J
Joe
Guest
Anatoly Fomenko, explains:? "Thorough research shows that there is literally no reliably datable information about events before the VIII century, and that there is only very scarce information originating from the VIII to the X century. As a matter of fact, most events of “Antiquity” took place from the XI to the XVI century, were replicated on paper in 1400-1600 AD, repackaged and positioned under labels of 'ancient' Greece, Rome, Egypt and Persia in an imaginary distant past.
We have researched in detail Almagest of 'ancient' Ptolemy that is considered the corner stone of classical history and allegedly compiled in 150 a.d. We definitely assert: Almagest was compiled in XVI-XVII cy from astronomical data of IX-XVI cy therefore the King of astronomers Prolemy and all 13 volumes of Almagest are the late medieval fakes; and all famous 'astronomers of antiquity' are aliases of the late medieval scholars.
We have decoded 34 'ancient' Egyptian horoscopes painted in tombs of the Valley of Kings or cut in stone in Dendera and Esna. Egyptology either dates these horoscopes to times immemorial or says they don't match any dates at all. Blatantly untrue! These horoscopes contain sufficient astronomical data to calculate the date of their composition, and all dates found therein turn out definitely medieval and pertain to the XI cy a.d. the earliest.
We have cross-checked archaeological, astronomical, dendro-chronological, paleo-graphical and radiocarbon methods of dating of ancient sources and artefacts. We found them ALL to be non-independent, non-exact, statistically implausible, contradictory and inevitably viciously circular because they are based or calibrated on the same consensual chronology.
Unbelievable as it may seem, there is not a single piece of firm written evidence or artefact that could be reliably and independently dated earlier than the XI century. When not fake the 'acient' Greek and Roman coins are medieval, their abundance due to the widespread rights of feudal local coinage. Classical history is firmly based on copies made in the XV-XVII centuries of 'unfortunately lost' originals.
The concensual chronology is thousands of years too long, this renders population growth and climate change forecast models unreliable. Our theory simply returns the Chronology of World History to the realm of applied mathematics from which it was sequestrated by the clergy in the XVI-XVII centuries. We have developed a number valid and verifiable methods of historical research based on statistics, astronomy and logic.
For example, computer assisted recalculation of eclipses with detailed descriptions allegedly belonging to 'Antiquity' shows that they either occurred in the Middle Ages or didn't occur at all. A simple application of computational astronomy to the rules of calculation of Easter according to the Easter Book introduced by the Nicean council of alleged 325 AD shows that it definitely could not have taken place before 784 AD.
Some related questions may arise: when and where was Jesus Christ born, when was He crucified? Chronological analysis of The Old Testament definitely shows that it was compiled after the New One, and renders medieval events in biblical disguise. No, the New Chronology theory is not a crude 'history denial' exercise, as it does not cancel persons, events, artifacts, Pyramids, Great Walls, etc.., but points to their more probable place in time and space".
THIS IS FROM HIS AMAZON BLOG. HE IS A BIG BIG PROFESSOR GENIUS GUY AHEAD OF ALL THESE PLACES IN RUSSIA...
WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF HIS WORK? READ THE "CRITICISM" SECTION ON HIS WIKIPEDIA ARTICLE BEFORE YOU ANSWER. I'D LIKE TO GET DIFFERENT OPINIONS ABOUT THIS MAN'S ABSOLUTE CONVICTION THAT WORLD HISTORY IS MUCH SHORTER THAN WE THINK, THAT THE DARK AGES NEVER HAPPENED AND THE OLD TESTAMENT WAS COMPILED CENTURIES AFTER THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE BIBLE AS CAN BE PROVEN ACCORDING TO CHRONOLOGICAL ANALYSIS, ACCORDING TO HIM. HIS THEORY IS THAT THE PROPHETS IN THE BIBLE ARE DISGUISES OF BAD PEOPLE IN THE MIDDLE AGES
We have researched in detail Almagest of 'ancient' Ptolemy that is considered the corner stone of classical history and allegedly compiled in 150 a.d. We definitely assert: Almagest was compiled in XVI-XVII cy from astronomical data of IX-XVI cy therefore the King of astronomers Prolemy and all 13 volumes of Almagest are the late medieval fakes; and all famous 'astronomers of antiquity' are aliases of the late medieval scholars.
We have decoded 34 'ancient' Egyptian horoscopes painted in tombs of the Valley of Kings or cut in stone in Dendera and Esna. Egyptology either dates these horoscopes to times immemorial or says they don't match any dates at all. Blatantly untrue! These horoscopes contain sufficient astronomical data to calculate the date of their composition, and all dates found therein turn out definitely medieval and pertain to the XI cy a.d. the earliest.
We have cross-checked archaeological, astronomical, dendro-chronological, paleo-graphical and radiocarbon methods of dating of ancient sources and artefacts. We found them ALL to be non-independent, non-exact, statistically implausible, contradictory and inevitably viciously circular because they are based or calibrated on the same consensual chronology.
Unbelievable as it may seem, there is not a single piece of firm written evidence or artefact that could be reliably and independently dated earlier than the XI century. When not fake the 'acient' Greek and Roman coins are medieval, their abundance due to the widespread rights of feudal local coinage. Classical history is firmly based on copies made in the XV-XVII centuries of 'unfortunately lost' originals.
The concensual chronology is thousands of years too long, this renders population growth and climate change forecast models unreliable. Our theory simply returns the Chronology of World History to the realm of applied mathematics from which it was sequestrated by the clergy in the XVI-XVII centuries. We have developed a number valid and verifiable methods of historical research based on statistics, astronomy and logic.
For example, computer assisted recalculation of eclipses with detailed descriptions allegedly belonging to 'Antiquity' shows that they either occurred in the Middle Ages or didn't occur at all. A simple application of computational astronomy to the rules of calculation of Easter according to the Easter Book introduced by the Nicean council of alleged 325 AD shows that it definitely could not have taken place before 784 AD.
Some related questions may arise: when and where was Jesus Christ born, when was He crucified? Chronological analysis of The Old Testament definitely shows that it was compiled after the New One, and renders medieval events in biblical disguise. No, the New Chronology theory is not a crude 'history denial' exercise, as it does not cancel persons, events, artifacts, Pyramids, Great Walls, etc.., but points to their more probable place in time and space".
THIS IS FROM HIS AMAZON BLOG. HE IS A BIG BIG PROFESSOR GENIUS GUY AHEAD OF ALL THESE PLACES IN RUSSIA...
WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF HIS WORK? READ THE "CRITICISM" SECTION ON HIS WIKIPEDIA ARTICLE BEFORE YOU ANSWER. I'D LIKE TO GET DIFFERENT OPINIONS ABOUT THIS MAN'S ABSOLUTE CONVICTION THAT WORLD HISTORY IS MUCH SHORTER THAN WE THINK, THAT THE DARK AGES NEVER HAPPENED AND THE OLD TESTAMENT WAS COMPILED CENTURIES AFTER THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE BIBLE AS CAN BE PROVEN ACCORDING TO CHRONOLOGICAL ANALYSIS, ACCORDING TO HIM. HIS THEORY IS THAT THE PROPHETS IN THE BIBLE ARE DISGUISES OF BAD PEOPLE IN THE MIDDLE AGES