• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

the Lost Millenium?

Thanz

Fuzzy Thinker
Thanz
Joined
Jul 24, 2002
Messages
3,895
Are we completely wrong in thinking we know when things happened? Is this really the 21st century? A book called The Lost Millenium is examining what appears to be a debate among scholars regarding dates for historical events, and trying to correlate stated dates with known astronomical events. Apparently, things don't add up and we may be out about 1000 years.

I haven't read the book, only a review - http://jam.canoe.ca/Books/Reviews/2006/01/29/1417121.html


Has anyone read the book? Or is at least aware of the debate? Is there really a debate, or is it a crock?
 
Thanz said:
Are we completely wrong in thinking we know when things happened? Is this really the 21st century? A book called The Lost Millenium is examining what appears to be a debate among scholars regarding dates for historical events, and trying to correlate stated dates with known astronomical events. Apparently, things don't add up and we may be out about 1000 years.

I haven't read the book, only a review - http://jam.canoe.ca/Books/Reviews/2006/01/29/1417121.html


Has anyone read the book? Or is at least aware of the debate? Is there really a debate, or is it a crock?
Click to expand...

The first thing that I thaught when I saw this was "when" this missing 1000 years "happened", apparently- according to the website Jesus may have lived 1000 years ago. Um, no. we know too much about history that recent for there to be only half of what we thaught there to be.


its one thing to say that some events could be moved a few years, or even decades, either way on the time line. But a whole 1000 years, consistently? thats getting just a little too close to a PCT for me.
 
It appears that the missing thousand years is meant to be between now and 0 AD? That I find hard to credit. Just from British history alone we have it documented continuously at least back a 1000 years so that would mean that Christ died the time of the Norman conquest i.e 1066!
 
Thanks for the link to the Globe review. It is much better.

Seems intriguing right up to the point where certain Popes and European monarchs have to be the same people to make the theory work.
 
*cough* Carbon dating *cough*

We have innumerable artifacts carbon dated, and nothing shows that any of these historical artifacts were made 1000 years earlier than history dates them at.

Except that woo-magnet, the Shroud of who cares.
 
A more in depth portrayal of Fomenko's ideas: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Chronology_(Fomenko)

Fomenko claims

1. That the chronology universally taken for granted is simply wrong;
2. That this chronology was essentially invented in the 16th-17th century;
3. That archaeological, dendrochronological, paleographical, carbon dating, and other methods of dating of ancient sources and artifacts known today are erroneous, non-exact or dependent on traditional chronology;
4. That there is not a single document that could be reliably dated earlier than the 11th century;
5. That Ancient Rome, Greece and Egypt were crafted during the Renaissance by humanists and clergy;
6. That Jesus Christ may have been born in 1053 and crucified in 1086 AD or even later;
7. That the Old Testament is probably a rendition of Middle Ages events.
Click to expand...

This guy's hat is clearly made of sub-standard foil.
 
How about dendochronology (tree ring analysis). I thought that they had a continuous record going back several thousand years. They've used it to date wooden artifacts and have been able to demonstrate that Viking ships are over a thousand years old.

Unless of course he is claiming that we've gone from having two to one growing season a year.

My other question is why is he so interested in re-dating history (unless perhaps he's trying to show that the biblical flood did indeed happen and that the pyramids were built afterwards) ?
 
Well if he is right then several British Monarchs must have also been the same person... the same is true for many other aristocratic families - in many of those families the same person must have been the 2nd 3rd and 4th Duke!

Happy to accept that we may not have say correctly lined up ancient Egyptian dynasties with say Chinese history but British history is continuously documented for at least the past 1000 years. So we can be pretty certain going backward that Christ cannot have been around in what we today say was 1000 AD.
 
Of course he would insist that there has been deliberate manipulating of the historical record in the middle ages. For instance the reigns of certain monarchs could have been extended to fill 1000 years from the original 500 years.

Do you not find the lengths of reign of Henry I (35 years), Henry II (45 years), Henry III (56 years) suspiciously long in a time when "no-one lived to be older than 30" ? In fact the proliferation of like named monarchs itself points to deliberate forgery by someone with a distinct lack of imagination.

By consolidating all of the Henrys and Edwards into one monarch each, you'd be able to cut out a couple of hundred years easily.

;)
 
The Don said:
....snip....

Do you not find the lengths of reign of Henry I (35 years), Henry II (45 years), Henry III (56 years) suspiciously long in a time when "no-one lived to be older than 30" ? In fact the proliferation of like named monarchs itself points to deliberate forgery by someone with a distinct lack of imagination.

By consolidating all of the Henrys and Edwards into one monarch each, you'd be able to cut out a couple of hundred years easily.

;)
Click to expand...

You're quite worryingly good at this!
 
If we consolidate all the Henrys into one, how many wives did he then have :eek: ?

And, seriously, how do you propose to get around dendrochronology? The three ring record is essentially reviewed every time a new sample is examined. It can't be faked.

Hans
 
One of two explanations:

Either there used to be two growing seasons each year back then or, much more realistically.... In addition to faking all the documents, the same hyperactive individuals also dug up every single wooden artifact replaced it with an identical artifact made out of older wood .

Of course the man himself says that

3. That archaeological, dendrochronological, paleographical, carbon dating, and other methods of dating of ancient sources and artifacts known today are erroneous, non-exact or dependent on traditional chronology;
Click to expand...

Which means that when contrary evidence is found, he sticks his fingers in his ears and goes "La, la, la, I can't hear you"
 
MRC_Hans said:
If we consolidate all the Henrys into one, how many wives did he then have :eek: ?
Click to expand...
One

Matilda Eleanor Mary Joanna Catherine Margaret Elizabeth Anne Jane Smith

They just shared her first names around between the fictitious kings
 
The Don said:
Which means that when contrary evidence is found, he sticks his fingers in his ears and goes "La, la, la, I can't hear you"
Click to expand...
Bit like AiG. It was the first hit on a Google search for "tree ring dating"

However, when the interpretation of scientific data contradicts the true history of the world as revealed in the Bible, then it’s the interpretation of the data that is at fault. It’s important to remember that we have limited data, and new discoveries have often overturned previous ‘hard facts’.
Click to expand...
(from http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/docs/tree_ring.asp)


And here's some proper information about the subject :)
 
Et tout les Louis I-XVI ? Le meme roi?

Mon Dieu! Cette histoire est plus facile !
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom