Evidences against Standard Cosmology

[joelr]

Native said: ↑
As a Comparative Mythologist, I´m of course aware of the Egyptian creation story too.

When the "primordial waters" came together from chaos, it created the "first fiery entity" which created everything else. And as this prime Atum-Ra entity otherwhere in the Egyptian cultural period was cosmologically closely connected to the Egyptian Goddess Hathor who resemble the Milky Way on the southern hemisphere, you have a DIRECT connection to the Milky Way Mythology too.

Agreed. But WHAT it this fire? Egyptological scholars and others have this primordial fire to represent the Sun but this doesn´t compute with the Hathor (or similar) Egyptian goddesses, which depicts the southern hemisphere contours of our Milky Way as illustrated here - The great Mother Goddess

http://www.native-science.net/MilkyWay.MotherGoddess.htm

"
An galactic ceiling within the burial chamber of Ramesses VI appears the sun being born from Nut within the morning, traveling along her body amid the day and being gulped at night ."
I don't se any evidence of anything except this being the sun.

This primordial water & fire describe the ancient known part of the Universe, our Milky Way galaxy and its´pre-creation and factual creation. You still can take the outlook of the galactic arms and symbolize these as "galactic rivers of water".

Not really, everything came from the primal waters, including stars which would include the milky way.

How would a primordial Nun ONLY be cited for making the geographic river Nile amongst everything else this deity created from the primordial waters? Where are the logics in this?

I just noted this because we´re dealing with the primordial conditions of creation from "water" and in this sense it is illogical to interpret Nun as a terrestrial geographic river.

Nun is primal waters. When they specifically take only water and say it also contains Nun this is just confirmation that they believed everything came from literal water.

Native said: ↑
IMO. the very Milky Way was in fact created in the initial beginning of the Genesis telling.


You can blame the authors of Genesis for not noticing this, but in fact, the Hebrew mythology had the "Fire-Stream" definition for the Milky Way which fits nicely to the Biblical Genesis notion of "let there be Light".

Fire stream is not in Genesis. Light was created from the primal waters.

Native said: ↑
This gives itself when working with Comparative Mythology and the cultural Stories of Creation - for instants as told in the Egyptian connection Nun>Atum-Ra>Milky Way goddess Hathor connection above.

Its not a problem for me: The Milky Way is created from the primordial waters (in modern science: cosmic clouds of dust and gases) and when this comes together in a swirling central motion, the central light (Atum-Ra) creates all firm matters in the Milky Way, hence the familiarity of (Atum)-Ra and goddess Hathor who represent the Milky Way contours on the southern hemisphere where the central galactic light is located.

I´m not rewriting anything. I´m simply COMPARING, INTERPRETING & EXPLAINING the ancient myths in both mythical and modern astronomical and cosmological terms - and THIS is the only new thing I do. (In fact this isn´t even new as this was already noticed by our ancestors in ancient times. I´m just re-discovering the ancient knowledge).

It's definitely the sun.

"
The skyline was amazingly imperative to the Egyptians, since it was here that the Sun showed up and vanished every day. A song to the Sun god Ra appears this reverance: ‘O Ra! In thine egg, brilliant in thy disk, sparkling forward from the skyline, swimming over the steel firmament.’ The Sun itself was spoken to by a few divine beings, depending on its position. A rising morning Sun was Horus, the divine child of Osiris and Isis. The twelve Sun was Ra since of its unimaginable quality.

The evening Sun got to be Atum, the maker god who lifted Pharoahs from their tombs to the stars. The ruddy color of the Sun at nightfall was considered to be the blood from the Sun god as he passed on. After the Sun had set, it got to be Osiris, god of passing and resurrection. In this way, night was related with passing and day with life or resurrection. This reflects the typical Egyptian Idea of Immortality.."

Native said: ↑
Do you really accept a concrete "Genesis Flood" to once have covered the entire Earth and its highest mountains? REALLY?

No, the historic interpreters thought this, but our prehistoric ancestors had the Milky Way symbolized to look like a celestial river running OVER and AROUND the Earth and not ON the Earth. You still can observe this celestial river in the darker seasons as a white band around the Earth. (And of course, a possible creator wouldn´t be that stupid to destroy his immense works!. This is simply a priestal "revenge invention" in order to govern the pub).

The Israelite myth is about a water flood. It was taken directly from the Epic of Gilamesh which is also a flood story.

Native said: ↑
The cultural Egyptian goddesses of Nut and Hathor both resembles the Milky Way as the mythical symbol of the Heavenly Cow, as you can read here - Book of the Heavenly Cow - Wikipedia

Here the consensus scholars and authors are mythologically and astronomically confused to ascribe both deities to the Sun - which of course is illogical as the Sun cannot depict "a heavenly cow" but it CAN depict the image of the Milky Way contours on the southern hemisphere - and then "the Sun" should be the "central luminosity in the Milky Way.

I see no evidence that the scholars are wrong. as if the sun wouldn't play a main role in their myths?

In fact we don´t disagree with each other at all. I just take the "primordial waters" to count for the modern cosmological terms of "creation from a cloud of dust and gases, i.e. "watery elements", hence the modern creation story of our Solar System - which is a small and orbiting part in the Milky Way creation.

We have to understand the ancient way of describing celestial matters by building a story with natural symbols known by humans: If you observe a celestial white band running in the night Sky, you´ll look for similar white/whitish colors and symbols from your surroundings and then you can take running rivers or you can take milk from cows and use this symbolic in order to describe what you observe in the night Sky = then a cow becomes a basic mythical and archetypical symbol of the Milky Way, and you even can take the human female milky qualities to describe the same and then you have a celestial Great Mother Goddess (Hathor and others of different cultural periods) of creation as illustrated here - The great Mother Goddess - If scholars have no clues of this natural and cosmological symbolism, they of course are all wrong per definition.

Except they can ready the myths, it's the sun. You have a belief you want to fit into data. That isn't how the truth is found.

No it is not. Its about having a cow to symbolise the southern Milky Way contours and a symbol of Light between its horns to symbolise the central Milky Way light/luminosity. Of course and logically you cannot imagine such a cow scenario to be connected to the Sun at all.

The cow birthed the sun. That's it?

Of course there is no references to the Milky Way there as the authors had no clue of such a connection. In their mythical, astronomical and cosmological ignorances, they just speaks (very inconsistently) of the Sun and that´s all.

Besides a preconcieved belief I see no evidence of anything else?

NOT when connecting factual notions to the galactic representation of Hathor and other goddesses/cows.

It doesn't need be a "factual notion??", that's the myth, a cow birthed the sun. Cows represent life which the sun gives.

Once again: You cannot speak of the Sun as neither a cow nor a female figure. This is scholarly mythical, astronomical and cosmological and disconnected confusions which tend to be superstitious claims when analyzing their interpretations in the deep..

Everything in the heavens is anthropomorphize and you know this.

As said several times now: It isn´t the Sun which is the prime entity to be formed from the primordial waters in the cultural creation stories. It is the CENTRAL LIGHT (Atum-Ra) in our Milky Way galaxy from where even our Solar (Ra) System is created.

You can say it 1 million times, you haven't given any evidence beyond cows have "milky" color? The sun was a major part of myths, it was the biggest thing in the sky, gave light and life. It's the most important part of old myths until Gods became more important.
There is no such thing as "intuitive" knowledge people get about the universe, there is no evidence that this is possible and you are re-interpreting myths with the intention of making this true. So it's bound to be incorrect. It's led to to believe you know more than actual scholars in the field. Making data fit beliefs is creation science.

 

[Native]

@joelr I´m very pleased to recognize your serious interest in ancient myths and it isn´t often I get such a fine response as you´re giving me here, so thanks for this.

An galactic ceiling within the burial chamber of Ramesses VI appears the sun being born from Nut within the morning, traveling along her body amid the day and being gulped at night ."
I don't se any evidence of anything except this being the sun.

You cannot observe the galaxy and the sun at the same time, hence you cannot make such a connection and conclusion. When referring to Nut, the galactic Mother Goddess, "her" direct familiarity with a LIGHT can ONLY be the central luminosity of the Milky Way, called Atum-Ra or Amun-Ra.

The global scholarly Sun confusion taking the Atum-Ra to be the Sun.
Of course we all know that the Sun is the nearest source of all growth on the Earth, but when analyzing the ancient texts, is possibly cannot be the our Sun which creates everything in the ancient Stories of Creation.

Quote from - Ra - Wikipedia
The following quotation is a huge confused mess and mix up of cosmological, celestial and terrestrial issues.

"At the beginning of time, when there was nothing but chaos, (# 1) the sun-god existed alone in the watery mass of Nun which filled the universe. (# 2) "I am Atum when he was alone in Nun, (# 3) I am Ra when he dawned, when he began to rule that which he had made." This passage talks about how ( # 4) Atum created everything in human form out of the chaos and ( # 5) how Ra then began to rule over the earth where humans and divine beings coexisted. (# 6) He created Shu, god of air, and the goddess of moisture, Tefnut. The siblings symbolized two universal principles of humans: life and right (justice). ( # 7) Ra was believed to have created all forms of life by calling them into existence by uttering their secret names. ( # 8) In some accounts humans were created from Ra's tears and sweat".

Ad 1: Our Sun wasn´t the first to be created from the watery chaos as lots of other references speaks of a galactic Mother Goddess being created by the "first fiery entity" created by the primordial waters. Of course our sun cannot have made and ruled everything else in the Milky Way. We are here dealing with the Egyptian ATUM-RA or AMUN-RA, the LIGHT of the central Milky Way and not RA = the Sun.
Ad 2: When being created from the Nun, Atum+Ra ruled the creation when "he dawned" = was created. We have a differentiel meaning between the central Milky Way LIGHT, ATUM-RA and the light of the Sun, RA.
Ad 3: It isn´t RA our sun which dawned first, but ATUM-RA, the Milky Way central LIGHT.
Ad 4: This is the correct mytho-cosmological notion of Amun-Ra/Atum-Ra.
Ad 5: This is the correct mytho-cosmological notion of Ra, the Sun.
Ad 6: Of course "he" (Ra the Sun) didn´t create Shu, the god of air as Shu is a elementary part of the primordial waters before the factual creation.
Ad 7: Again: Not Ra, the Sun, but Amun-Ra or Atum-Ra the central Milky Way LIGHT of creation.
Ad 8: Of course we all are created by the Milky Way LIGHT as the prime creative source, ATUM-RA and by the secondary source Ra, the Sun.

Joelr, I´ve said it several times before: If past and present interpretators, scholars and authors have no clues of the cosmo-mythical extend in the ancient myths, they have no other options but to interpret the LIGHT SYMBOLISM of the Sun to rule everything in the ancient known part of the Universe, our Milky Way.

In this matter they all interpret the ancient stories from "daylight observation perspectives" and ignore the nighttime observations of stars, star constellations and the very observation of the Earth encircling Milky Way band and its galactic center which provides the prime mythical observations created by the Egyptian Atum-Ra or Amun-Ra, the Milky Way contours which is imagined by our ancestors as a huge female goddess on the southern hemisphere and a huge male god on the northern hemisphere as illustrated here - Keys to unlock the doors of Milky Way Mythology

Now to some of your latest comments:

An galactic ceiling within the burial chamber of Ramesses VI appears the sun being born from Nut within the morning, traveling along her body amid the day and being gulped at night ."
I don't se any evidence of anything except this being the sun.

According to my analytic explanations above, this is not the Sun, but Amun-Ra/Atum-Ra the central Milky Way luminosity.

The evening Sun got to be Atum, the maker god who lifted Pharoahs from their tombs to the stars.

The mythical "evening Sun" concept refers the nocturnal light of the Milky Way.

The Israelite myth is about a water flood. It was taken directly from the Epic of Gilamesh which is also a flood story.

Almost every culture had such a telling and it connects directly to the mythical term of the "Cosmic Ocean" and more specifically to the mythical Milky Way River. And as this Milky Way river can be observed all over the world, its description logically would be very similar all over the world.

I see no evidence that the scholars are wrong. as if the sun wouldn't play a main role in their myths?

They certainly are wrong when leaving out the mythology and symbolism of the Milky Way around which the entire Solar System orbits.

Except they can ready the myths, it's the sun. You have a belief you want to fit into data. That isn't how the truth is found.

I´ve provided the logical analysis and explanation above.

It doesn't need be a "factual notion??", that's the myth, a cow birthed the sun. Cows represent life which the sun gives.

Try to imagine a cow giving birth to the Sun It´s obviously the other way around: The central LIGHT of the Milky Way creates the galactic contour on the southern hemisphere which is imagined as both a Sacred Cow and the galactic goddess Nut, Hathor, Aphrodite, Venus, Isthar, Inanna etc. etc.

Everything in the heavens is anthropomorphize and you know this.

All I know is that our ancestors didn´t make anthropomorphic images and symbols as thought by modern scholars. They made very logical descriptions of everything.

If they observed a snake on the ground and they saw a snake-like star constellation, they logically added wings to the snake in order to describe the dimension above the Earth where birds flies. The same goes with observing human like figures in the night Sky where they added wings or heads of birds to such a human like celestial figure - as you see very specifically in the Egyptian symbolism, but also otherwhere in cultural myths.

You can say it 1 million times, you haven't given any evidence beyond cows have "milky" color? The sun was a major part of myths, it was the biggest thing in the sky, gave light and life. It's the most important part of old myths until Gods became more important.

Try to watch the night Sky and your "biggest thing, the sun" is just a small dot of the entire imagery where the term "mythical giants symbolism" belongs to the Milky Way contours of light.

Besides: If you take the biblical Genesis, the Sun was made later in this telling, hence it was made by a prime former Light.

There is no such thing as "intuitive" knowledge people get about the universe, there is no evidence that this is possible and you are re-interpreting myths with the intention of making this true. So it's bound to be incorrect. It's led to to believe you know more than actual scholars in the field. Making data fit beliefs is creation science.

Do you outright reject "religious revelations" in general? Do you too reject the references to shamans who travels spiritually in other dimensions in order to tranfer knowledge and healing powers to their tribes? Is it really that difficult for you to imagine your created self to communicate with the powers which have created you?

With sincere respect and regards from
Native

Edit:
BTW I recommend you to read:

John O´Neill - A brilliant comparative mythology author.

My favorite author of mythological and cosmological topics is John O´Neill, author of “Nights of the Gods”, Part 1-2.

Part 1 can be read online or downloaded ad PDF files here: The Night of the Gods : John O'Neill : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive
Part 1-2 can be bought here:
http://www.amazon.com/Night-Gods-Part-John-ONeill/dp/076615159X

My comment: Except from minor interpretative issues, where the mytho-cosmological concept of “soil being created and formed in the galactic center of our Milky Way”, is interpreted as meaning “the Earth” instead of "from soil", the rest of his works is just excellent, comparing the same mythical telling from many cultures and working etymologically with the texts.

 

[Native]

Subject: "The Theory of Anything".

Me: How astrophysicists and cosmologists are playing their biased fairy tale lotteries and forget all about the scientific methods.

Dr. Brian Keating´s abstract:
The concept of the Multiverse is an old one, one that has been approached primarily as a matter of metaphysics or philosophy. But is it scientific? And, if it is scientific, why do so many of its most ardent supporters describe their 'faith' in the Multiverse?
This video explores several contrasting viewpoints, from Andrei Linde to Paul Davies as well as ways to test Eternal Inflation, one of the leading theories that predicts a Multiverse.

Content:
00:00 Introduction
01:00 Fine-tuning
02:20 Karl Popper: Falsification and Astrology
04:00 Steven Weinberg & the Weak Anthropic Principle
04:45 Paul Davies
07:00 Sabine Hossenfelder: Why the multiverse is religion, not science.

Me: Sabines comments on "black holes" are also just based on assumptions of the surroundings of a galactic center and not on scientific explanations of this subject. This is also just a point of a "religious" belief.

 

[joelr]

@joelr I´m very pleased to recognize your serious interest in ancient myths and it isn´t often I get such a fine response as you´re giving me here, so thanks for this.

You cannot observe the galaxy and the sun at the same time, hence you cannot make such a connection and conclusion. When referring to Nut, the galactic Mother Goddess, "her" direct familiarity with a LIGHT can ONLY be the central luminosity of the Milky Way, called Atum-Ra or Amun-Ra.

The global scholarly Sun confusion taking the Atum-Ra to be the Sun.
Of course we all know that the Sun is the nearest source of all growth on the Earth, but when analyzing the ancient texts, is possibly cannot be the our Sun which creates everything in the ancient Stories of Creation.

Quote from - Ra - Wikipedia
The following quotation is a huge confused mess and mix up of cosmological, celestial and terrestrial issues.

"At the beginning of time, when there was nothing but chaos, (# 1) the sun-god existed alone in the watery mass of Nun which filled the universe. (# 2) "I am Atum when he was alone in Nun, (# 3) I am Ra when he dawned, when he began to rule that which he had made." This passage talks about how ( # 4) Atum created everything in human form out of the chaos and ( # 5) how Ra then began to rule over the earth where humans and divine beings coexisted. (# 6) He created Shu, god of air, and the goddess of moisture, Tefnut. The siblings symbolized two universal principles of humans: life and right (justice). ( # 7) Ra was believed to have created all forms of life by calling them into existence by uttering their secret names. ( # 8) In some accounts humans were created from Ra's tears and sweat".

Ad 1: Our Sun wasn´t the first to be created from the watery chaos as lots of other references speaks of a galactic Mother Goddess being created by the "first fiery entity" created by the primordial waters. Of course our sun cannot have made and ruled everything else in the Milky Way. We are here dealing with the Egyptian ATUM-RA or AMUN-RA, the LIGHT of the central Milky Way and not RA = the Sun.
Ad 2: When being created from the Nun, Atum+Ra ruled the creation when "he dawned" = was created. We have a differentiel meaning between the central Milky Way LIGHT, ATUM-RA and the light of the Sun, RA.
Ad 3: It isn´t RA our sun which dawned first, but ATUM-RA, the Milky Way central LIGHT.
Ad 4: This is the correct mytho-cosmological notion of Amun-Ra/Atum-Ra.
Ad 5: This is the correct mytho-cosmological notion of Ra, the Sun.
Ad 6: Of course "he" (Ra the Sun) didn´t create Shu, the god of air as Shu is a elementary part of the primordial waters before the factual creation.
Ad 7: Again: Not Ra, the Sun, but Amun-Ra or Atum-Ra the central Milky Way LIGHT of creation.
Ad 8: Of course we all are created by the Milky Way LIGHT as the prime creative source, ATUM-RA and by the secondary source Ra, the Sun.

Joelr, I´ve said it several times before: If past and present interpretators, scholars and authors have no clues of the cosmo-mythical extend in the ancient myths, they have no other options but to interpret the LIGHT SYMBOLISM of the Sun to rule everything in the ancient known part of the Universe, our Milky Way.

In this matter they all interpret the ancient stories from "daylight observation perspectives" and ignore the nighttime observations of stars, star constellations and the very observation of the Earth encircling Milky Way band and its galactic center which provides the prime mythical observations created by the Egyptian Atum-Ra or Amun-Ra, the Milky Way contours which is imagined by our ancestors as a huge female goddess on the southern hemisphere and a huge male god on the northern hemisphere as illustrated here - Keys to unlock the doors of Milky Way Mythology

http://www.native-science.net/MilkyWay.Mythology.Keys.htm


"past and present interpretators, scholars and authors have no clues:" You are just goin in circles hand hand waving scholarship away. Not interested in conspiracy theories. Write a paper and get it peer-reviewed.

Now to some of your latest comments:

According to my analytic explanations above, this is not the Sun, but Amun-Ra/Atum-Ra the central Milky Way luminosity.

Atum-Ra is the evening sun. In later myths Amun-Ra joined with Atum.

The mythical "evening Sun" concept refers the nocturnal light of the Milky Way.

No it's the sun in the evening:

"Atum was linked specifically with the evening sun, while Ra or the closely linked god Khepri were connected with the sun at morning and midday.[1"

Almost every culture had such a telling and it connects directly to the mythical term of the "Cosmic Ocean" and more specifically to the mythical Milky Way River. And as this Milky Way river can be observed all over the world, its description logically would be very similar all over the world.

All these cultures had a cosmic ocean of actual water. I see you are changing the myths to fit this agenda and I'm just really bored at this point. The evidence I gave wasn;t countered, you just keep saying it's something else?

They certainly are wrong when leaving out the mythology and symbolism of the Milky Way around which the entire Solar System orbits..

There is no milkyway symobolism? If you haven't presented it by now it's not coming. One Egyptian myth had space as a firmament and the stars were just holes where meteors fell. Definitely no milkyway there? Egyptians didn't know about orbits and were far less impressed with stars or clouds of gas then the stuff in front of their face like the sun.
It's about Time: Ancient Egyptian Cosmology on JSTOR

I´ve provided the logical analysis and explanation above.

NO you just re-assigned Gods to different meanings without evidence then said scholars are wrong. I'm done with this sorry.

Try to imagine a cow giving birth to the Sun It´s obviously the other way around: The central LIGHT of the Milky Way creates the galactic contour on the southern hemisphere which is imagined as both a Sacred Cow and the galactic goddess Nut, Hathor, Aphrodite, Venus, Isthar, Inanna etc. etc.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sky_deity


The goddess is depicted as a cow and clearly gives birth to the sun. The cow shape was revered because it gave them life?

"She was mentioned in the Pyramid Texts. In ancient Egyptian creation myths, she gives birth to the sun at the beginning of time, "
"Mehet-Weret was responsible for raising the sun into the sky every day. She produced the light for the crops of those who worshipped her, and she also caused the annual Nile River flood that fertilized the crops with water. In Patricia Monaghan's The Encyclopedia of Goddesses and Heroines, she describes Mehet-Weret as the Goddess of Creation because she gives birth to the sun every day, creating life for all those who worship her.[4]"w

All I know is that our ancestors didn´t make anthropomorphic images and symbols as thought by modern scholars. They made very logical descriptions of everything.

Sorry I don't believe you. I believe the scholars. I'm not interested in this at all. Go back to school, get a degree in this and present your evidence, get it peer reviewed and then I'll gladly read it.

I

Try to watch the night Sky and your "biggest thing, the sun" is just a small dot of the entire imagery where the term "mythical giants symbolism" belongs to the Milky Way contours of light.

Besides: If you take the biblical Genesis, the Sun was made later in this telling, hence it was made by a prime former Light.

The sun is the biggest thing in the sky all day and was a main part of myths.

Do you outright reject "religious revelations" in general?

Until proper evidence is presented of course I do. There are no Gods. What there is is people who tell ridiculous stories.

Do you too reject the references to shamans who travels spiritually in other dimensions in order to tranfer knowledge and healing powers to their tribes? Is it really that difficult for you to imagine your created self to communicate with the powers which have created you?

Yes Shamans do fake healings with chicken parts. When a Shaman goes to a hospital and demonstrates his magic then I'll consider it. Until then it's more archaic crank.
When a Shaman demonstrates he actually goes to another dimension (he doesn't) I'll believe it.
The powers that created me are quantum mechanics and such. Everything else is crank.
There is no proof of supernatural realms and ancient people had no secret powers to access this fiction. They had no science or anything else so creating elaborate myths was common. Once someone says scholars are wrong about a topic, I'm out.
I hear this from Christian apologists - "oh I don't listen to atheist historians"....ok,bye.

 

[Native]

Native said: ↑
Try to imagine a cow giving birth to the Sun It´s obviously the other way around: The central LIGHT of the Milky Way creates the galactic contour on the southern hemisphere which is imagined as both a Sacred Cow and the galactic goddess Nut, Hathor, Aphrodite, Venus, Isthar, Inanna etc. etc.

She was mentioned in the Pyramid Texts. In ancient Egyptian creation myths, she gives birth to the sun at the beginning of time,

You don´t get it that you´re citing a creation texts and this text concerns the very CREATION and it has NOTHING to do with the solar rhythms of day and night and its "morning light".

It is a creation story in which the solar system is created in the Milky Way, hence its observed rotation around the Milky Way center from which central light (electromagnetic force) it is created.

I don´t bother to waste my time on the rest of your misunderstood post.