Oera Linda intersects the Polar Configuration of David Talbott

If you are new here, please introduce yourself before posting in one of the other threads.
Forum rules
The obvious rules apply: behave yourself. Moderators will delete (parts of) posts that are inappropriate.
Post Reply
Posts: 9
Joined: 28 May 2023, 04:57
Location: Oregon

Oera Linda intersects the Polar Configuration of David Talbott

Post by Pentuin »

I'm Scott Talkington, living in Oregon. I've discussed some of these things having to do with Electric/Plasma Universe Theory with Jan, but I've become much more knowledgeable on the topic, and only recently noticed that there is a forum. If you're not aware of EU Theory and the Talbott, Cardona, Cochrane theories about the Earth having been part of a different solar system within the past 20,000 years then their theory of a Saturnian system will probably surprise you. The Jul is the crux of Talbott and Cardona's theory, in which the brown dwarf star that was the center of our infant solar system was captured by our current sun. Shortly after the capture, which broke the plasma/electrical membrane of Saturn's photosphere, the planets of the small star (Venus, Mars, and Earth) stopped revolving around Saturn and took up revolutions around the new sun, but in line with the now-planet Saturn. During this period Saturn dominate the sky of the Earth, and within Saturn's disc were situated Venus and Mars, such that the overall formation resembled an eye with an iris and pupil. During this period a crescent appeared on Saturn that rotated every 24 hours so that at midnight the crescent was at the top of its travel and also at its brightest, while at noon it was at the bottom. You'll find images of this crescent in many places, such a Gobeklitepe, and in the ruins of Egypt, Sumeria, China, and Mesoamerica together with the star and crescent image which is nothing like our moon.

Talbott's thesis is that with the advent of this polar configuration and the rotating crescent about the "wheel" image of the configuration man first began to index the passage of time. Prior to that humans lived within the photosphere (plasma boundary) of Saturn where the light was uniform and there was nothing to mark the passage of time, at least as a uniform index. This was the even described in Genesis 1, and in the myths and legends of every human population on the Earth. There is virtually incontrovertible proof of this in the form of both the uniformity of myths as well as literally hundreds of millions of graphic images carved on the walls of neolithic caves created during the transition, and later formalized in places like Gobeklitepe (and probably in the temples mentioned in the Oera Linda Codex before they were detroyed).

I know this is a lot to take in, if it's new to you, so I'll leave you with a passage in Talbott's book *The Saturn Myth* that recounts the relationship between the "First Man" (the Heaven Man) and the later evolution of civilization:
So vivid was the great father’s celestial image and so overpowering was his influence on civilization in its infancy, that the ancient chroniclers often gave him human form, recalling him as the “first man.” But he was no mortal of flesh and blood. In his original character he upheld the Cosmos as the Heaven Man, a celestial giant whose body encompassed all the gods and composed the “primeval matter” of creation.

The great father reigned over the prosperous age and then departed amid great upheavals. The mythical accounts give this imposing figure such tangible and “human” traits that more than one scholar reduces him to a living man—an esteemed tribal ancestor whose heroic exploits succeeding generations progressively enlarged until the entire universe came under his authority.
This is the approach of William Ridgeway, who, in a survey of the best-known figures of the great father, argues that only an actual tribal chief could have left such a profound imprint on primitive communities. Ridgeway asks us whether the abstract “sky,” or the solar orb, or a vegetation spirit—common explanations of the great father—could produce such devotion as is evident in the annual lamentations over the ruler’s catastrophic death. Osiris, Brahma, Tammuz, Quetzalcoatl—their devotees remember each as a living ancestor, whose passing was a terrifying calamity.1
Of course Ridgeway does not assume that one man alone accounts for all the traditions of a great father. Rather he seeks to identify each in terms of a historical figure quite distinct from the venerated ancestors of other tribes. If his arguments against prevailing astronomical and vegetation theories carry great weight, they fail to explain the global parallels between the respective myths. Nor can one reconcile Ridgeway’s interpretation with the incontrovertible fact that, in the earliest accounts, the great father is manifestly cosmic.

That many sacred histories, however, present the creator-king in human form is a paradox requiring an explanation. The solution lies in the nature of the legendary “first man.”
And he goes on to describe how the original religion was monotheistic, how the Father and Adam were the same entity, and how that changed over time:
The all-embracing character of the great father facilitated an important development of the god’s image at a time when cultural mixture could have destroyed the “monotheistic” theme. In ancient Egypt almost every district seems to have had its favored representative of the god One, a fact which gives the great compendiums of Egyptian religion (Pyramid Texts, etc.) a misleading appearance of confusion. How can we speak of a solitary god when Egyptian texts refer to an endless number of primary deities?

In more than one locality the priests themselves at least partially resolved the problem by adopting alien gods as the limbs of the local great god—a process obviously encouraged by the preexisting image of the god as Heaven Man. This habit was widesspread in Egypt and occurred as early as the Pyramid Texts, which assimilate a number of once-independent gods to the body of Åtum:

Your head is Horus of the Netherworld,
O Imperishable…
Your nose is the Jackal [Ap-uat],
Your teeth are Sopd, O Imperishable,
Your hands are Hāpy and Dūamūtef…
Your feet are ’Imsety and Kebhsenuf…
A hymn from the Papyrus of Ani similarly honors Osiris:
The hair of Osiris Ani is the hair of Nu.
The face of Osiris Ani is the face of Re.
The eyes of Osiris Ani are the eyes of Hathor.
The ears of Osiris Ani are the ears of Ap-uat.
The lips of Osiris Ani are the lips of Anpu…2

In almost the same words, the Papyrus of Nu joins the divinities Osiris, Ptah, Anpu, Hathor, Horus, Isis, and others to the body of Re.3 In the Memphite theology Åtum, Horus, Thoth, and the company of gods became the limbs of Ptah.4 Syncretization of this sort, though appearing absurd to us today, actually helped to preserve the original idea against the eroding forces of cultural assimilation. Faced with a growing number of competing deities, the priests proclaimed: there was only great god in the beginning, whose body encompassed a circle of subordinate deities.</Q> --David Talbott, The Saturn Myth
So, I finally got that off my chest. In other places Talbott mentions how this original deity was identified with both "the Word" and "World". What do you think? Does it lend authenticity to the narratives in the Oera Linda Codex? Jan, what do you think? Worth more research?
User avatar
Posts: 104
Joined: 31 Dec 2022, 11:08

Re: Oera Linda intersects the Polar Configuration of David Talbott

Post by Nordic »

Welcome! Your interesting take made me to start a new topic on the theme. Feel free to join there, ask any questions or put forth your own findings.
Posts: 11
Joined: 18 Aug 2023, 21:09

Re: Oera Linda intersects the Polar Configuration of David Talbott

Post by Jeppe »

Hi Pentium.
Very interesting of course but the being part of an other universe is doubtful .
Uni in Universe comes from Unique which means One so that hampers the thought of more than one...

Adam and Eve ... I think Adam originated from Dutch/Frisian Adem which means Breath. that is where Life Starts.
I think Eva/Eve originated from the Frisian word Ewa/ Dutch eeuwig which means centuries or forever

If you go to google translate you can translate stuff into Frisian. Look for the words from before the Industrial Revolution because after it became diluted . So example Monday is in Frisian Moandei... which is in speech the same.

There is only one pole which is North.... All compasses show the North therefor the opposit is South...

I hope this little bit of information is helpful in your search
Post Reply