Dear Mr. Sitchin,
While the contents of this letter may constitute a challenge to your academic scholarship, the intent of this letter is more in the interest of research than confrontation. I recognize and appreciate your efforts toward understanding the ancient texts of Mesopotamia and the Hebrew Bible in more than a sterile, unimaginative way than characterizes most scholarship in this area. However, I find many of your positions to be curiously lacking in precisely the area which you (or perhaps mainly your followers) have claimed expertise - the languages of the ancient near east. At this point I can only conclude (perhaps ignorantly) that either you do not know the grammar of these languages, did not do enough research into the languages and therefore missed the points I have raised above on this website, or (hopefully not) do not want your readers to know what's going on in these ancient texts with respect to the grammar and structure of the languages. Toward clarifying why your work has overlooked some obvious linguistic issues, I would ask that you respond to the following questions:
1. Can you please provide transcripts of your academic language work, or an address to which I could write to obtain proof of your training in this area? I would like to post this information on my website, and would gladly do so.
2. Can you explain why your work on Genesis 1:26-27 overlooks so many obvious grammatical indications that Elohim in that passage refers to a single deity (as demonstrated above)?
3. Can you explain why you did not include the comparative linguistic material from the Amarna texts that shows the Akkadian language also uses the plural word for "gods" to refer to a single deity or person?(as demonstrated above)?
4. Can you explain how your interpretation of the word "nephilim" is at all viable in light of its morphological impossibility?
5. Can you explain why you were unaware that Sumerian has no relative pronouns, thereby making the alleged "SHU.MU" etymology for Hebrew "shem" a totally bogus argument (as demonstrated above)? Why did you fabricate this form in light of Sumerian grammar?
6. Can you produce a single text that says the Anunnaki come from the planet Nibiru - or that Nibiru is a planet beyond Pluto?
7. Can you explain why the alleged sun symbol on cylinder seal VA 243 is not the normal sun symbol or the symbol for the sun god Shamash?
8. Can you explain why your god=planet equivalencies do not match the listings of such matching in cuneiform astronomical texts?
9. Can you explain why many of your critical word meanings / translations of Sumerian and Mesopotamian words are not consistent with Mesopotamian cuneiform bilingual dictionaries?
10. Can you provide a coherent rationale in response to the logical problems presented by your understanding of the technology of the Annunaki:
How is it that the same gods who conquered deep space travel took several tries to genetically create humans?
How is it that these gods, with their fantastic space travel technology, gods who gave mankind the technology to build the pyramids and other fantastic structures, didn't have a better mechanism than MANUAL LABOR for mining the earth's gold?
How is it that the deep space travel capability of the Annunaki CONSISTED OF COMBUSTION ENGINES (the "fiery rockets")?
How is it that these gods who had mastered the forces of physics and biology could not make a synthetic equivalent to gold?
Thank you for taking the time to respond. I will of course post any responses on this site.
Sincerely,
Michael S. Heiser
PhD candidate, Department of Hebrew and Semitic Studies
University of Wisconsin-Madison
