This a fascinating look into a global conspiracy that may or may not be the foundation of our lack of understanding. This initial episode will detail in the problems with chronology.
Here’s a link to a created doing a line by line breakdown:
https://www.youtube.com/c/CtruthHere’s a link to follow along with:
https://www.jaks.sk/dokumenty/fomenko/Englang%20and%20Russia%20-Great%20horda-empire-.pdfTranscripts:
https://app.podscribe.ai/episode/50581299Speaker 0 (0s): Hello, my friends, I was already feeling out there. So I got something special. I'm gonna look into today. I'm hoping you will follow me on this journey. I've recently put out some feelers to some of my like-minded conspiracy friends. Who've been asking me, George, what do you got in the way of conspiracy? I got a good one for a lot of people like to talk about the new world order or a lot of people like to talk about vaccines, or a lot of people like to talk about maybe the magic Johnson thing, sports politics.
However, I found myself digging way down on the bottom of the, what if Beryl and I came up with some real gold, but I'm going to let you be the judge. I will let you be the judge because ultimately you're the one listening in my job is to keep it interesting. So that being said, let me first off give you the claim.
Let me give you the claim to see if I can pique your interests. What if Jesus Christ was born in 1152, a D and crucified in 1185, a D what if the old Testament refers to medieval events? What if the apocalypse was written after 1486? Does this sound uncanny? This version of events is substantiated by facts and logic validated by new astronomical research and statistical analysis of ancient resources to a greater extent than everything you may have read and or heard about history before.
Probably thinking to yourself, this guy sounds like a nutcase, but I'm listening. You still with me? Aren't you. Alright, let me try and give you a little validation about the man who made these claims by a man named Anatole a flamenco before you get to out in the woods here, before you go here, who's this guy in a totally, let me give you his background, a little more validation and a totally flamenco was born in 1945.
He's a full member of the Russian Academy of sciences, a former member of the Russian Academy of natural sciences, full member of the international higher education Academy of sciences, doctor of physics and mathematics professor head of the Moscow university section of mathematics of the department of mathematics and mechanics saw plateaus problem from the theory of minimal spectral surfaces, author of the theory of invariants and top illogical classification of integral Hamiltonian dynamic systems Laureate of the 1996 national premium of the Russian Federation in mathematics for a cycle of works on the Hamiltonian dynamical systems and manifolds in variants theory, author of 200 scientific publications, 28 monographs and textbooks on mathematics, a specialist in geometry and topology, calculus of variations, symplectic topology, Hamiltonian, geometry, and mechanics, computer geometry.
So is there any one of you that have those qualifications because I definitely do not have those qualifications gotta tell you there's something about a Russian mathematician. There's something about the Eastern block of people that seem to be a higher order of cognitive thinking. At times, I'll give it up to you guys. I'm going to give it up to my, to my counterparts in the Eastern blocks.
They seem to be better at math might not be as good looking as me, but they're probably better thinkers sold. Let us begin at the beginning, the problems of historical chronology first and foremost, we're going to introduce the problem going to give a criticism of the scallop Jerian chronology. Don't worry. I'll break down what daddy is. The dating methods as offered by mathematical statistics, eclipses Zodiacs, Roman chronology, as the foundation of European chronology.
Let us give a concise, preliminary account of the current state of ancient and medieval chronology. The importance of chronology for historical science is all the greater. Since this discipline allows for the determination of the time interval between the historical event and the current era provided it can be adequately translated into terms of contemporary chronology. That is to say it is given a corresponding BC slash Ady dating nearly all the fundamental historical conclusions depend on the dating of the events described in the source that is being studied, an alter or imprecise dating of an event defines its entire interpretation and evaluation.
The current global chronology model has evolved owing to the labor of several generations of chronologists in the 17th through 19th century, and has Julian calendar dating's ascribed to all the major events of ancient history. The datings of events referred to in some freshly discovered document are predominantly based on the Roman chronology, since it is considered that all the other ancient chronological datings can be linked to our calendar via direct or indirect synchronism with the Roman dates.
In other words, Roman chronology and history are the spinal column of the consensual global chronology and history. This is why Roman history shall have to enjoy our very special attention point to scalp injure Pettius and other clerical chronology hours. The creation of contemporary chronology of the ancient times in the 16th through 17th century, a D the chronology of ancient and medieval history in its present form was created.
And for the most part concluded in a series of fundamental works of the 16th and 17th century that begins with the writings of Joseph is ScaleFunder called the founder of modern chronology as a science by the modern chronologist II Brickman scholars. His principle works on chronology are as follows. Scallon ger one Opus Novem date <inaudible> Tim Purim, Skalla injure one, the Sorum Tim Purium for the most part, the body of scalpers work was concluded by Dionysus.
<inaudible> the best known book of the latter is titled de doctrina tempore to quote the prominent contemporary chronologist E Brickman. There has been no chronological research ever conducted that could be called exhaustive and conforming to modern standards. It would be correct to call the modern consensual chronology of the classical period and the middle ages, the ScaleFunder potasium version.
We shall simply refer to it as Scala Jerian chronology, as it will be pointed out this version. Wasn't the only one existing in the 17th through 18th century, its veracity has been questioned by eminent scientists. The ground laying works of scalp injure and Batavia's of the 16th and 17th century present the ancient chronology as a table of dates given without any reasons whatsoever.
It is declared to beyond ecclesiastical tradition. This is hardly surprising since history has remained predominantly ecclesial for centuries. And for the most part was written by the clergy today, it is believed that the foundation of chronology were laid by Eusebius pamphlets and Saint Hieronymus allegedly in the fourth century, a D it is worth noting that you Sibelius of Sarah is painted, wearing typically medieval attire on the Renaissance epoch.
Most probably because he had lived in that period of time and not any earlier, despite the fact that Skalla Jerry in history ascribed you Sylvia's to the fourth century, a D during the years, two 60 to three 40. It is interesting to note that his famous work titled the history of time from the Genesis to the nice scene council, the so-called Chronicle, as well as the track tape by Saint Hieronymus weren't discovered until very late in the middle ages.
Apart from that historians say that the Greek original is only available in fragmentary form nowadays, and is complimented by the ad libitum translation made by st. Hieronymus Mark. The fact that the <inaudible> attempted to write the new history of the first three centuries in the ninth century or revise the history of Eusebius, but he could not do more than repeat that, which was written by Eusebius.
However, since the work of Eusebius was only published in 1544, that is much later than the writing of <inaudible>. One has reason to wonder could the ancient Eusebius have based his work on the medieval tractate of, of nice Cyprus Calista bias. On figure 1.7, we can see a painting of Caesar Nebia and Giovanni Guetta that was created in 1585 to 1590.
According to historians, it depicts a scene of st. Jerome and his pet lion visiting the library of Eusebius who's Chronicle was translated by Jerome and casserole. What we see here, however, is a typically medieval scene of the Renaissance at epoch, or maybe even the epoch of the 16th through 17th century. The library shelves are filled with books that look basically the same as those of the 18th and 19th century in hardcovers with wide fastening straps, the artists of the 16th and 17th century have most probably painted recent medieval events and characters cast into the dark ages.
By later 17th and 18th century chronologist of the Scala Jerian tradition, it is assumed that Skalla Jerian chronology was based on the interpretations of assorted numeric data collected from the Bible. Certain basis dates that were used as reference points originated as results of Scholastic exercises with numbers. For instance, according to the imminent chronologist Jay usher, the world was created on Sunday 23rd of October, 4,004 BC in the small hours of the morning mind boggling precision one is to bear in mind that the secular chronology of the present days is largely based on the Scholastic biblical chronology of the middle ages.
He Brickman it. Contemporary historian is perfectly right to note that the Christian historians have made secular Crinod graphy serve a clean zeal history. The compilation made by Hieronymus is the foundation of the entire edifice of Occidental chronological knowledge. Although Joseph Scallon ger the founding father of modern chronology as a science had attempted to reconstruct the entire track tape of Eusebius.
As he brick men tells us the datings of Eusebius that often got transcribed erroneously in manuscripts are hardly of any use to us nowadays, due to the controversy and the duality of all these medieval computations. The Genesis dating for instance, varies greatly from document to document. Let us quote the main examples.
59 69 BC, the Antiochian dating, according to Theo, Phyllis 55 Oh eight BC, the Byzantine dating also known as the constant Obel version, 54 93, BC Alexandrian the any, and error also 54 72 BC 4,004 BC, according to usher, a Hebraic dating 58 72 BC, the so-called dating of the 70 interpreters 4,700 BC Samarian, 37 61, BC Judaic, 34 91, BC, according to Hieronymus 51 99 BC, according to Eusebius 5,500 BC, according to the Julius Afrikanas 55, 15 BC, also 55 Oh seven BC.
According to Theo, Affiliace 55 51 BC, according to Augustine, as we can see this temporal reference point considered fundamental for the ancient chronology fluctuates within the span of 2100 years, we have only quoted the most famous examples. Here. It is expedient to know that there are about 200 various versions of the Genesis date in existence.
On figure 1.8, you can see an ancient painting of the 70 Bible translators commonly referred to as the 70 interpreters today. The correct Genesis dating issue was far from Scholastic and receive plenty of attention in the 17th and 18th century. For good reason. The matter here is that many ancient documents, date events in years past, since Adam or since the Genesis, this is why the existing millenarian discrepancies between the possible choices of this reference point substantially affect the datings of many ancient documents.
Joseph scavenger together with de <inaudible> were the first ones to have used the astronomical method for proving, but not examining critically the late medieval version of the chronology of the proceeding centuries, modern commentators consider scalp injure to have if DOE facto transformed this chronology into a scientific one.
This scientific veneer proved sufficient for the chronologists of the 17th and 18th century to put unquestioning trust in the largely rigidified chronological date grid that they had inherited. It is very significant that scholar, Jerry and chronology was initially created within the paradigm of the Western European Catholic church, which had remained and it's from control for a great amount of time.
Speaker 1 (18m 19s): Okay. A
Speaker 0 (18m 21s): <inaudible> wrote the medieval theologians often tried to calculate the age of the earth, interpreting assorted data contained in the Holy writ on having studied the text of the Bible. Archbishop Hieronymus came to the conclusion that the world was created 3,941 years before the beginning of modern chronology, his colleague Thiel, Phyllis, the Bishop of Anton Ikea had extended this period to 5,515 years.
Saint Augustine had added another 36 years wireless. The Irish arch Bishop James usher, who had obviously nurtured a fondness for precise numbers had made the assumption that the world was created in the early morning hours on 23rd of October, 4,004, BC, many eminent Western European chronologists of the 16th and 17th century were clergyman.
Joseph Scallon Jer for instance, was a theologian
Speaker 1 (19m 43s): TIS church.
Speaker 0 (19m 44s): The founding father of paleography was a doctor of divinity. <inaudible> a Jesuit and an author of several theological works that are absolute trust in this in fallibility of what the ecclesial chronology was telling them, determined their entire Wellston Shaw. Therefore their attitude to the data offered by other disciplines was determined by whether or not it could serve the advocacy of this op priori assumption or the other invariably based on the medieval ecclesial chronology that was later baptized scientific.
The fact that the clerical chronologists of the Occidental church
Speaker 1 (20m 40s): Had
Speaker 0 (20m 40s): Defied the endeavors of their predecessors of the 15th and 16th century excluded the very possibility of criticizing the foundations of chronology in any way at all. Even my noodly Joseph's Gallagher, for instance, could not even conceive of such heresy as running a check on the chronological materials of the Holy fathers, you Sylvia's and others scavenger calls this work by Eusebius the evangelical preparation, divine trusting the authority of their predecessors unconditionally.
The chronologists reacted to external criticisms, very bitterly. The same Joseph's Gallagher makes a perfect demonstration of this attitude toward objective scientific criticisms. In the following episode, the eminent biologist, Joseph Scallon ger the author of the chronology that has received such high scientific acclaim turned into a keen Quadro tourist.
Let us remind that a quadrat tourist was someone who tried to build a square equaling, a given circle in an area using nothing but a pair of campuses and a ruler. This mathematical problem is insoluble as a principle, which is proven by geometry. However, Joseph's Gallagher had published a book where he claims to have proved the true Quadro tour, which solved the problem, the best mathematicians of the Epic Viet Claudius have tried their hardest to prove to him that his reasoning was incorrect.
All in vain. The point here is that scallopers erroneous proof made the easy corollary about the perimeter of an equal lateral polygon with 196 angles being greater than that, of the circle. Circumscribing it, which is naturally quite absurd. Nevertheless, Scallon injure and his supporters who had a habit of defending their opinions.
Vehemently didn't want to acknowledge anything replying with Malad dictions and scornful epitaphs, and finally calling all the geometric options complete ignoramuses. And what concerned geometry one might imagine how these people reacted towards attempts of analyzing their version. Chronology, critically few are aware that <inaudible> brought chronology to perfection and absolutely precise datings quoting the year, day, month, and sometimes even the time of day for all the principle events in history of humankind, for whatever reason, modern monography is in textbooks.
Usually only quote, the years of events, according to scalp injure potatoes coyly, or meeting the month, day and hour. It is verily a step backwards that deprives the chronology calculated in the 17th and 18th century of its former splendor. And fundamentality by the 19th century, the accumulated volume of chronological material had grown to the extent of inducing respect our priori by a cheer scale.
So the chronologists of the 19th century saw their objective in making minor corrections and not much else. The issue of veracity is hardly raised at all in the 20th century and the ancient chronology solidifies terminally in the very shape and form given to it by the writings of Eusebius Hieronymus Thiel Filey is Augustine Hippolytus Saint Clement of Alexandria usher Scallon ger and <inaudible> to someone in our day and age.
The very thought that historians have followed in a Romania's chronology for about three centuries seems preposterous since it contradicts the existing tradition. However, as chronology developed specialists encountered considerable difficulties in trying to correlate the varied chronological data offered by ancient sources with the consensual scholar Jerian version. It was discovered for instance, that Hieronymus ms.
Dates his own time by a hundred years, the so-called SaaS and I tradition separated Alexander the great from the sauce. And I'd by an interval of 226 years, which was extended to 557 by contemporary historians. In this case, the gap exceeds 300 years, the Jews also allocate a mere 52 years for the Persian period of their history.
Despite the fact that Cirrus the second is separated from Alexander. The great by 206 years, the basic Egyptian chronology has also reached us through the filter of Christian chronologists. This list of Kings compiled by monotherapy on only survived as quotations made by the Christian authors. Some readers might be aware that the Oriental church avoided using the birth of Christ as a chronological point of reference.
Since in Constantinople, the debates about the date of his birth had continued well into the 19th century. Number three, the veracity of the scalp injure petite chronology was questioned as early as the 16th century, the doubts regarding the correctness of the consensual version, aren't a recent phenomenon. They have quite a tradition behind them in a Morozov wrote in particular that the Sala Monka university professor D R Sila published his works programmer, his story universe, solace and divination florae Historica where he had proved that the entire history of the classical age was medieval in its origin.
This is exactly the same point of view that was shared by the Jesuit historian archeologist Eugene hard-won 1646 to 1724, who considered the classical literature to have been written in monasteries during the preceding 16th century, the German Robert Bell doff wrote his history and his criticisms in 1902 through 1993, proving that not only ancient history, but even that of the early middle ages is a forgery of the Renaissance Epic and the subsequent centuries with the use of nothing, but phylo logical arguments.
You can see the title page of one of <inaudible> books in figure 1.9. And that of its translation by Edwin Johnson, the eminent English scientist, Edwin Johnson, the author of several remarkable critical studies of ancient and medieval history gave some severe and serious criticism of scalp injure chronology. The main conclusion that Edwin Johnson had arrived to after many years of chronological research was formulated thusly.
We are a lot closer in time to the Greeks and the Romans than what the chronological tables tell us. Edwin Johnson called for a revision of the entire edifice of the ancient and medieval chronology. His principle works were published in the late 19th and early 20th century.
Speaker 3 (29m 54s): Okay.
Speaker 0 (29m 56s): Newton, an English mathematician, mechanicians astronomer and physicist, the creator of classical mechanics member of the Royal society of London since 1672. And it's president since 1703 develop differential and integral calculus. He discovered light dispersion and chromatic aberration researched diffraction and interference worked on the development of the corpuscular theory of light, made a hypothesis and combine the concepts of waves and particles built.
The reflecting telescope formulated the principle laws of classical mechanics discovered the gravity law formulated the theory of movement and celestial bodies and the founding principles of celestial mechanics. Sir, Isaac Newton occupies a special place among the critics of the ScaleFunder potato Prius version. He is the author of a number of profound works on chronology, where he relates his conclusions regarding the in veracity of scale Ginger's version.
And some of its principle parts. This research remains rather obscure for the contemporary reader, despite having provoked major controversy in the past. The main chronological works of Newtons are the following a short Chronicle from the first memory of Kings in Europe to the conquest of Persia by Alexander the great to the chronology of ancient kingdoms, amended Newton made a radical revision of the ancient chronology based unnatural scientific ideas.
Some very few events were added extra age. This is true of the legendary voyage of the Argonauts, which Newton determined to have occurred in the 14th century BC and not in the 10th BC as was believed in his time period. However, the dating of this event is rather vague in later chronological studies of other chronologies as well.
The new chronology offered by sir, Isaac Newton is a lot shorter than the consensual chronology of ScaleFunder Newton moved. Most of the events dated as preceding the Epic of Alexander. The great forward in time, closer to us, the revision isn't as radical as the contained in the writings of, in a Morozov who had been of the opinion that the scallop Jerian version of ancient chronology was only voracious starting in the fourth century, a D let us Mark that Newton did not go further in time than the BC D Mark in his research.
Contemporary historians have this to say about those works of Newtons. They are the fruit of 40 years of labor diligent research and a tremendous irritation. Basically, sir, Isaac Newton studied all of the major literary works on ancient history and all the primary sources beginning with ancient and Oriental mythology, modern commentators. Invariably, come to the conclusion that sir, Isaac Newton was wrong when they compare his conclusion to the consensual skeletal, Syrian chronology, they say that naturally, without deciphered CUNA Forman, hieroglyphic writings have no archaeological data due to the non-existence of archeology.
And that age bound by the presumed veracity of the biblical chronology and the belief in the reality of what was told in myths Newton's errors, weren't measured in mere tens of hundreds of years. He was thousands of years off the Mark and his chronology is far from true, even in what concerns, the very reality of the events described w Winston wrote in his memoirs.
Sir, Isaac often saw the truth in mathematics intuitively without even needing proof, but this very psoriasis, Newton compiled a chronology. However, this chronology isn't any more convincing than the most ingenious, historical novel, as I have finally proved in my reputation thereof, Oh, how weak, how utterly weak even the greatest of the mortals can be in some regards, what did sir Isaac suggest exactly.
Basically he had analyzed the BC chronology of ancient Egypt and ancient Greece. He must have lacked the time for the analysis of more recent epochs. Since this track, Tate only got published in the last year of his life. For instance, the contemporary consensual version of chronology ascribes. The first years of rain of the Egyptian Pharaoh menace to approximately 3000 years, BC Newton suggested that this event could be given a date as recent as nine 46 BC.
Thus, the shift forward in time comprises about 2000 years nowadays, the myth of Theseus is dated to the 15th century BC. However, sir, Isaac claimed that these events took place around 936 BC. Hence the shift of dates forward that he suggests amount to roughly 700 years. The famous Trojan war is dated to roughly 1225 BC today.
But Newton claimed this event to have occurred in nine Oh four BC. The shift forward here is one of approximately 330 years. Newton's main conclusion may be encapsulated as follows. He moves a part of the history of ancient Greece about 300 years forward in time, closer to us, the history of ancient Egypt covering a span of several hundred years. According to this calendar that is 3000 BC and on his moved forward in time by Newton and compressed into a time period, as short as 350 years, namely nine 46 BC to 617 BC Newton also moved some fundamental dates of the ancient Egyptian history about 1800 years forward in time.
Sir, Isaac Newton only managed to revise the dates proceeding 200 BC. His observations were of a rather eclectic nature, and he could not find any system in these apparently chaotic re datings. We shall also briefly relate the publication history of Newton's work as told by the book which may lead one to certain conclusions, Newton's seemed to have been wary of the plethora of complications and the publication of his track tape on chronology could lead him to this work of his had commenced many years before 1727, the book had been rewritten numerous times up until his death in 1727.
It is noteworthy the short Chronicle wasn't intended for publication by its author. However, the rumors of Newton's chronological research had spread far enough and the princess of Wales expressed a wish to familiarize herself with it. Syriza gave her the manuscript on the condition that no third party should learn of it. The same happened with ABI Conti who started to lend the manuscript to interested scientists upon his return to Paris.
As a result, <inaudible> translated the manuscript into French and added his own historical overview to it. The translation eventually reached the Paris bookseller G Gavalon who wrote Newton a letter in may of 1724, eager to publish his writings, having re C no answer. He wrote another letter in March 25, 1725, that is telling Newton that he would consider sir, Isaac's silence as acquiescence for the book's publication with ferrets comments, no reply was given to that either.
Then cavalier asked his friend in London to get a reply from Newton. Personally, their meeting took place on 27th of May, 1725, and sir Isaacs answered in the negative, but it was too late. The book had already been published under the following title. <inaudible> D M L Chevalier Newton, sorry, for my very poor attempted French, sir, Isaac received a copy of the book on 11th of November, 1725.
He published a letter in the philosophical transactions of the Royal society, where he accused the Abbe of breach of promise and publication without the author's consent. When father associate started his attacks in 1726, sir, Isaac had announced the preparation of a more voluminous and detailed work on ancient chronology for publication. All of those events took place shortly before Newton's death. He had sadly lacked the time for the publication of the more in depth book and none of its traces remain in existence.
Sir, Isaac died in 1727, leaving his research of ancient history. Unfinished could all this complicated history of the short Chronicles publication be explained by Newton's fear of groundless attacks. What was the reaction to the publication of this book? The mid 18th century press saw a multitude of responses. Most of them were made by historians and phylo GEs and had voiced such negative opinions as the blenders of the honor to dilettante in regard to Newton's work.
Only very few articles appeared and express support of his opinion. After the initial wave of responses subsided, the book was defacto hushed up and withdrawn from scientific circulation in the 19th century Francoise. Arago the author of the review presume Newton's chronological research unworthy of more than the following. Rather flip it remarks by and large Newton failed to come up with correct judgments in everything accepting mathematics and its application apart from his theological.
Opuses the chronology that he compiled is there to confirm our opinion. The very chronology that Frere Rhett refuted immediately upon publication most probably are ago decided not to get involved in the issue and quoted ferrets opinion without thinking twice about it, CSR and Brazo tries to bring the issue to conclusion in his notorious genius and insanity in the following manner.
Newton whose mind amazed the entire humanity as the contemporaries rightly state was yet another one to have gone senile in his old age, although the symptoms in his case, weren't quite as grave as those of the geniuses listed above. That must have been the time when he had written his chronology apocalypse and letter to Bentley obscure involved writing's quite unlike anything that he had written in his youth, similar accusations would later be addressed at in a Morozov another scientist, bold enough to revise chronology.
They sound most peculiar in a scientific discussion. And as we think mask the inability to reply substantially, all right, my friends. What do you think about that so far? Because we are getting deep hot. See this initial intro is just trying to get in and kinda debunk the fact of the chronologists. The fact that the majority of our timelines came from injure and potatoes.
And if you can trace back the majority of all our timelines back to these two guys who did not really have all the information they need, you could think about how science is done today, how the difficult it is to argue with the consensus, you can make that same argument to the past. So this intro is about kind of debunking timelines, and you can see great lines like Isaac Newton that had issues with it. Other great scientists at the time had issues with the chronology.
So this intro is going to be the foundation on which we build up the crescendo of historical and biblical figures being a lot closer to us than we previously thought. Let me know what you guys think. This is kind of tough to get into, and please forgive my pronunciation of a lot of Greek and French and Russian words as I am dumb American. I love you guys.
Thank you for taking time to hang out with me. Let me know if you want to hear a little bit more about this. Cause this is I find fascinating. I hope
Speaker 4 (44m 32s): You do. Let me know in the comments if you like it and we'll keep moving forward. I get some good feedback. All right. I love you guys. Huh?