[Eddy_P (OP)]

Hi there.
When I searched for info on Hammurabi for my earlier reply, the details provided to me were:
Hammurabi Born c. 1728 BC (short)
Died c. 1686 BC (short)
Title King of Babylon

Since I extracted and posted that information, and rechecking it due to your query, the info on the Wikipedia [nofollow] page has changed to
Hammurabi Born c. 1795 BC (short)
Died c. 1750 BC (short)
Title King of Babylon

Does this fall in line with your understanding ?

[MonikaS]

Here is Tutankhamen's name in hieroglyphics.


© Copyright 1999, Jim Loy

The above says, "Ruler of Upper and Lower Egypt, Nebkheperura, Son of Ra, Tutankhamun."
BUT..
In the first bit you can clearly see a cd being washed in a bowl of water after a beetle made a mess on it 3 times. In the second part you can see that the cd was then wiped on the back of a duck to polish it!  [:0]

I found a nice site that lets you write names (and other stuff) in hieroglyphs.
http://hieroglyphs.net/000501/html/000-042.html
http://hieroglyphs.net/000501/html/000-036.html

Monika

[science_guy]

Hi there.
When I searched for info on Hammurabi for my earlier reply, the details provided to me were:
Hammurabi Born c. 1728 BC (short)
Died c. 1686 BC (short)
Title King of Babylon

Since I extracted and posted that information, and rechecking it due to your query, the info on the Wikipedia page has changed to
Hammurabi Born c. 1795 BC (short)
Died c. 1750 BC (short)
Title King of Babylon

Does this fall in line with your understanding ?

then I guess the second possibility (I dont remember what I learned in the 6th grade correctly) is the right one.

as I said before, the only relevant part of my argument is that the mediterranian empire came before the egyptian empire, and it would only make sense to have records of it in the Egyptian lore.

[Eddy_P (OP)]

I seeking to establish a set of rules for studying and verifying Evidence of Time Travel.
 
This study is not about 'How time travel works' nor 'When was a time machine invented'.
It is not asking for opinions whether time travel is possible or not, but simply…
Is there any evidence documented in ancient texts that relate to visits to the past ?

PURPOSE and AIMS
- To seek out and identify any evidence of Time Travel that may be documented in ancient texts.
- Create a set of rules for this task.
- Scrutinize and examine past information and any new evidence found - using an organized peer process of evaluation.
- Make a Judgement based upon the evidence presented, then state a Conclusion.

METHOD
I am seeking a ‘Submission of Ideas’ regarding how to go about gathering information and then evaluating it.
STEP 1   .     Develop a Search Criterion
STEP 2   .     Gather Evidence
STEP 3   .     Examine and Evaluate evidence
STEP 4    .     Form a Judgement and Conclusion

I am hoping people will be able to contribute to my project with ideas or comments.

LINK to Ideas Submission website [nofollow]

Submissions may be cited on the website.

Yours Faithfully,
Eddy Pengelly
On behalf of PPHC Study Group, Australia.

[TheHerbaholic]

I'm sure I red this when I first signed upto this forum about a week or two ago, and it was some kind of scam to buy a book... Looks like he reposted it.

[Eddy_P (OP)]

RE: "it was some kind of scam to buy a book... Looks like he reposted it"

No.
I am seeking help to set up 'How to Study Evidence of Time Travel'.

...
Draft Search Criterion Available

Please be advised that a draft SEARCH CRITERION is now available for viewing along with HOW Texts have been selected for examination.

Your suggested amendments and/or comments are welcomed.

LINK to Search for Evidence of Time Travel website [nofollow]

EXPERIMENTS will soon be conducted to TEST Ronald Pegg’s theory regarding ‘Evidence of Time Travel being documented in Ancient Texts’.

[science_guy]

I'm sure I red this when I first signed upto this forum about a week or two ago, and it was some kind of scam to buy a book... Looks like he reposted it.

This was the original topic, and was making known that the possibility exists, he was not imposing a scam in any way.

I seeking to establish a set of rules for studying and verifying Evidence of Time Travel.

You already know my standpoint on this, so I'm not gonna bother posting it. I was just clearing an accusation up, because this is not a scam, but an innocent discussion.

[Eddy_P (OP)]

VIEW preliminary results

Please be advised that 8 preliminary results are now available for viewing.

The Study Criterion was completed and initial examination of selected texts undertaken.

Pegg's 'Descriptive' Theory

The documented accounts in certain ancient texts known as prophetic "dreams" or "visions" are about the contents of the 1995 produced Ancient Civilizations of the Mediterranean multi-media cd-rom.

To test Pegg's theory we need to conduct a REALITY-CHECK to see if it is true for all, many, some, or no ancient texts.

To do this we need to use 'If-Then' logic, and PREDICT what will happen when Pegg's theory is applied to other ancient texts. We then need to conduct EXPERIMENTS and OBSERVE what happens.

If-Then Prediction
In relation to the cited texts, IF the theory is correct, THEN we will observe that pictures from the Ancients cd-rom match to the descriptions in the cited ancient texts.

If Pegg's theory fails our reality check because its predictions do not match observations, then it can be rejected as false.

You now have the opportunity to examine 8 sets of observations to decide for yourself whether Pegg’s theory has merit or not.
LINK to ‘Examine Ancient Texts for Evidence of Time Travel’ website [nofollow]
These include
(NT Revelation 4:6-7)
OT Ezekiel 1:5,10
OT Daniel 7:3-8
Qur’an 42:32
(Nostradamus Century 1 Quatrain 81)
Akkadian, Babylonian, Mesopotamian Creation Stories
The Great Ennead of Heliopolis (Egyptian Gods)
Plato's Critias Dialogue – City Beneath the Sea (Atlantis)
The Egg of Brahma (Hindu Understanding)
OT Genesis Chapter 1
(Accounts by Endubsar from Sumerian Clay Tablets)

[Eddy_P (OP)]

2008 Major Report Available

PPHC-SG presents a new report regarding the Old Testament Book of Ezekiel chapters 1-4, 8, 9, 40, & 41.

From 8 Chapters (involving 104 verses), 198 descriptions by Ezekiel have been found to match the imagery from the Ancients cd-rom.

LINK to ‘Examine Ancient Texts for Evidence of Time Travel’ website [nofollow]

Three more major reports will be made available from mid June 2008:
- Egyptian texts, hieroglyphs, and stories about their Gods.
- Plato's Critias and Timaeus dialogues: The legend of Atlantis.
- Sumerian Clay Tablet stories by the scribe Endubsar.

[Eddy_P (OP)]

For many years, claims of ‘Evidence of Time Travel being found by the Australian researcher Ronald Pegg’ have been circulating around the internet.

He claimed to have found descriptions in ancient texts that match to the contents of a certain 1995 produced multi-media compact disk. This would mean that somehow, modern technology was taken back in time for ancient people to view.

It is asserted that “The documented accounts in certain ancient texts known as prophetic 'dreams' or 'visions' are about the contents and pictures from the 1995 Ancient Civilizations of the Mediterranean multi-media cd-rom”.

Now you have the opportunity to evaluate this specific claim with a ‘verse by verse’ examination of ten texts that he said contains proof.

http://www.pphcstudygroup.org.au/search4ett/index.html [nofollow]

Use this link then go directly to the Evaluation Session (or read an Introduction beforehand).

[lyner]

I could do the same thing by reading some old texts and then making up a CDRom with some of the info on it. It is easy to mix up cause and effect if you want to convince yourself.
I hope Mr Pegg doesn't go back and shoot his Grandad.

[Eddy_P (OP)]

Others have phrased your doubt in this way: “I don’t see how this can be purported to be evidence of anything more than the CD graphics based on ancient text.”

One set of matching details could just be a coincidence, and could be the result of the makers of the cd-rom using one particular set of ancient descriptions as their source and inspiration.
Maybe also two or three (or four) could be passed off as 'just coincidences'.
But ten ancient sets of details from different time periods and countries matching is beyond a coincidence.

The same set of descriptions turn up in many ancient stories where most are associated with a messenger turning up in a bright light (or 'dream') carrying a stone of testimony (aka. wheel, tablet, plate, or disc) which tells of future things and provides 'visions'. These extra associated characteristics indicate that the same source was viewed by all the ancient writers and story tellers by the same means - and not that any one ancient story was the source used by the makers of the cd-rom for their imagery.

Regarding people's own conclusions, we are often asked, concerning the observed evidence from these experiments as being identical or very close to the Ancients cd-rom pictures...
Is the imagery, on the cd-rom, evidence of someone or a group of people travelling back in time and showing the ancient people the images from it, or was the Ancients cd-rom created by people that have read any or all of the texts? They may have only been inspired, even subconsciously, to make the cd-rom the same or very similar to what is in the ancient texts.

If the descriptions in the Atlantis dialogues by Plato only matched to the cd-rom imagery, then, yes, you would have to conclude that the makers of the cd-rom used the Atlantis descriptions as inspiration.

If the descriptions in the Bablylonian stories only  matched to the cd-rom imagery, then, yes, you would have to conclude that the makers of the cd-rom used Bablylonian descriptions as inspiration.

If...Akkadian…Aboriginal Dreamtime Stories...North American Indian Mythologies...Buddhism & Hindu Understanding...Old Testament...New Testament...Qur'an...Book of Mormon...each only  matched, then, yes……

But all of the above cultures that DO match to the imagery from the Ancients cd-rom are NOT part of the history contained on that cd-rom. So why would the makers use imagery from over ten other cultures that they are not presenting on the cd-rom ?

The civilizations presented are from around the Mediterranean region from betwen 2000 BCE and 476 CE, being Etruria, Carthage, Roman Empire, Greece, Phoenicia and Egypt.
(The Egyptian section only presents seven video shows, and not pages of pictures.)

The Etrurian section shows things Eturian…
The Roman section shows things Roman…
The Greece section shows things Greek…
The Phoenician section shows things Phoenician…
The Carthage section shows things Carthagian…
…and NOT anything to do with Altantis, Babylon, Akkadia, Aboriginal Dreamtime Stories...North American Indian Mythologies...Buddhism & Hindu Understanding...Old Testament...New Testament...Qur'an, nor Book of Mormon.

Specifically...
Regarding: "Is the imagery, on the cd-rom, evidence of someone or a group of people travelling back in time and showing the ancient people the images from it."

Based upon ten years of investigations - we believe yes. In the Old Testament (Ezekiel), New Testament (Revelation), and Qur'an (Mohammed) encounters where the cd-rom imagery is described, there is an Angel reported as being present, and in the Bible accounts, this angel has a 'sealed book with seven seals' that is opened, and from which 'visions' are seen by the prophet. That prophet's descriptions of these 'visions' are of the contents of the Ancients cd-rom.

We conclude that this 'angel' is some form of time traveller.

[paul.fr]

I always thought i had a screw loose until i followed the link above.

[that mad man]

I stand by my earlier replies.

http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=14073.0;topicseen

[Bored chemist]

Me too.

[Eddy_P (OP)]

Some results so far

Whether pictures match ancient descriptions as a percentage, where
0-30 is NO,
>30-50 is probably not,
>50-75 is MAYBE,
>75-85 is probably, and
>85 to 100 is YES.

Results from 12 Evaluation Sessions
nil: 0 - 30
2 : >30 - 50
4 : >50 - 75
4 : >75 - 85
2 : >85 - 100
--
12 in total

Average is 67.71 percent, which means it is more than a coincidence.

For these figures to actually be relevant, we need another series of evaluations by at least a 100 people to provide a better overall summary of opinions.

Can you help ? Can you spare the time to complete the Evaluation Session [nofollow] ?
.

[BenV]

This has been discussed in other threads - please keep all discussion of one topic to one thread, to help keep the forum tidy.  In fact, I've merged all the threads into one, lets keep discussion in here.

[Eddy_P (OP)]

Some results so far

Whether pictures match ancient descriptions as a percentage, where
0-30 is NO,
>30-50 is probably not,
>50-75 is MAYBE,
>75-85 is probably, and
>85 to 100 is YES.

Results from 12 Evaluation Sessions
nil: 0 - 30
2 : >30 - 50
4 : >50 - 75
4 : >75 - 85
2 : >85 - 100
--
12 in total

Average is 67.71 percent, which means it is more than a coincidence.

For these figures to actually be relevant, we need another series of evaluations by at least a 100 people to provide a better overall summary of opinions.

Can you help ? Can you spare the time to complete the Evaluation Session [nofollow] ?
.

.
Purpose of Evaluation Session

Some people seem to be not understanding or are missing the point of this evaluation session.

HISTORY:
1. Ronald Pegg made an observation regarding an ancient text and modern cd-rom pictures.
.
2. Ronald Pegg investigated 20 more ancient texts, and made associated observations regarding those ancient texts and pictures from a modern cd-rom.
.
3. He proposed an hypothesis - “The documented accounts in certain ancient texts known as prophetic 'dreams' or 'visions' are about the contents and pictures from the 1995 Ancient Civilizations of the Mediterranean multi-media cd-rom”.
.
4. He asserted a Conclusion based upon his observations and investigations - “This is Evidence of Time Travel”.
.
5. He established a general Theory - “Certain noted Angels giving 'visions of the future' who were documented in the sacred texts of the Hebrew, Christian, Muslim, and Mormon faiths (and others) - were not of a divine origin...as they were actually human chrononauts taking back warning messages concerning false religions, details of certain historical and astronomical events, and a chronology regarding a future war. Those technological time travellers were misunderstood and perceived as 'Angels'”.
.
This session is NOT evaluating points 3 & 4 & 5. These may be discussed in later sessions.
.
This session IS evaluating the validity of Pegg’s original OBSERVATIONS (points 1 & 2) by asking “Do the descriptions in ancient texts match to the pictures seen on a modern cd-rom.
.
To do this I am asking you to assist with the evaluation process by testing, with a ‘verse by verse’ examination, ten texts that Pegg said contains proof. LINK to Evaluation Session [nofollow]

[BenV]

I've been avoiding this thread so far, but I've just had a look at the 'evaluation' page and wanted to comment.

Telling people what you want them to see and then asking them if they can see it is not a valid way to assess anything.  Any results you get will be horribly biased, but you will likely use them to back up your existing ideas.

In short, your 'evaluation' is misleading, invalid and therefore pointless.

Going way back to the start of this thread...

The Theory is either
1. God sent his Angels through time to bring modern cd-roms back to ancient prophets (to create new religions),
or
2. Human technological time travel took a selection of modern cd-roms and a computer back to ancient people (to warn them of ‘future religious wars’.)

Once you have viewed the comparisons between ancient descriptions and modern cd-roms, you decide - Which theory best takes into account the presented evidence ?

Nope.  These are two outlandish hypotheses based on a large number of baseless assumptions (there is a god, angels exist, time travel is possible and happening, time travellers would attempt to change the course of history...). Hypotheses that make fewer assumptions are more likely to be true.  These may include:

1. The references in the texts bear no more resemblance than chance and coincidence.
2. The author is hoping to see relevant references, and as a result sees links where there are none.
3. The authors of the CD-ROM were influenced, consciously or otherwise, by the text.

So by presenting yourself with only 2 hypotheses, each of which are based on poor assumptions, you have limited yourself to certain conclusions, and convinced yourself that one of these must be correct.


The following comments & questions may have also appeared above, so please forgive me for not re-reading the entire thread if I'm repeating other people:

Has Ronald Pegg confirmed with the makers of the cd-rom that they had never seen or read any of the texts to which he's referring?  If they have, then even subconsciously it could have affected the way that they chose to display the information.

What was the start date for the time travellers?  (i.e. from what date did they go back?)  If this was recent, why take a 13 year old CD-rom with them?  Why not take something more useful?  If it was 1995, then surely we would have heard more about time travel by now?  Why bother coving it up?

Why would the time travellers have hidden their tracks?  Why would the only reference to them be hidden in these references?

Why would they show them a CD-ROM of the ancient world?  That just doesn't make any sense.  Surely you would show them more modern things, or inventions that could help them avoid pitfalls?  Why not take something that would last, as proof that they had traveled back in time to help the people of the past make the right decisions?  Of course, this would set up all the usual time travel paradoxes, but so would going back and showing selective people a CD-ROM.

Personally, I feel that this is no evidence for time travel, but at best a coincidence and at worst a delusion.

My final question is to you, Eddy_P.  Are you willing to entertain the possibility that you are wrong?  If not, I see no reason why this thread needs to continue.

[Eddy_P (OP)]

Telling people what you want them to see and then asking them if they can see it is not a valid way to assess anything.

.
You seem to be missing the point (or just twisting it).
The evaluation session is investigating whether Pegg’s original observations are valid.
To do this, the words from the original texts have to be presented, and the specific descriptions under investigation highlighted.
The pictures from the cited cd-rom which Pegg says matches to these descriptions are then presented.
Using the highlighted ‘keywords’ from the ancient texts, you are asked to make a judgement whether what Pegg says he saw in the picture do in fact “match” to the images in the presented pictures. ie. are the KEYWORDS present in the cd-rom pictures.
 
A simple Yes / No could have been employed, but due to some of the ancient words in many of the texts being either originally mistranslated or misinterpreted into English, or being out of context, or ambiguous, a Maybe was added to take language differences into account.
.

Going way back to the start of this thread...

The Theory is either
1. God sent his Angels through time to bring modern cd-roms back to ancient prophets (to create new religions),
or
2. Human technological time travel took a selection of modern cd-roms and a computer back to ancient people (to warn them of ‘future religious wars’.)

Once you have viewed the comparisons between ancient descriptions and modern cd-roms, you decide - Which theory best takes into account the presented evidence ?

Nope.  These are two outlandish hypotheses based on a large number of baseless assumptions (there is a god, angels exist, time travel is possible and happening, time travellers would attempt to change the course of history...). Hypotheses that make fewer assumptions are more likely to be true.  These may include:

1. The references in the texts bear no more resemblance than chance and coincidence.
2. The author is hoping to see relevant references, and as a result sees links where there are none.
3. The authors of the CD-ROM were influenced, consciously or otherwise, by the text.

So by presenting yourself with only 2 hypotheses, each of which are based on poor assumptions, you have limited yourself to certain conclusions, and convinced yourself that one of these must be correct.

.
NO, these are not hypotheses.
They are conclusions based upon the presented evidence.
You apparently have not read some of the information earlier on from this ‘merged thread’.
To save you searching, go to the source and Follow this link and read [nofollow] the “Creating a Study Criteria” and “How texts were selected” pages…
.
…also see separate post regarding Arthur’s question about the ‘premise’.
.
Regarding your point # 3 “The authors of the CD-ROM were influenced, consciously or otherwise, by the text” - that question has been addressed. (In part)…
One set of matching details could just be a coincidence, and could be the result of the makers of the cd-rom using one particular set of ancient descriptions as their source and inspiration.
Maybe also two or three (or four) could be passed off as 'just coincidences'.
But ten ancient sets of details from different time periods and countries matching is beyond a coincidence.

The same set of descriptions turn up in many ancient stories where most are associated with a messenger turning up in a bright light (or 'dream') carrying a stone of testimony (aka. wheel, tablet, plate, or disc) which tells of future things and provides 'visions'. These extra associated characteristics indicate that the same source was viewed by all the ancient writers and story tellers by the same means - and not that any one ancient story was the source used by the makers of the cd-rom for their imagery.
For the remainder of this article Read this page [nofollow].
.

{1.} Has Ronald Pegg confirmed with the makers of the cd-rom that they had never seen or read any of the texts to which he's referring?  {2.} If they have, then even subconsciously it could have affected the way that they chose to display the information.

.
1. We have been unable to contact the makers of the cd-rom, as the company was dissolved or taken over.
2. This was addressed via the previous link [nofollow].

What was the start date for the time travellers?  (i.e. from what date did they go back?)

Unknown.

If this was recent, why take a 13 year old CD-rom with them?  Why not take something more useful?

This is addressed via this link [nofollow]. (also check out the other Qs & As.)
.

?  Why bother coving it up? Why would the time travellers have hidden their tracks?  Why would the only reference to them be hidden in these references?

.
So ‘history’ would not be changed. The revealing of this information occurred at a certain point of time. Past history can not be changed (without destroying our current timeline) but our future can be amended by knowing of the problems of the past that have contributed towards the negativeness of the various world’s cultures.
.

Why would they show them a CD-ROM of the ancient world?  That just doesn't make any sense.  Surely you would show them more modern things, or inventions that could help them avoid pitfalls?

.(from the Qs & As page…)
Ronald Pegg believed that when a time machine was (will be) built, the first field trip was back to the ancient Middle East, somewhere around the Mesopotamian region.
The purpose was simple - using their new toy (time machine) and showing off, the chrononauts gave a 'show and tell' of the future to the very first civilized people they could find.
It has been proposed that historical cd-roms were selected which were relevant to neighbouring regions (from which future civilizations would emerge), but would mean nothing to the ancient locals due to their lack of geographical understanding. In this way, the experiment could be a success without damaging history. If the people could not understand what they were seeing, then the brief appearance of modern technology and the showing of future information would not change history.
.

Personally, I feel that this is no evidence for time travel, but at best a coincidence and at worst a delusion.
My final question is to you, Eddy_P.  Are you willing to entertain the possibility that you are wrong?  If not, I see no reason why this thread needs to continue.

I am always willing to concede when I am wrong.
But are you ?

You may have your own opinions that draw you to come to different conclusions than myself and other people, but your personal opinion does not necessarily make my position wrong.
My conclusions are based upon ten years of research.

Have you read ALL the available information from the WBD and PPHC-SG websites in order to come to a valid determination ?