Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - Raymond Sayle

Pages: [1]

Insertion - Aug 26/19.  Too long to read?  See Video titles at the bottom of this page

Astrophysicist or Archaeo-Astronomer to see if my conjectures could be correct.  Can you help me find one?  One with a open mind.
One who could accept evidence from Nostradamus.  Biblical, Historical and Academic evidence, scant as it is, as well? It would be greatly appreciated.  And?  Well, like I stated in my first post if I'm right, great.  And, if I'm wrong ....  So be it

The three brothers have died
And the evil one controls all.
Then is a sign a dove amidst Heaven's stars
And the time for the Son is high.

Now, before I advance I should say a few things.

One.  The verse above from Nostradamus does NOT appear in the Centuries.  It is rather, one of his Lost Quatrains
which has come to light or it appeared in a letter which he wrote to someone, most likely to his son or the King of France.
Either way, by its style, I do believe it is authentic.

Two.  If you translate the name, Jonah, from the Hebrew into English, it does mean - Dove.
And, come to think of it, didn't Jesus tell the Pharisees there would be the Sign of Jonah as it pertains to Him?
Interesting ...

Three.  Since this term will be coming up quite often when I list my Academic reasons why I could be right, I might as well state it
now.  Occam's Razor is a philosophical principle which states the following.  If you have a mystery, of sorts, and there's several theories
which tries to explain it and none carries more weight that another then, the simplest explanation should be given the most credence.   
You'll see what I mean when I do it.  What is the simplest explanation to explain the disappearance of Flight 19 in 1945.
Alien abduction?  Time warps.   Methane gas.  Whatever. What caused the disappearance of 5 Avenger Airplanes and their crew?  Well, given, Captain Taylor, was new to the area he got lost and when they all were running out of gas ... he ordered they ditched themselves into the ocean.  Is that what really happened?  Who knows?  But it is the simplest explanation. 

So, how did I come up with my theory to begin with?  Glad you asked.

Since I couldn't do what I really wanted to do after graduating from high school  (Thanks, Dad.  May you rot in Hell.)  I decided to try being a writer with the thought that if I could get a book of poetry published I could earn a living.  I was 19.  Give me a break.  Anyway, after God knows  what rejection letter came to our home I decided to look up real poets to see why they got published and I couldn't.  My plan then was to get one poem, extend the theme and then - present the new poem to a literary magazine so I could, at the very least, say I did become a published author.  To do this I went to a desk, pulled out an English essay I wrote in my final year of high school on the poet, Raymond Souster.  Well, the following poem did stand out.

A Christ On Yonge Street

The same long hair
same beard
same gentle eyes.

His back to Yonge Street
he is smashing his fists
against a wall.
but not hard enough
to draw blood
                   so of course
no one notices.

Well, I don't know about you but I liked it then and still like it now.  So, what could have taken place regarding Jesus that could have passed unnoticed?  Well, I then decided it couldn't be in the New Testament since His life (albeit jumbled up) was documented so the only thing left was His time in the tomb and then who suddenly popped up in my mind but ... Buddha.   Buddah?  I'm not kidding. 
I was planning to write a poem about Jesus and Buddah comes to mind?  And what was Buddha doing but sitting in a lotus position and he was holding a planted flower by the stem and by doing so ... the earth stood still.   What the .... ?  I then looked at the TV which was on and a Universal movie from the 30's was just starting and their logo at the time was the world rotating on its axis and as I continued watching the film itself, the opening scene showed ... the earth spinning on its axis.   What is this?  The earth was held still and it kept spinning on its axis?  Could that happen?  Well. I guess it could.  Day and night could have kept appearing as usual but we stayed still as it was revolving around the sun.  Okay, but why?  Wait a minute.  What if an asteroid was coming towards the earth and because the earth was held back for three days it missed us and all life was saved.  Yeah.  All life on this planet was saved by Jesus in the tomb and nobody noticed.   Wow!  What a poem this was going to be.

Well, I did start writing the poem but that didn't last very long.  I remember my head suddenly looking up and asking myself.  What if it really happened?  Forget the poem.  What if it really happened?  After this I then started searching through the New Testament to see if there was any passage where days were held back and ... Well, I didn't have very far to look.   In the Gospel of Mark, it states. 

        And unless the Lord had shortened the days no living creature would be saved. 
        But for the sake of the elect whom He has chosen, He has shortened the days.

Now, the asteroid, notwithstanding, and if it was or will be big enough to wipe out all life on this planet is a moot point for me.
Let's put the horse before the cart.  Could that type of celestial event where the earth was stationary but kept rotating upon it's axis have happened and more importantly - since we don't know the exact year of the crucifixion - could it have happened sometime when Pontius Piilate was the Curator for Judea which took place between, 26 AD -  36, AD and, could that event have taken place for three complete days?  That's what I hope will be investigated.  Could it be verified and if so, then Christ's answer to the Jews would have   been authentic.  He was the one.  You know, when they asked for a sign and Jesus answered them  ...

An evil and adulterous generation asks for a sign but no sign shall be given them - but one.  Just as Jonah was in the belly of the whale for three days and three nights, so too will the Son of Man be in the belly of the earth for three days and three nights.   

Well, I think that happened and you know what ... I also believe the same type of event took place when He was born.
You know when the Nativity Star stood still or was it, really us, who stood still.  You know, that night like no other.

So, Astrophysicists and Archaeo- Astronomers would at least one of you consider these points.  All academic, so to speak, to start
with and If you want more to consider, more Biblical reasons and, Nostradamus, for that matter, that will be near the end.   Let's go.

1.  The early Christians used to celebrate and please note the word - the day of the crucifixion - AND - the day of the Resurrection on the first day of spring, which according to the Julian calendar at the time, was on March 25.  The simplest explanation?  They did this to appeal to the pagans in order to get converts.  While the early Church was guilty of that as in, declaring Christ's birth on the Saturnellia, when a party was taking place, I don't think the early Christians did that.  If anything they were a brotherhood of sorts and all were expecting the imminent return of Jesus.   The first day of spring, notwithstanding, if I was right then both days would have been technically the same day.  Btw ... truth be told, I can live with the first day of spring being sustained for that period of time since it was a watched event.  You know, the equinoxes, the summer or winter solstice and how many cultures throughout the world were watching those things.  It would have been on a world stage if anyone took the time to notice.  Certainly not that event as it took place but the next one for sure.  Wha happened?  Why did it shift?

2.  If there was a Pre-Christian astronomical monument like, Stonehenge, with, let's say, like Stonehenge, again has a 
Heel Stone in the distance capable of marking out the solstice then, it should be 4 days off compared to how it appeared in ancient times.  You know, 3 days for the time Christ' spent in the tomb and 1 day for His birth ... which, is exactly what happens now at, Stonehenge,  The simplest explanation?  The Heel Stone must have sunk over the centuries.  Okay, it had to sink but, it couldn't have sunk in a straight line because if it did, then the solstice, summer or winter, would still have appeared in the same spot.  So, therefore it had to sink and, at the same time, sink to one side to explain the discrepancy.  Also, please note the following.  The Heel Stone weighs about 35 tons and it is partially buried as well, so here's where the Archaeo-Astronomers, comes in.

Modern scholarship tends to believe Jesus was born between, 8 - 6 BC.   If what I say did happen and it concerned one day then, there should be small blip in the Archaeological astronomical records sometime during that period.  If I am right about the event when He was in the tomb then our blip would be slightly bigger if Jesus spent a day and a half as most Christian do believe or the blip would be as  huge as it could be to if He did spend three complete days there before the Resurrection.  Again, between, 26 - 36 AD.   In other words were there any other Pre-Christian observatories, if you will, like Stonehenge and there own Heel Stone.  What do they show?  Is the solstice lined up correctly and if not, was there any new sinkings, we should know about?  Anything in oral traditions?  Myths that speak of a derangement of the Heavens during the times in question?  Historical observations like the one I'm about to present now? 
Yeah, read on.

3.  After Rome conquered Egypt, one of the items they eventually brought back with them was an obelisk which was erected in the Maritus Field around 20 BC.  Pliny stated in his, Natural History ...  it has been found for nearly thirty years ... not to agree.  (In other words, it showed the wrong time, so to speak.)  The simplest explanation?  The Romans failed to take into account the change of latitude from Egypt to Rome   Really?  Take a gander.  From - A Short History Of Scientific Ideas To 1900.

.... the difference in the length of day in different latitudes was well known to the Romans.  From the fact that the longest day in Alexandria was 14 hours, in Italy 15 and in England 17.  Pliny (notice who) deduces that the land close to the poles must have a 24 hour day and a 24 hour night in winter.

Now, I think it would be best if I analyze the above in the next section so I don't have to do it twice but I would like you to look
at what I highlighted from Pliny's quote and what I will highlight when he, himself, gives possible explanations as to what
could have caused the event.

a)  it has been found for nearly 30 years ... not to agree.

b) Possible explanations  ... whether it is that the sun has changed its course in consequence of some derangement of the heavenly system or whether the whole earth  has been to some degree displaced from the center or whether that some earthquake confined to this city alone has wrenched the dial (obelisk) from its original position ... or whether it is in consequence of the Tiber, the foundation of the mass has subsided.

the sun has changed it's course  ... some derangement of the heavenly system ... the whole earth ... has been displaced from the center   

Now, if we listen to Sponge Bob and use our i-m-a-g-i-n=a=t-i-o-n, wouldn't  my theory fit Pliny's reaction?  I think it would and like I said there will be more on this in the next section.

4.  Sosigenes must have made an error of 24 hours in his determination of the vernal equinox in 45 BC when he formulated the Julian calendar.  Simplest explanation?  Actually, this time, it is the simplest explanation and I don't think it's true but to show it I have to go into the history of the Julian Calendar.  I will try to be as brief as possible but it will be hard.  God, I'm dreading this.

When Julius Caesar became Emperor of Rome he decided to commission, Sosigenes of Alexandria to fix the calendar once and for all.
And?  Well, he did do a good job.  He had established March 25 as the first day of spring.  The year 45 or 44 BC would be the start.  There was 365.25 days in the year which would be rounded off to 365 and every fourth year an interclary day would be put in.  Problems?  Well, there would be two so i'll deal with them one at a time.  The first took place when the knuckle ... I mean the pontifeces who were to oversee the calendar started adding interclary days every 3 years instead of 4.  This was detected when Augustus was Emperor and he fixed the problem beginning in 8 BC.  From that year forward until 7 AD (one source says 8 AD) no interclary would be added.  Yes - I do realize there are other variations but the last was the most common.  8 BC to 7 AD .  Please look at the charts below and you will see what I mean.  Days that should have been added.  Th wrong version underneath.

Correct Way with 44 BC as the start.         

40 BC                                                           
36 BC                                               
32 BC                                               
28 BC
24 BC
20 BC
16 BC
12 BC
8  BC - Modifications begin.

Wrong way when the overseers
screwed it up.

41 BC
38 BC 
35 BC
32 BC
29 BC
26 BC
23 BC
20 BC
17 BC
14 BC
11 BC
8  BC - Modifications begin.

Now, if you look at the charts you will plainly see why Augustus picked 8 BC for the modifications to start because both charts coincide.   So he had to drop, at the very least, 4 interclary days to get the calendar back on track spanning from 8 BC to 7 AD inclusively. Really ?  Why would he have to drop 4 days when there was only 3 out of kilter.? Look at the charts.  The first shows 8 interclary days were inserted.  The second shows 11 interclary days were inserted.  Why 4 days?  There would have been I day dropped in 8 BC.  The second dropped in 4 BC.  The third  in O or 1 AD.  (Please note, technically there was no year,  0.)  The fourth dropped in 3 or 4 AD.  And then, one was - added - in, 8 or 9 AD to get everything back to normal.  Didn't I tell you modern scholarship tends to believe Jesus was born between, 8 to 6 BC and isn't it within the time span when the adjustments were being implemented?  Wouldn't a further adjustment be 
warranted if what I said ... did happen?  Now, let's go back for a second.

Sosigenes must have made an error of 24 hours in his determination of the vernal equinox when the Julian calendar began in 45 BC.
Here again ... Really?  He was bright enough to come up with 365. 25 days in the year.  Bright enough to round that number off and have an interclary day added every fourth year and he couldn't determine the first day of spring correctly?  I don't think so.  Now, consider the following,.  Since the Julian calendar was adjusted by 7 AD, then that should be our base point.  In other words, if he didn't make a mistake then by 7 AD, the first day of spring should have been on March 25.  If he did make a mistake then Augustus would have picked the same date for the beginning of spring because that's what Sosigenes intended.  Please note, this is very important as it concerns the second problem which the Julian calendar had and it was a big one to say the least.

When Sosigenes did formulate the calendar one of the things he didn't factor in was that the year was actually, 11 minutes and 14 seconds too short than he estimated.  If this problem wasn't addressed then the calendar would lose - and there are three
different estimates here by the experts - 1 day lost every 128 years.  1 day every 129 years and 1 every 130 years.   Needless to say, 
it wasn't addressed for centuries and by the time of, Pope Gregory, in the late 1500's the first day of spring was marked as taking
place on March 11 when traditionally it should have happened around, March 21st.  He solved the problem with the help of a mathematician, Christopher Clavis.  In 1582, 10 days were dropped from the calendar so the equinox would line up as it did when the Council of Niacea documented the first day of spring on March 21st.  This Council met in 325 AD.  Now, consider the following whereby all three estimates will be presented as we go back in time.

1 day lost every 128 years from 1582.  128 x 10 = 1280.  1582 - 1280 brings us to an equinox in 302 on March 21.  Makes sense.
The Council documented an equinox on March 21 in 325.  302 - 128 = 174.  Equinox on March 22.  174 - 128 = 46.  Equinox on March 23 in 46 AD.  Let's stop here.  1 day lost every 129 years from 1582.  129 x 10 = 1290.  1582 - 1290 = 292.  Makes sense given the Council.  Continue the procedure and we end up  with a March 23rd Equinox in 35 AD. 1 day every 130 years.  1300 from 1582 = 282. Equinox March 21, 282.  Again, agrees with the Council.  Keep going back,  First day of spring, March 23 in 24 AD.   So, if we look at the last three equinoxes which were tabulated, we have a March 23 equinox in, 46 AD, 35 AD or 24 AD.

Now, let's look at this objectively.

1.  If Sosigenes did not make a mistake setting the first day of spring at the onset and the interclary days were adjusted then there's
no way that I can see, that the first day of spring in 44 BC set at March 25 could have drifted to March 23 as soon as 24 or 35 or 44 AD.  If it ran its course normally then the March 24 equinox should have happened around 72 AD if not, later.  Something must have happened.

2.  If Sosigenes did make a mistake and Augustus compensated for it by 7 AD and the first day of spring was indeed March 25
then there's really no way it could have drifted to the 23rd in such a short span of time.  Something major certainly must have happened.

3.  If Sosigenes did make a mistake of 24 hours and Augustus didn't fix it by 7 AD then ....  Well, I always have Pliny's observation
which should be considered  and for that matter, considered very seriously but first .... we have to look at his life.  Yes, there's a reason.

Well, what do you know about that.  I guess it's true, you're never too old to learn something new.  Yes, I was researching Pliny's life again to make sure that what I would be listing would be correct and Yes - he was born around 23 AD in Gaul which is now today part
of Italy, he was well educated, he served in the army etc.  What I really wanted to know is when he wrote that line re the obelisk and if it could have been nearly 30 years when it was erected. and there was nothing.  Well, there was but I would have to read one of his volumes in his Natural History which, if anyone cares, was the first encyclopedia ever written.  Now what?  Well since Augustus did the erecting I punched in his name with obelisk and Egypt and ...?  Well, I did find something very interesting but first I have to list two mistakes that I made.

1.  A while back I stated that Augustus brought an obelisk back to Rome from Egypt and it was erected in the Maritus Field  in 20 BC.
Partially correct.  He did bring an obelisk back but it was erected in the Maritus Field in 10 or 9 BC.  It should also be noted that it was accompanied by another obelisk which was fashioned in Rome ... both to be used in regards to keeping an accurate calendar.  Please note as well, they were dedicated to Julius Caesar for his contribution thereof.

More to come on my own Reply.  I guess I exceeded the amount of 20,000 characters required.

Pages: [1]