Acronis True Image 2018
travel insurance protection insured trip abroad security

Author Topic: Phantom Time Hypothesis  (Read 211 times)

hubag bohol

  • AMBASSADOR
  • THE SOURCE
  • *****
  • Posts: 88400
  • "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool...
Phantom Time Hypothesis
« on: June 10, 2012, 05:14:00 PM »

When Dr. Hans-Ulrich Niemitz introduces his paper on the “phantom time hypothesis”, he kindly asks his readers to be patient, benevolent, and open to radically new ideas, because his claims are highly unconventional. This is because his paper is suggesting three difficult-to-believe propositions: 1) Hundreds of years ago, our calendar was polluted with 297 years which never occurred; 2) this is not the year 2010, but rather 1713; and 3) The purveyors of this hypothesis are not crackpots.

The Phantom Time Hypothesis suggests that the early Middle Ages (614-911 A.D.) never happened, but were added to the calendar long ago either by accident, by misinterpretation of documents, or by deliberate falsification by calendar conspirators. This would mean that all artifacts ascribed to those three centuries belong to other periods, and that all events thought to have occurred during that same period occurred at other times, or are outright fabrications. -- http://www.substudio.com/
...than to speak out and remove all doubt." - Abraham Lincoln


hubag bohol

  • AMBASSADOR
  • THE SOURCE
  • *****
  • Posts: 88400
  • "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool...
Re: Phantom Time Hypothesis
« Reply #1 on: June 10, 2012, 05:14:19 PM »
...than to speak out and remove all doubt." - Abraham Lincoln


islander

  • SUPREME COURT
  • THE LEGEND
  • *****
  • Posts: 44324
  • If you're from Pluto, you're welcome.
Re: Phantom Time Hypothesis
« Reply #2 on: June 11, 2012, 02:11:48 PM »
How Many Holes Are There in This Theory?

It's a very simple question, isn't it? How could anyone insert time into a chronology? We know how much time has passed since the death of Caesar, right? We can prove this independently? Let us see.

One way to check the date of things is by using radiocarbon dating to determine the age of artefacts. Detractors of the Phantom Time Hypothesis point this out, and say, 'Pish and tosh. We know how old things are from carbon dating.' The problem with this: radiocarbon dating uses dendrochronology to calibrate itself, and dendrochronology has a few problems of its own.

Dendrochronology is dating things by examining tree rings. Trees lay down rings season by season. This growth varies according to prevailing conditions. If enough is known about the age of the tree, its location, conditions, etc, the wood can be used for dating. Problems: there are not many trees that are old enough; there are not many trees of the same species; wood from buildings may have been lying around for a long time, may have been reused, etc. It turns out that dendrochronologists have been using written sources to help 'correct' their timelines.

This might be a problem if we want to use dendrochronology to correct a written source.
Republic Act 8485 (Animal Welfare Act of 1998, Philippines), as amended and strengthened by House  Bill 6893 of 2013--- violation means a maximum of P250,000 fine with a corresponding three-year jail term and a minimum of P30,000 fine and six months imprisonment


islander

  • SUPREME COURT
  • THE LEGEND
  • *****
  • Posts: 44324
  • If you're from Pluto, you're welcome.
Re: Phantom Time Hypothesis
« Reply #3 on: June 11, 2012, 02:14:35 PM »
Another way to check the date of things is to go by the stars, which are not susceptible to falsification by ambitious emperors and clerics. Unfortunately, the debate is still on as to whether written accounts of such phenomena as eclipses are accurate-– or whether historians eager to correct their own timelines have been grasping at straws. 'This looks like Halley's comet, so it must have been that year...' The jury is still out as to whether this information can clear up the question. The research required would be massive.

Another objection to the Phantom Time Hypothesis is that Europe did not exist in a vacuum. If someone had changed the calendar, wouldn't anyone else-– say the Muslims?-– have noticed? It is hard to say. Some areas of early Islamic history might actually be simplified by the discovery that the Western dates had been altered. It might explain inscriptions on early Islamic coins-– the ones that showed Muhammed meeting with a Persian emperor who supposedly died a century before. Similar claims are made about 'missing time' in Jewish records. Another possible means of comparison would be Chinese history-– which is notably long, with accurate astronomical observations. All these areas would require an enormous amount of research either to validate or refute the theory, research that is unlikely to be undertaken by anyone not interested in rewriting the timeline.

A theory is a theory because it is not an undisputed fact. A theory is a possible explanation. Does the Phantom Time Hypothesis fit this description? Yes. Could it be definitively proven/disproven? Possibly. Is anyone interested enough to do the research? Time will tell.

more at http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/place-devon/A85654957
Republic Act 8485 (Animal Welfare Act of 1998, Philippines), as amended and strengthened by House  Bill 6893 of 2013--- violation means a maximum of P250,000 fine with a corresponding three-year jail term and a minimum of P30,000 fine and six months imprisonment


 

ESET Antivirus and Internet Security for Mac computers and laptops - Save 25%
Mobile View
SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2017, SimplePortal