Mysteries :
The Official GrahamHancock.com forums

For serious discussion of the controversies, approaches and enigmas surrounding the origins and development of the human species and of human civilization. (NB: for more ‘out there’ posts we point you in the direction of the ‘Paranormal & Supernatural’ Message Board).

Thanos5150 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Audrey Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > It's not ignorance, it's confusing and

> > complicated.

>

> I am far behind the curve to figure it out on my

> own so I sincerely appreciate your effort, not

> just now but 2yrs ago as well. It takes a village

> as they say.

>

> > No, it does not cross it, not in 2450 b.c. or 2550

> > b.c or 10,000 bc. or any of the years I rolled

> > through. Here is Jon's target. And with Ori's

> > calculations, I think this wraps it up. So much

> > for Thuban.

>

> But poor Manu was just so

> visible in 2450BC.

>

> The dates Proctor gave was 3,350BC or 2,170BC with

> a +/- error rate of 50-200yrs. Can you please

> check those dates if you haven't already so I can

> be put out of my misery on this one? And if

> Proctor is wrong, where do you think he went

> astray?

>

> [i.imgur.com]

>

> You're a cruel mistress Thuban.

If I did the math correctly, 2170BC isn't far enough away from 2550BC to allow Thuban to arrive at the required off-axis angle. But it does seem possible that Thuban may have been at least partially "visible" down the DP in 3350BC. Actually, Thuban may already have

-------------------------------------------------------

> Audrey Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > It's not ignorance, it's confusing and

> > complicated.

>

> I am far behind the curve to figure it out on my

> own so I sincerely appreciate your effort, not

> just now but 2yrs ago as well. It takes a village

> as they say.

>

> > No, it does not cross it, not in 2450 b.c. or 2550

> > b.c or 10,000 bc. or any of the years I rolled

> > through. Here is Jon's target. And with Ori's

> > calculations, I think this wraps it up. So much

> > for Thuban.

>

> But poor Manu was just so

*sure*it was> visible in 2450BC.

>

> The dates Proctor gave was 3,350BC or 2,170BC with

> a +/- error rate of 50-200yrs. Can you please

> check those dates if you haven't already so I can

> be put out of my misery on this one? And if

> Proctor is wrong, where do you think he went

> astray?

>

> [i.imgur.com]

>

> You're a cruel mistress Thuban.

If I did the math correctly, 2170BC isn't far enough away from 2550BC to allow Thuban to arrive at the required off-axis angle. But it does seem possible that Thuban may have been at least partially "visible" down the DP in 3350BC. Actually, Thuban may already have

*undershot*the LOWER limit of the DP portal by 3350BC. I think Thuban may have been more centrally positioned in the DP portal sometime closer to 3000BC, the several major presumptions made in this estimate, notwithstanding.______________________________________________________________

*How can any of us ever*__know__, when all we can do is**think**?Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.