin provide for his theories?

Sitchin's evidence primarily comes from his interpretations of ancient texts and artifacts. He believed that certain myths and symbols from different cultures were actually descriptions of extraterrestrial encounters and technology.

What are some common criticisms of Zecharia Sitchin's theories?

Some common criticisms of Sitchin's theories include his lack of expertise in ancient languages and cultures, his selective use of evidence, and his tendency to present his interpretations as fact rather than theories.

Why do some people believe in Zecharia Sitchin's theories?

Some people are drawn to Sitchin's theories because they offer a unique and exciting explanation for ancient mysteries and a different perspective on human origins. However, it is important to approach these theories critically and consider the lack of scientific evidence to support them.

Similar threads

Replies
20
Views
895
Replies
5
Views
10K
Replies
3
Views
322
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
14
Views
526
Replies
5
Views
382
  • General Discussion
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
27
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
958
Replies
2
Views
1K
Back
Top