Talk:Venus tablet of Ammisaduqa

"Venus tablets"
I have moved the following anonymously contributed unsourced assertions here. Can anyone make sense of this or provide some source? (Wetman 05:02, 1 February 2007 (UTC))


 * ''The Venus tablets are a major date in all chronologies both biblical and pagan. First, you must postulate the concept that all chronologies once started from a doctrine of one Creation date of the world, not a different date per nation and culture. Then you must postulate that they feared the year 6000 or around it for an astral disaster. Our ancient past is so filled with these myths that we should not be opposed to start here. Whereas short Genesis chronologies place the tablet at Year 2400 plus 3600 more to the Year 6000, all long Genesis chronologies, and all pagan chronologies (presumed to have no biblical connection) use this tablet date as the year 3600 from Creation. This becomes lost and unnoticed because each nation has recalculated The Flood that created the new current world. The many Creation dates are all that of the Flood. Example: Mayan Flood is 3114 BC creating the world. But because they now predict that the current world will last 13 baktun (5200 tun), they presume all previous worlds to be of same length. And so that Flood becomes labeled as 13 baktun. The original prediction of 3744 haab (3796 tun) reveals its ancient connection to the Flood being (not 13 baktun) but 2256 years. However, the seasonal drift of the 365-day calendar stays in tact with the Venus tablet date May 1626 BC. As the Sothic is 720+720+20=1460 (leap days 180+180+5=365 days)so that many chronologies use 1440 as 360 leap days, so too the seasonal 744+744+20=1508 has 1488 years as 3114-1626 BC when Ammisaduqa died. The chronologies that place creation at 5500 BC whether the biblical Adam or pagan Creation do so by equating 1900 BC as the Year 3600 and as that tablet, and Venus date. The chronologies that place Creation at 5200 BC do so by regarding 1600 BC as 3600, the end of 300-year Babylon (1900-600 BC correctly 1894-1594 BC). (NOTE: Venus Dec 1625 BC minus 24 is Dec 1601 BC.) The Maya place it at Hamurabi's 1770 BC as Noah's year 1344 from that 3114 BC Creation by flood as being 2256 years to the Creation. In short Genesis comparison of the same data (2256 and 1344 and 3600), the Flood is Man's year 1656 so that the year 2256 is Venus in Noah's year 1200, and then only 144 years later the Venus Tablet of Noah's year 1344 is Man's year 2400. Babylon's 3600 is then a countdown calendar to year 6000. The rise of Venus as an 8-year cycle to July 1770 BC, Venus then drifts back to being a rise in May 1626 BC, (next rise 584 days later in Dec 1625 BC). This is Man's year 2400+3600 of which becomes reversed as Man's year 3600+2400. Venus as 1200 Egyptian years minus 60 days is equal to 1199 Julian and 5 days. The discovery was formulated as a half cycle being 600 egyptian years minus 30 days (subtract 2 days for every 40-year Venus). The 40-year cycle Moses used began in 1594 BC when Babylon ended (1894-1594 BC), but the world concluded the end of Babylon and end of Amizaduga to be the same year (correctly 1626 BC but mistaken as 1600 BC). Early Greeks and later christian Eusebius conclude the 300-year span of Babylon to be 1900-1600 BC as year 3600 because of the fall of 3rd dynasty Ur in 1900 BC. From this springs the debate of Man as 5500 BC or 5200 BC. And this in turn effected the myth of the Great Pyramid being a tower to survive the world's end disaster. The debate whether it was completed the year before the Flood, or started the year after the Flood (survived it or not) was altered to claim it was built 300 years before the Flood.''

Anonymous IP User_talk:69.76.46.169 is convinced that his calendrical theories provide the Key to All Mythologies, but the amount of effort he's spent working them out does not translate into corresponding clarity of explanation... AnonMoos 19:35, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

I am not having success at reformating the Venus dates i posted earlier (which are Fotheringham calculations (1929), in my current attempt to include the actual translated dates from Fotheringham and under them the formerly posted calculated dates. So with them in the HISTORY of this subject, perhaps someone can insert the proper carriage returns or text format so that others may see the variance between known text and known Venus calc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.144.96.249 (talk) 03:27, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Does anyone want a copy of Fotheringham's translation of the dates. The ones posted here are by me from that book. They are his calculations of Venus for 1921-1900 BC, and not the actual text with its astral formula errors. Most of these dates are not the actual dates on these texts, because lunar dates drop down 4 lunar dates every 8 years of Venus, and as Venus repeated cycle in later years, scribes altered accurate dates thinking they were making corrections to crept-in errors. I know you do not beleive the creation of Adam to be 4025 BC (although you will publish 3761 BC for Jews in 1000s of places as long as you don't say it is Adam), but as 2400 years 4025-1625 BC, the dates do also match 1900 BC and are applied by Fotheringham as such, and whether Amizaduga (or Ibbi-Sin) they are 3600 years form Alexandrian Era placing Adam as 5500 BC. These are not coincidences and even Wikipedia isn't big enought o hold all the proof and evidence of this.

New material for consideration.

The title of this article should be something like "Babylonian Venus Tablets" instead of "Venus Tablet of Ammisaduqa." The Venus observations table spans more than one tablet and the connection to Ammisaduqa (Ammizaduga) may present a problem.

Here are three footnotes which I think have a bearing on how the article might be titled, and about Ammizaduga's relation to the material. These are copied from page 198 of Immanual Velikovsky's Worlds in Collison (1950).

1. (Pertaining to translations of the Venus tablets.) Published by H.C. Rawlinson and G. Smith, Table of the Movements of the Planet Venus and Their Influences. Sayce's translation was printed in the Transactions of the Socienty of Biblical Archaeology, 1874; a more recent translation by S. Langdon and J. K. Fotheringham was published as The Venus Tablets of Ammizaduga (1928).

2. (Refers to Giovanni Schiaparelli's decision to limit the tablets to the seventh and eighth centuries.)  Fotheringham in Langdon and Fothringham, The Venus Tablets of Ammizaduga, p. 32. See Schiaparelli, 'Venusbeobachtungen und Berechnumgen der Babylonier,' Das Weltall, Vols. VI, VII.

3. (About Ammizaduga's formula found on one of the tablets.)  Kugler ascribed the Venus tablets to the first Babylonian Dynasty, because he read a year-formula of Ammizaduga in one of them. In 1920, F. Hommel (Assyriologische Bibliothe,, XXV, 197-199) declared that the year-formula of Ammizaduga was inserted into the Venus tablets by a scribe in the reign of Assurbanipal, in the seventh century.

RobertFritzius (talk)RobertFritziusRobertFritzius (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 17:48, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Reorganised the intro, some corrections
The article was based on some old reference materials. The fact that there are multiple copies of this tablet was completely ignored (more could be added about this). The intro was way too long. Also, I've added some more recent literature. --Dyuku (talk) 22:33, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

An unsourced contribution moved from the article
I'm moving the following text here from the article: it's unsourced and appears to be WP:OR. It is the only contribution by User:Jack "curiosity" smith and was added 16:49, 17 January 2010.

The above table, assuming it to be an accurate translation, can be shown to equal 30 days in the 12 month year on ten months of the year. It is reasonable to assume that the two months adar and tashritu are also 30 day months which would seem to indicate that the twenty-one year record occurred during a period when the year consisted of 360 days of twelve months of thirty days. Comparison between these records and present day movements of Venus (365.25 day year) would not seem possible. jack "curiosity" smith

–Syncategoremata (talk) 10:47, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Velikovsy controversy
I am confused.

Carl Sagan said that Babylonian astronomers recorded that Venus existed many years before Velikovsky said it existed. Peter Huber seems to confirm this:-

http://www.velikovsky.info/Peter_Huber

Soo...are there any rebuttals to Huber's observations, and do they hold any weight?

I checked on Google and found this:-

http://www.bearfabrique.org/Catastrophism/venus/zenith.htm

But it doesn't refute the allegation by Huber that Venus was observed long before Velikovsky said it existed.

In this piece by James P. Hogan, we have a quote by Velikovsky claiming that Jupiter was ejected thousands of years before the collision:-

"That Venus was observed before it came into conflict with Earth is clear from what I wrote. It did not come from Jupiter just on the eve of that collision. It came thousands of years before. It could be seen." http://www.jamesphogan.com/books/info.php?titleID=37&cmd=sample&sample=79

Some guy called Rose claimed that Huber made a lot of amendments and factual errors in his assumptions. I am unable to obtain Rose's work on the internet. Thus, I am unable to verify if Roses' critique is even valid.

Why does this article on thunderbolts.info say that Venus was ejected (in the final sentence)? How can we confirm this if there is no clear way to resolve dates in which the planet was observed? http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2007/arch07/070115titanatmosphere.htm

Hence...my confusion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.193.65.149 (talk) 13:01, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Simply put, Velikovsky's proposals, and any proposals based on his, is all junk. He was a doctor/psychiatrist who had little to no real understanding of how gravity, electricity, magnetism, or any basic physics work. He grew up in an age when people still viewed electricity and magnetism as something magical (which, even if he didn't quite see it as literally being "magical", his lack of knowledge about how these actually worked certainly allowed that misconception to influence what concept he did have — what he wrote about this and gravity seems to indicate this). Simply put, what he proposes is physically impossible under any conditions. (Velikovsky was a guy who thought it was possible to make a person levitate using a 12 volt battery and a bunch of wire)! The best advice is to reject and ignore anything that came from the man, you will be far better off. — al-Shimoni  (talk) 15:31, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

New Section (rename as appropriate)
I'm not going to tamper with the main page. I haven't contributed to Wikipedia in many years. However, I contributed these dates that are in the main text here as Observations (I got them out of my copy of Fotheringham), and I also wrote this Bible ramble you claim below (apparently I speak a different English than all of you do, but to me its called insight versus those who don't have it because they are belligerent or arrogant). THUS with that said Here is the dates I got from Fotheringham that I then used math to obtain the Sewell dates since I couldn't find Sewell. The math is simple (17-day Gregorian-Julian difference in 1900s BC for Gregorian dates he uses) 243 years is the same Julian date of Venus (251-year is about the same Gregorian date) and the 32-year difference is 8 leap days or 9 of drifting Venus. Tabulate it in columns and use it if you value it. (My personal copy includes Egyptian dates, Persian dates, Zoroaster, Yezdezred, Jewish lunar cycle, and Babylonian.) THE CORRECTION listed is from Fotheringham not from me. Because 100s of students in Babylonian schools were told to copy all these dates (as Moses told 600,000 to all copy his Bible), the dates of 1oos of tablets vary into impossible variations and so are collected in their variations and corrected to fit an actual Venus. Fotheringham's last year as 1900bc is valuable to me, not because Catholic Father Scheil claimed it placed Haumrabi dying 125 years earlier as Amrapal, but because I see 1900bc as Ur destroyed and sending off its last populace the Hindu off to Harappa India on the Hindus River. It means Hindu of 700bc made the textual mistake 2600 years before Father Scheil had.

Actual Text Year 1	(Pentacle point 1) inferior   Venus	sets on	Shabatu 15	and after 3 days	rises on	Shabatu 18

Fotheringham	Gregorian /Julian 1920 BC =Hindu Noah 1180	G.Feb 27 = J.Mar 16	to	G.Mar 2 = J.Mar 19

Sewell	Gregorian /Julian 1645 BC			G.Feb 22 = J.Mar 7	to	G.Feb 25 = J.Mar 10

Text Year 2	superior Venus	vanishes E on	Arahsamna 11	and after 2 months 7 days	appears W on	Tebetu 19

Correction		vanishes E on	MarHesvan 21	and after 1 month 25 days	appears W on	Tebet 16

Fotheringham	Gregorian /Julian 1920 BC=Hindu Noah 1180	G.Nov 25 = J.Dec 12	to	1919bc G.Jan 18 = J.Feb 4

Sewell	Gregorian /Julian 1645 BC			G.Nov 19 = J.Dec 3		1644bc G.Jan 12 = J.Jan 26

Text Year 3	(pentacle point 2) inferior   Venus	sets on	Ululu 23	and after 20 days	rises on	Tashritu 13

Correction			sets on	Elul 29	and after 16 days	rises on	Tishri  15

Fotheringham	Gregorian /Julian 1919 BC =Hindu Noah 1181	G.Sep 24 = J.Oct 11		G.Oct 10= J.Oct 27

Sewell	Gregorian /Julian 1644 BC			G.Sep 18 = J.Oct 2		G.Oct   4= J.Oct 18

Text Year 4	superior Venus	vanishes E on	Dumuzi 2	and after 2 months 1 day	appears W on	Ululu 3

Correction		vanishes E on	Tamuz 3	and after 2 months 6 days	appears W on	Elul 9

Fotheringham	Gregorian /Julian 1918 BC =Hindu Noah 1182	G.Jun 21 = J.Jun 8		G.Aug 26= J.Sep 12

Sewell	Gregorian /Julian 1643 BC			G.Jun 15 = J.Jun 29		G.Aug 20= J.Sep 3

Text Year 5	(Pentacle point 3) inferior   Venus	sets on	Ayaru 2	and after 15 days	rises on	Ayar 18

Correction			sets on	Nisan 29	and after 12 days	rises on	Ayar 11

Fotheringham:	Gregorian /Julian 1917 BC =Hindu Noah 1184	G.May 7 = J.May 24		G.May 19 = J.Jun  5

Sewell:	Gregorian /Julian 1642 BC			G.May 1 = J.May 15		G.May 13 = J.May 27

Text Year 5	superior Venus	vanishes E on	Kislimu 25	and after 2 months 4 days	appears W on	Shabatu 29

Correction		vanishes E on	Kislev 27	and after 2 months 3 days	appears W on	Shebat 30

Fotheringham:	Gregorian /Julian 1916 BC =Hindu Noah 1184	G.Jan 26 = J.Feb 12		G.Mar 29 = J.Apr 15

Sewell:	Gregorian /Julian 1641 BC			G.Jan 20 = J.Feb 3		G.Mar 23 = J.Apr  6

Text Year  6	(Pentacle point 4) inferior   Venus	sets on	Arahsamna 28	and after 3 days	rises on	Kislimu 1

Correction		sets on	MarHesvan 28	and after 3 days	rises on	Kislev  1

Fotheringham	Julian /Gregorian 1916 BC = Hindu Noah 1185	G.Dec 18 = J.Jan  4  bc1915		1916bc Dec 21 = J.Jan  7  bc1915

Sewell	Julian /Gregorian 1641 BC			G.Dec 12 = J.Dec 26		G.Dec 15 = J.Dec 29

Text Year 7	superior Venus	vanishes E on	Abu 21	and after 2 months 11 days	appears W on	Arahsamna 2

Correction		vanishes E on	Ab 30	and after 2 months	appears W on	Tashri  30

Fotheringham	Gregorian Julian 1915 BC =Hindu Noah 1186	G.Sep 11 =J.Sep 28		G.Nov 9 =J.Nov 26

Sewell	Gregorian Julian 1640 BC			G.Sep 5 =J.Sep 19		G.Nov  3 =J.Nov 17

Text Year 8	(Pentacle point 5) inferior   Venus	sets on	Dumuzi 23	and after 3 days	rises on	Ab  2

Correction		sets on	Tamuz 9	and after 17 days	rises on	Tamuz  26

Fotheringham	Gregorian /Julian 1914 BC =Hindu Noah 1187	G.July 12 =J.July 29		G.July 29 = J.Aug 15

Sewell	Gregorian /Julian 1639 BC			G.July 6 =J.July 20		G.July 23 = J.Aug  6

Text Year 8	superior Venus	vanishes E on	Adar 25	and after 2 months 7 days	appears W on	Simanu 2

Correction		vanishes E on	Adar 27	and after 2 months 16 days	appears W on	Sivan  13

Fotheringham	Gregorian /Julian 1913 BC =Hindu Noah 1187	G.Mar 24 = J.Apr 10		G.Jun 7 = J.Jun 24

Sewell	Gregorian /Julian 1638 BC			G.Mar 18 = J.Apr 1		G.Jun  1 = J.Jun 15

Text Year 8-9	(Pentacle poin 1) inferior Venus	sets on	Simanu 11	and after 4 days	rises on	Adar 15    ( error of Simanu obviously carried over from year 8 )

Correction		sets on	Adar 12	and after 2 days	rises on	Adar 14          (  the text would have read as set on Adar 11 )

Fotheringham	Gregorian /Julian 1912BC =Hindu Noah 1188	G.Feb 26= J.Mar 15		G.Feb 28 = J.Mar 17

Sewell	Gregorian /Julian 1637 BC			G.Feb 21= J.Mar 6		G.Feb 23 = J.Mar 8

Text Year 10	superior Venus	vanishes E on	Arahsamna 11	and after 1 month 25 days	appears W on	Tebetu 16

Correction	Hebrew Adam 2389	vanishes E on	MarHesvan 17	and after 1 month 25 days	appears W on	Tebet 12 Fotheringham	Gregorian /Julian 1912 BC =Hindu Noah 1189	G. Nov 16 = J.Nov 30		1636 BC G.Jan 9 = J.Jan 23

Sewell	Gregorian /Julian 1637 BC			G. Nov 16 = J.Nov 30		1636 BC G.Jan 9 = J.Jan 23

Text Year 11	(Pentacle point 2) inferior  Venus	sets on	Ululu 26	and after 11/12 days	rises on	II Ululu 7/8 	  INTERCALARY MONTH

Correction		sets on	Elul 25	and after 16 days	rises on	II  Elul  11

Fotheringham	Gregorian Julian 1911 BC =Hindu Noah 1190	G.Sep 21 = J.Oct 8		G.Oct  7 =J.Oct 24

Sewell	Gregorian Julian 1636 BC			G.Sep 15 = J.Sep 29		G.Oct 1 =J.Oct 15

Text Year 12	superior Venus	vanishes E on	Nisan 9/8	and after 5 months 16/17 days	appears W on	Ululu 25	( span widened by 50 days before and 50 days after )

Correction		vanishes E on	Ayar 29	and after 2 months 6 days	appears W on	Abu 5    ( probable observation point close to a light source like a sacrificial fire ) Fotheringham	Gregorian Julian 1910 BC =Hindu Noah 1191	G.Jun 18 = J.July 5		G.Aug 24 =J.Sep 10

Sewell	Gregorian Julian 1635 BC			G.Jun 12 = Jun 26		G.Aug 18 =J.Sep 1

Text Year 13	(Pentacle point 3) inferior  Venus	sets on	Ayaru 5	and after 7 days	rises on	Ayar 12

Correction 	sets on	Nisan 25	and after 12 days	rises on	Ayar  7

Fotheringham	Gregorian /Julian 1909 BC = Hindu Noah 1192	G.May 6 = J.May 23		G.May 18 = J.Jun 4

Sewell	Gregorian /Julian 1634 BC			G.Apr 30 = J.May 14		G.May 12 = J.May 26

Text Year 13	superior Venus	vanishes E on	Tebetu 20	and after 2 months	appears W on	Adar 21

Correction 	vanishes E on	Tebetu 23	and after 2 months 3 days	appears W on	Adar 26

Fotheringham	Gregorian	Julian 1908 BC =Hindu Noah 1192	G.Jan 24 = J.Feb 10		G.Mar 27 = J.Apr 13

Sewell	Gregorian	Julian 1633 BC			G.Jan 18 = J.Feb 1		G.Mar 21 = J.Apr  4

Text Year 14	(Pentacle point 4) inferior  Venus	sets on	Tishri 11	and after 1 month 17 days	rises on	Arahsamna 27  ( the span is in error,  because Tishri 11 is obviously an error)

Correction		sets on	MarHesvan 24	and after 3 days	rises on	MarHesvan 27

Fotheringham	Gregorian /Julian 1908 BC =Hindu Noah 1193	G.Dec 15 = J.Jan 1  bc1907		1908bc G.Dec 18 = J.Jan  4  bc1907

Sewell	Gregorian /Julian 1633 BC			G.Dec 9 = J.Dec 23		G.Dec 12 = J.Dec 26

Text Year 15	superior Venus	vanishes E on	Abu 20	and after 2 months 15 days	appears W on	Arahsamna 5 Correction		vanishes E on	Ab 26	and after 2 months	appears W on	Tishri  26

Fotheringham	Gregorian /Julian 1907 BC =Hindu Noah 1194	G.Sep 8 = J.Sep 25		G.Nov  6 = J.Nov 23

Sewell	Gregorian /Julian 1632 BC			G.Sep 2 = J.Sep 16		G.Oct  31 = J.Nov 14

Text Year 16	(Pentacle point 5) inferior  Venus	sets on	Dumuzi 5	and after 15 days	rises on	Dumuzi 20

Correction		sets on	Tamuz 5	and after 16 days	rises on	Tamuz  21

Fotheringham	Gregorian /Julian 1906BC =Hindu Noah 1195	G.July 10 = J.July 27			G.July 26 = J.Aug 12

Sewell	Gregorian /Julian 1631 BC			G.July  4 = J.July 18			G.July 20 = J.Aug  3

Text Year 16-17 superior Venus	vanishes E on	Adar 15	and after 3 months 9 days	appears W on	Simanu 24 (?)

Correction		vanishes E on	Adar 24	and after 2 months 15 days	appears W on	Sivan 9

Fotheringham	Gregorian /Julian 1905 BC =Hindu Noah 1196	G.Mar 22 =J.Apr 8		G. Jun  5  = J.Jun 22

Sewell	Gregorian /Julian 1630 BC			G.Mar 16 =J.Mar 30		G.May 30 = J.Jun 13

Text Year 17	(Pentacle point 1) inferior  Venus	sets on	Adar 11	and after 4 days	rises on	Adar 15

Correction		sets on	Adar 8	and after 3 days	rises on	Adar 11

Fotheringham	Gregorian Julian 1904 BC		G.Feb 22 = J.Mar 11			G.Feb 25 = J.Mar 14

Sewell	Gregorian Julian 1629 BC		G.Feb 17 = J.Mar 2			G.Feb 20 = J.Mar  5

Text Year 18	superior Venus	vanishes E on	Arahsamna - - 	and after - - - days	appears W on	- - -

Correction		vanishes E on	MarHesvan 13	and after 1 month 25 days	appears W on	Tebet 8 Fothringham	Gregorian /Julian 1904 BC =Hindu Noah 1197	G.Nov 20 = J.Dec 7		1903 BC G.Jan 13 = J.Jan 30

Sewell	Gregorian /Julian 1629 BC			G.Nov 14 = J.Nov 28		1628 BC G.Jan 7 = J.Jan 21

Text Year 19	(Pentacle point 2) inferior  Venus	sets on	II Ululu 1	and after 15 days	rises on	II Ululu 17  	  INTERCALARY MONTH

Correction		sets on	II Ululu 20	and after 17 days	rises on	Tishri 8

Fotheringham	Gregorian /Julian 1903 BC =Hindu Noah 1198	G.Sep 17 = J.Oct 4		G.Oct   4 = J.Oct 21

Sewell	Gregorian /Julian 1628 BC			G.Sep 11 = J.Sep 25		G.Sep 28 = J.Oct 12

Text Year 20	superior Venus	vanishes E on	Simanu 25	and after 2 months 6 days	appears W on	Ululu 24	( Ululu 24 is a duplicate of backside previous line, year 12 )

Correction		vanishes E on	Sivan 25	and after 2 months 6 days	appears W on	Elul  1

Fotheringham	Gregorian Julian 1902 BC =Hindu 1199	G.Jun 17 = J.July 4		G.Aug 21 = Sep  7

Sewell	Gregorian Julian 1627 BC			G.Jun 11 = J.Jun 25		G.Aug 15 = Aug 29

Text Year 21	(Pentacle point 3) inferior  Venus	sets on	Nisan 27/26	and after 6/7 days	rises on	Ayaru 3

Correction 	sets on	Nisan 22	and after 11 days	rises on	Ayar 3

Fotheringham	Gregorian /Julian 1901 BC =Hindu Noah 1200	G.Apr 28 = J.May 12		G.May  9 = J.May 23

Sewell	Gregorian /Julian 1626 BC			G.Apr 28 = J.May 12		G.May  9 = J.May 23

Text Year 21	superior Venus	vanishes E on	Tebetu 28	and after 2 months (0 days?) appears W on Adar 28

Correction 	vanishes E on	Tebetu 19	and after 2 months 3 days	appears W on	Adar 22

Fotheringham	Gregorian /Julian 1900 BC =Hindu Noah 1200	G.Jan 22 = J.Feb 8		G.Mar 25 = J.Apr 11

Sewell	Gregorian /Julian 1625 BC			G.Jan 16 = J.Jan 30		G.Mar 19 = J.Apr 2

75.86.172.174 (talk)

Question from Venustablet
Whatever this example means: "inferior  Venus	sets on	Shabatu 15	and after 3 days	rises on	Shabatu 18"?

I, who have a poor understanding of English, realize that Venus would have been below the horizon for about three days. However, according to the Stellarium program, this was not the case. Raksutus 08th March 2021 time 11:13 FIN — Preceding undated comment added 09:16, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Immanuel Velikovsky's Worlds in Collision
We (modern man) regularly assume we have a better understanding of heavenly bodies than every generation before us. Why is the position of Venus as witnessed and recorded by these ancient peoples assumed to be incorrect when there is a modern theory that supports their accounts? Why is Velikovsky laughed out of a room without even a fair consideration of his work? 72.201.187.122 (talk) 15:33, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I have an anecdote for you. many moons ago a publisher bringing out Velikovsky's work was going to label it science. the real science writers who used that publisher said they were going to rip up their contracts if it happened. the publisher backed down.

100.15.117.34 (talk) 21:06, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Thera
https://static.cambridge.org/content/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:article:S0003598X18001655/resource/name/S0003598X18001655sup001.pdf 100.15.117.34 (talk) 21:06, 3 February 2024 (UTC)