Lloyd Pye Defends Zacharia Sitchin

This is short piece defending the work of the later Zecharia Sitchin whois no longer here to do so himself. Through a re interpretation of Sumerian texts, he produced an alternatehistory of the past two hundred thousand years or so.  This alternative history is a combination ofspecifics and plausible reconstruction that informs the inquirer.

Without such work, it is impossible to advance knowledge at all.  We only need look at the folly of the Clovishorizon in the Americas.  General acceptance of the 12,500 BC horizon meantdigging no deeper.  That is and will turnout to be bone stupid.  Yet fundingconstraints almost force researchers to follow that accepted guideline.

Sitchen opened the door to possibilities that were unimagined.  From that new evidence is fleshing out his frameworkand steadily reinforcing it.  Nothing yethas come even close to shutting it down.

South Africa was claimed as the first major site of human goldmining and lo and behold we have established the existence of thousands ofprimitive gold miners living in a huge distributed community in Africa, unlike anything else.

Proposing the existence of alien human biological interaction has openedour eyes to the possibility and now we have the starchild held by Pye.  We may have never looked.

One basic lesson.  Every usable valleyon earth out onto the continental shelf was occupied by humanity before the endof the Ice Age.  We have generally failedto dig deep enough.

In Defense Of Zecharia Sitchin

by Lloyd Pye, Dec 2010

http://www.lloydpye.com/essay_defensesitchin.htm

ZechariaSitchin was an author famous for "The Earth Chronicles" series ofbooks about the writings of the ancient Sumerians (circa 5,000 years ago) as heinterpreted them. He was one of perhaps 200 people in the world, if that many,who could translate cuneiform, the symbolic language of the Sumerians. His workhas been very influential on my own.

A Message From Lloyd Pye

Since the death ofZecharia Sitchin on Oct. 9, 2010, his critics have come out in droves on theinternet to try to trash his work and his legacy. Because of my well-knownregard for his work, which I heavily incorporated in Part IVof my book Everything YouKnow Is Wrong,several people have asked me to come toZecharia's defense now that he can no longer do it himself in thevigorous way he was known for. With that said, here is my nutshell defenseof his work against any and all criticisms. It is simple and it is true. Pleasefeel free to share it with others on the internet, and/or use it to respond toany critic you care to address: 

Anyonewho says Zecharia Sitchin is a fraud or mistaken in histranslations of Sumerian texts, or anything in that vein, is busily grinding aheavily worn axe. They base all of their complaints on the factthat in certain key areas of the Sumerian writings, he deviatesmarkedly from the "classical" translations, thevast majority of which were completed before 1947, before the terms"UFO" or "alien" came into common usage. 

When the earlytranslators came upon passages that could have been and should have beeninterpreted the way Sitchin interpreted them, they hadno conceivable frame of reference for such terminology. Thus, theyshoehorned it to fit into their own restricted world views,and because this nonsense was created by "experts" ofthat time, modern experts are inevitably brainwashed by their education processto believe no other translation is needed, much less preferable. 

This intellectualclaptrap has become established as the "preferred" and"accepted" translations that critics claim Stichin should haverespected and stuck with in the way they are obligated todo. Sitchin rightly jettisoned the nonsense and translated the texts morelike they were actually written, calling an alien an alien, so to speak,and this gross offense to modern academic sensibilities iswhat classic scholars consider a sacrilege to their mindset.

I have no doubtthat, in the fullness of time, historians will consider ZechariaSitchin vastly more correct than any mainstream pundit alive at thismoment. Why? Because modern scholars endure years of intense training thatforces them to consider the work of prior scholars sacrosanct, whichproduces a virtual army of close-minded sycophants who, ultimately,will be dismissed as laughably wrong.