moundbuilder Posted July 22, 2011 Report Share Posted July 22, 2011 (edited) Hi, my name is Fritz and I an the author of "The Nephiim Chronicles: Fallen Angels in the Ohio Valley" The book provided indisputable proof of migrations of the accounted giants known as the Amorites or Nephilim to North America. Over 300 historical accounts of giant skeletons found within burial mounds are provided along with similar skull types that have been found near Stonehenge and the Biblical Levant. Edited July 22, 2011 by moundbuilder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeuroTypical Posted July 22, 2011 Report Share Posted July 22, 2011 (edited) Welcome.The book provided indisputable proofCan you explain the difference, as you see it, between evidence, conclusive evidence, disputable proof, and indisputable proof? I hope you don't take this the wrong way, it's just that 99 times out of 100, when someone uses the phrase "indisputable proof", they misuse it. Edited July 22, 2011 by Loudmouth_Mormon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moundbuilder Posted July 22, 2011 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2011 None taken. I use the comparison of large skeletal remains, skull types, comparing the solar temples called henges in England and the Ohio Valley, Burial mound types in the Levant, Britain and the Ohio Valley. Cupstones in all three regions, Etymology...ect. Everything matches up. I have over 300 historical accounts of giant skeletons found in Jersualem, England and the Ohio Valley. 'There were giants in those days.." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeuroTypical Posted July 22, 2011 Report Share Posted July 22, 2011 Again, and I'm glad you're not offended here, but I notice you didn't answer my question. I'm looking for some indication that you know the difference between terms like evidence and proof. "everything matches up", especially in an archaeological setting, is hardly what I would call proof. I had an archaeologist professor teach us the difference. At one point in his career, he was absolutely, 100% confident that he had discovered proof of mummification being practiced in the Americas. There were ritual markings on the eyes and eye sockets - precision cut holes in the eye sockets that he had seen in other areas of the world as a part of mummy preparation. And in the same cave with a few sabertooth tiger skeletons too! He was very excited. Then someone held up a sabertooth skull, and inserted the fangs into the eye sockets of the human skull. They fit perfectly, and he immediately saw that he hadn't stumbled on evidence of humans mummifying, he had stumbled on the place where the sabertooths dragged their meals. Anyway, he wanted to make sure his students never repeated his mistake and confused wishful thinking for proof, or evidence for conclusive evidence. So, here you are, with a very remarkable claim that would excite a lot of people if it's really as proven as you think it is. The world is full of skeptics, the archaeological world even moreso. Do you know the difference between evidence and proof? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moundbuilder Posted July 23, 2011 Author Report Share Posted July 23, 2011 I have a 350 pg book of evidence. If you think I can sum it all up it a a paragraph, you are mistaken. I commented on a few of the lines of evidence that I present in the book; if you are intrigued, Buy the book. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slamjet Posted July 23, 2011 Report Share Posted July 23, 2011 I have a 350 pg book of evidence. If you think I can sum it all up it a a paragraph, you are mistaken. I commented on a few of the lines of evidence that I present in the book; if you are intrigued, Buy the book.Maybe a few paragraphs because what you posted was not evidence, it was a teaser. I'm also intrigued with your phrase "historical accounts." Historical accounts are not as reliable as people want them to be. "History is written by the victors" is not altogether a false statement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pam Posted July 23, 2011 Report Share Posted July 23, 2011 13. You will not use this site to solicit the sale of any product, service or website. If appropriate, you may post a link to your business on your profile, in your forum signature, and you make create one post in the web link section of the forum. Do not post any link or discuss any business, service, or website that violates any rule of LDS.net. LDS.net is not responsible for the content of any site linked on LDS.net. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kindan Posted July 23, 2011 Report Share Posted July 23, 2011 Moundbuilder, Is your main/only goal being a member of this forum to sell your book? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moundbuilder Posted July 24, 2011 Author Report Share Posted July 24, 2011 I have about 20 historical accounts (from county histories) of giant skeletons found in the State of New York. I will be travelling there this winter to photograph the ancient ruins in the that area. I wondered what the feeling of Mormons were on the topic of Nephites. I was reading a quote from J. Smith as he was going through Ohio and observing the many mounds and earthworks, in which he called it the "land of the Nephites." Nephilim translates to "giants." Can the same be said about Nephites??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeuroTypical Posted July 25, 2011 Report Share Posted July 25, 2011 I'm still waiting for an answer to my question, Fritz... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.