Perceived Needs

Let's first take a look at stats from my blog Philologica.

Of five consecutive published posts, not the two or three last ones, one had a higher number of readers, more than twice, but the other four were respectively, none of them 63, but all around 63, namely 61, 62, 64, 65:



61 + 62 + 64 + 65 = 252
4 * 63 = 252

One post from yesterday has 42 readers. One from November has 84 on a less read of my blogs.

One blog last month had 4421 readers. I divide by 21 and get 210.various.decimals. 21 * 210 = 4410. 11 below the total.

This one has 2 649, divide by 21 and you get 126.various.decimals. 21 * 126 = 2646. Three below the total.

16 167 / 21 = 769.various.decimals. 777 (or 21*37) is 8 above the total.

Another has 1 349, while 21 * 63 = 1323, 26 or twice thirteen below the total.

Here are a few with similar repeating sequence in decimal after dividing by 21:

89,47619047619047619047619047619
23,761904761904761904761904761905
80,047619047619047619047619047619

0,47619047619047619047619047619 * 21 = 10
0,761904761904761904761904761905 * 21 = 16
0,047619047619047619047619047619 * 21 = 1

1/21, 4/21, (7/21), 10/21, 13/21, 16/21, 19/21 - all except 7/21=1/3, being (3n+1)/21 have the sequence 619.

Perhaps a reason to chose 21 with multiples as a common "medium" readership for post or for day or for country etc.

But even if not, here is anoother indication some coordination about my blog is going on.

Two of my blogs were last week reached from Los Angeles People - a site featuring Flat Earth videos. Links go from 2015 to December 2018, none seem to link to me. I happen to not be Flat Earth. I also happen to think that surveying Flat Earthers "among other suspects of extremism" is a generally bad idea. I share the Geocentric part with them.

"SSundee advices" got to XIII blogs and "Dracko's tricks & tips" to XIII blogs. I won't link to them. The point is, they also did not seem to link to me. This means, the readers coming from them to me were not seeing a link to me on their page, but were looking for certain types of content - curiosity or surveillance. It seems a bit unfair to me to be surveying my blogs to see if there is smut on them. I don't spread that kind of thing.

Now, Lita Cosner made a point today:

It is important to note that resources like this do not come together out of thin air; they are developed in response to perceived demand.

This is not all of the story. I write most of my articles in response to a perceived need of others (this type of curmudgeoning on my situation is exceptional, but I was tired this morning). But it's not just that Jen Wilkin wrote his* work in response to a perceived need of others, LifeWay paid him, printed, transported, sold and got paid and continued to pay him. Also in response to a perceived need.

This isn’t evil—even CMI develops resources based on what we think people will find useful and want to have in their own libraries.

Oh, I agree this side of things is not evil.

There is another side. It is about deciding what you don't just don't want on your own library, but also not want on someone else's. That is called Gatekeeping. Like Jewish Rabbis, according to ONEFORISRAEL have been gatekeeping so ordinary Jews didn't read Daniel for timing or a certain chapter if Isaiah for suffering of the Messiah.

Considering the kind of co-ordinated readership I have, according to some signs I have given (the club 21, the alignment between 2 of my blogs and Flat Earth and 13 of my blogs and smut, the alarm bells that ring when I defend C. S. Lewis against A. N. Wilson, whether the guys in 2*21 are for Lewis and are alarmed he is attacked or against Lewis and alarmed I read him, this seems to me to indicate that I am object of some type of gatekeeping.

Being round earth is not ingratiating with those who are not just Geocentric but Flat Earth.

Being Geocentric is hardly ingratiating with anyone except Flat Earth Geocentrics and the other Round Earth Geocentrics.

Being Round Earth Geocentric and believing in Angelic movers is not ingratiating with other Round Earth Geocentrics.

Both probably all semi-historical Creationists like Jen Wilkin and some Biblical Young Earth Creationists like most or all on CMI (notably Robert Carter, but I haven't spotted another take from the rest) and also like some 7DA (their prophet Ellen Gould White, like Joseph Smith, like Swedenborg, was Heliocentric) would not find it ingratiating on my part to be Geocentric and believe in Angelic movers, like so many others historically (Photius, unlike both Indicopleustes and St Thomas, found it ridiculous, but he certainly does not represent the Latin West in this respect).

So, if there are people doing gatekeeping, I am not surprised of the fact. If anything, I am surprised (or was some time ago, I am becoming jaded) that people so much disliking each other, if not as persons or as Christians, at least as to message, are so eager to collude on gatekeeping against me (again, I am not just making up or imagining gatekeeping after simply failing to get readers, I have plenty of page views, and they seem coordinated, sometimes calculated to outsource reading sth from France, sometimes to increase the bounce rate of a blog, and people I meet are much less prone to take an URL from my cardboards than some years ago), and that they are in fact colluding also with Jews who want another Messiah than Our Lord Jesus Christ, Muslims who want no Holy Trinity, Neo-Catholics who want Heliocentric and Theistic Evolutionist Wojtyla to be a canonised saint. And Orthodox, who don't like filioque any more than papal supremacy, seem to be along in this collusion (note, many readers from Russia and Ukraine seem to indicate some presence of those churches in reading or rather surveying my blogs, and therefore in the gatekeeping).

Lifeway clearly knows that people want to know more about creation—but they wrongly think that being agnostic about some of the most important issues in Genesis 1–11 will make a more popular product. But this makes it substantially less helpful than it might have been.

Yes, I also think some people are missing out on things and making their product substantially less helpful. CMI is not saving souls by being Protestants. CMI is also not being more convincing on their correct position of Young Earth Creationism by chosing the less helpful solutions on Distant Starlight (considering day IV as a timezone question rather than as actual time as the word is normally used is disingenious and reduces the "from the beginning of Creation" very much). And when both Kolbe Center for Study of Creation and CMI do feature Flood dates too recent before Abraham and do feature outmoded and probably untrue philosophemes on "PIE to Latin to French" linguistics and refuse to feature an at least attempt of detailed calibration of Carbon 14 within Biblical timeline - Tas Walker one honourable exception from Journal of Creation, not featured as an article on the CMI blog, back in 2015, as best I know no follow up - that also looks like even ill advised gatekeeping. Two non-Jewish organisations acting to me like two neighbouring Shtettel's would act to a Christian a 100 years ago (outside the area where they were in Russian Revolution).

Now, in the name of Christ, who suffered death and harrowed Hell, to Heaven rose alive again, stop this gatekeeping! If you disagree with me, say so openly. Stop avoiding debate and mention in order to "not give me a platform".

Signed, Hans Georg Lundahl
St. Valentine's Day, 14.II.2019, Nanterre University Library.

* Oops, she. I see, Jen = Jennifer ... sorry. Glad I said no uncourteous things!

An Inadequate Work Published on Kolbe Center for Study of Creation : Date of Flood

Here is a salient paragraph:

The Sumerian civilization is considered to have been the oldest civilization on earth. Both Sumeria and Egypt had histories prior to 2241 BC. Both civilizations began in the previous millennium. Other civilizations had prehistories prior to 2241 BC whether or not they had histories. For example, Chinese history began many centuries after 2241 BC, and the early Indian religious writings seem to have been written many centuries after 2241 BC as well. However, from the prehistories one might be left with the impression that in all civilizations something of a very chaotic nature occurred on earth about the year 2241 BC and afterwards the civilizations had undergone some sort of change.

Inadequate for Flood.

If Flood was 2241 BC (there is a serious proposal from LXX text, it was 2242 Anno Mundi, but that's another story), you cannot just project Sumerian, Egyptian, Chinese, Indic histories prior to 2241 BC to the pre-Flood world.

In case readers don't believe this is what Schmirler is proposing, this comes after a discussion of First Intermediate Period as the time in Egyptian archaeology and history where the Flood fits in.

Why cannot you project Old Kingdom to pre-Flood? Why cannot you project Neolithic China to pre-Flood? Why cannot you project dynasties of Ur prior to the Third to pre-Flood? Or Harappa and Mohenjo Daro, as I did myself some time ago, when very early on I hoped to identify Mohenjo-Daro with Henoch in the land of Nod and its famous Pashupati seal* figure with Cain or Tubal-Cain or some apparition of Apollyon in the pre-Flood world?

Post-Flood humanity has one origin, if the Flood was universal. This precludes a pre-Flood diversification recurring as a post-Flood diversification.

It does not directly (but the short time from Creation to Flood indirectly does) preclude two subsequent pre-Flood diversifications.

It does not directly even preclude two subsequent post-Flood ones.

But the most reasonable is, the pre-Flood diversification where Cro-Magnon type man coexisted with Neanderthal and Heidelbergians and Denisovan has been replaced with a post-Flood one in racial types "black, white, yellow" and linguistic diversity.

Now, it could be done to analyse DNA from Egyptians of Old Kingdom, Sumerians prior to III Dynasty of Ur, Chinese Neolithic population and find they fairly well match the later history of what Schmirler considers (correctly) as post-Flood.

But more important, you do have texts in diversified languages from what Schmirler considers as pre-Flood.

These** would on Schmirler's view be pre-Flood:

c. 2690 BC		Egyptian
Egyptian hieroglyphs in the tomb of Seth-Peribsen (2nd Dynasty), Umm el-Qa'ab[7]		"proto-hieroglyphic" inscriptions from about 3300 BC (Naqada III; see Abydos, Egypt, Narmer Palette)
26th century BC		Sumerian
Instructions of Shuruppak, the Kesh temple hymn and other cuneiform texts from Shuruppak and Abu Salabikh (Fara period)[8][9]		"proto-literate" period from about 3500 BC (see Kish tablet); administrative records at Uruk and Ur from c. 2900 BC.
c. 2400 BC		Akkadian
A few dozen pre-Sargonic texts from Mari and other sites in northern Babylonia[10]		Some proper names attested in Sumerian texts at Tell Harmal from about 2800 BC.[11] Fragments of the Legend of Etana at Tell Harmal c. 2600 BC.[12]
c. 2400 BC		Eblaite
Ebla tablets[13]
c. 2250 BC		Elamite
Awan dynasty peace treaty with Naram-Sin[14][15]

You cannot even have a pre-Flood linguistic diversity replaced by a post-Babel one and these belonging to the pre-Flood one, since they continue well after 2241 BC in the conventional timeline:

• The Egyptian language was spoken in ancient Egypt and was a branch of the Afro-Asiatic languages. Its attestation stretches over an extraordinarily long time, from the Old Egyptian stage (mid-3rd millennium BC, Old Kingdom of Egypt). Its earliest known complete written sentence has been dated to about 2690 BC, which makes it one of the oldest recorded languages known, along with Sumerian.[3]
  
  Its classical form is known as Middle Egyptian, the vernacular of the Middle Kingdom of Egypt which remained the literary language of Egypt until the Roman period.
  
  
• Sumerian (Sumerian: 𒅴𒂠 EME.G̃IR15 "native tongue") is the language of ancient Sumer and a language isolate that was spoken in Mesopotamia (modern-day Iraq). During the 3rd millennium BC, an intimate cultural symbiosis developed between the Sumerians and the Semitic-speaking Akkadians, which included widespread bilingualism.[4] The influence of Sumerian and the East Semitic language Akkadian on each other is evident in all areas, from lexical borrowing on a substantial scale, to syntactic, morphological, and phonological convergence.[4] This has prompted scholars to refer to Sumerian and Akkadian in the third millennium BC as a Sprachbund.[4]
  
  Akkadian gradually replaced Sumerian as a spoken language around 2000 BC (the exact dating being subject to debate),[5] but Sumerian continued to be used as a sacred, ceremonial, literary and scientific language in Akkadian-speaking Mesopotamian states such as Assyria and Babylonia until the 1st century AD.
  
  (note well, if Sumerian could be learned as late as 1st C BC, Odin before getting to Sweden, starting the idolatrous sect that continued to Viking Age, could have read Sumerian material - and there are similarities in the mythologies)
  
  
• Akkadian (/əˈkeɪdiən/ akkadû, 𒀝𒅗𒁺𒌑 ak-ka-du-u2; logogram: 𒌵𒆠 URIKI)[2][3] is an extinct East Semitic language that was spoken in ancient Mesopotamia (Akkad, Assyria, Isin, Larsa and Babylonia) from the 30th century BC until its gradual replacement by Akkadian-influenced Eastern Aramaic among Mesopotamians by the eighth century BC.
  
  
• Eblaite /ˈɛblə.aɪt/ (also known as Eblan ISO 639-3), or Paleo Syrian, is an extinct Semitic language which was used during the third millennium BCE by the populations of Northern Syria.[3] It was named after the ancient city of Ebla, in modern western Syria.[3] Variants of the language were also spoken in Mari and Nagar.[3][4] According to Cyrus H. Gordon,[5] although scribes might have spoken it sometimes, Eblaite was probably not spoken much, being rather a written lingua franca with East and West Semitic features.
  
  (This one could uniquely have been pre-Flood, if it was the original Hebrew, but the other ones couldn't - and I don't think it was, not in the Eblaite tablets, anyway, though original Hebrew could have coincided with either Eblaite or Ugaritic linguistically)
  
  
• Elamite is an extinct language that was spoken by the ancient Elamites. It was used in present-day southwestern Iran from 2600 BC to 330 BC.

This means, whatever you consider as possible for Flood in 2241 BC Biblical timeline, you cannot, you must not align this with 2241 in conventional timeline.

I actually do consider another year better in the real and Biblical timeline, 2957 BC, and even that I will not align with 2957 BC in modern conventional archaeology; rather, with 40 000 BP (as far as carbon dates go) since that aligns with disappearance of Neanderthals and Denisovans as separate lineages (both have left trace DNA in modern lineages, I don't doubt, via Noah's daughters in law).

Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre UL
Thirty Martyrs in Rome,
"via Lavicana, between two Laurels"
22.XII.2018

* See this quote:

A seal discovered at the site bears the image of a seated, cross-legged and possibly ithyphallic figure surrounded by animals. The figure has been interpreted by some scholars as a yogi, and by others as a three-headed "proto-Shiva" as "Lord of Animals".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohenjo-daro#Pashupati_seal

** https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_languages_by_first_written_accounts

Greetings from Hugh Owen! (link)

Evolution Scientific Fact or Science Fiction? with Hugh Owen
Fiat Ministry Network · added 1:st Nov. 2017
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Z4doYGl86k

Courtesy of Kolbe Center : Character of God (video, link)

Character of God
Kolbe Center for the Study of Creation
http://abdonsolutions.com/kc/character_of_god.php