Republic of Malaysia | Local Campaigns Resources

August 28, 2008

Malaysia 3 | Real Babel? and List of Numbers

Filed under: Ko Yem Binjai, Malaysia, Republic of Malaysia — Tags: , , — Nun Ha Alliance @ 2:00 pm


List of numbersIntegers

100000 144000   1000000

Cardinal 144000
Ordinal 144000th
Factorization 27 × 32 × 53
Binary 100011001010000000
Hexadecimal 23280

A Real Babel ?

Recounting the story of the discovery of the Astronomical Equation, from its very beginning. It came from the story of Babel in the book of Genesis.
Interested readers may put the matter in context by first visiting Astronomical Enigma and/or Stonehenge Equation (and Nibiru)
It would be appreciated if the reader would reserve judgement until he/she has read and understood the following.. It is a detective story with a difference.
The fabled Tower of Babel is still with us, and it tells us things we did not previously know about the Solar System.
Discovered by the writer in 1980.
Story is in two pages skip to page two ?
I suppose it really started in 1977 when the door bell chimed. There, clutching bags and Bibles, stood two ladies from the local group of Jehovah’s Witnesses. We all know the joyful feeling we get when we open the door to see two silver haired, smiling faces, holding books and leaflets. I was no different. On that occasion I decided to argue, though it was so long ago I do not remember the details. Only one detail sticks in my mind, something one of them said. ‘Why not read it for yourself ?’That seemed to me to be quite a reasonable suggestion, so I did.
I didn’t get very far into it before I came across the story of the tower of Babel. It caught my interest because it seemed to be out of place in the narrative. It is placed smack in the middle of a genealogy and sticks out like a sore thumb, as if some scribe had dropped his papers and picked them up in the wrong order.It was already known to me that the chapter and verse divisions in the Bible are a modern convention, so I allowed myself to view the context of chapters ten and eleven of the book of Genesis as one continuous story. In fact it is all genealogy, apart from verses one through nine of chapter eleven, and these relate the Babel story. Again, I noticed the story was apparently misplaced in time as well, since, going back to chapter ten, verse ten, we see that Babel was part of Nimrod’s kingdom.‘The beginning of his kingdom was Babel…’ (Ch 10 v 10)I had to ask myself why had the ancient scribe misplaced the story of the construction of Babel. Was it an accident? Perhaps not. Perhaps it was a deliberate ploy to attract attention? Certainly it had that effect, it attracted mine.It seemed to me to be saying ‘Please take notice, here is something important.’ I experienced that feeling, though logic, and the view of experts, told me otherwise. The experts all said that Babel was a Babylonian ziggurat, though they never give their reasoning. Perhaps they think that any rational answer is better than confessing ignorance. There were many Babylonian ziggurats built, long after the time context of the Biblical Babel. Why would a Bible writer include mention of just one such ziggurat, when there were many built ? In the context of the Bible, the tower was built before the confusion of tongues and the scattering of the people. It follows that it was built before the time of Nimrod, who founded his kingdom on it.Nimrod was second generation after Noah stepped out of the famous ark onto the slopes of mount Ararat. If we accept the context of the story, Nimrod was the son of Cush, who was the son of Ham, who was one of Noah’s three sons who took passage on the ark. (Gen. 10, verses 6 & 8 ) It follows that the tower was built within two generations, and even if we allow for longevity, the construction was started, at most, within one century of the famous flood.

In the context of the narrative, it was long before the rise of Babylon. The experts place Babel in Babylon, despite the contextual anachronism, because of the similarity in phonetics of the two words. But the word ‘Babel’ has no linguistic or etymological connection to the word ‘Babylon’.

The Witnesses seemed to think it was a pagan temple.

As it turned out, it seems that both were wrong.

Another problem area was found in chapter eleven, verse two, where the authorized version says :-

“…as they journeyed From the East.”

The sequence of the narrative is quite easy to follow, there should be no cause for great dispute.

When Noah and his family stepped from the ark, they were the only living souls on Earth.

They stayed in the area of Ararat for a while, and then set out in a westerly direction, to explore their new world.

Mount Ararat is in Turkey, so traveling from the east would mean they were moving towards the west. That is to say they would be moving towards Europe, not towards Babylon, which was in the other direction. (actually it wasn’t, Babylon did not exist as a nation at that time. All the Earth was of one speech and the people one, according to the text)

I concluded that Babel was not a Babylonian ziggurat, and must therefore be something else.

By this time I was well and truly hooked.
It was more than enough to cause me to read with closer interest. Soon other anomalies presented themselves, and I found myself drawn into a fascinating Biblical world.
My initial curiosity soon led to a full investigation. I followed clues which led me to discover the maths reported in detail on the other pages.
(“An Astronomical Enigma”, and/or “Stonehenge Equation”. )
I kept an open mind, or tried to, and was willing to accept the Bible on its own terms.My approach was to say, ‘O.K. The Bible is myth, but let us accept it, let’s accept the context, and see where it leads.’
The idea was, of course, that if the Bible was myth then accepting it would produce no valid result. If I were to base logic and reasoning on Biblical clues, and if those clues were not real, then quite obviously, I would not expect real results. The fact that I did obtain real results came as something of a shock, but more of that later.The first thing I did was to draw up a list of all the things I could that concerned Babel, along with a fresh translation of the text. The translation I made with the aid of a concordance, and common sense, I am no expert on Hebrew.I knew that Hebrew words had many nuances of meaning, just like English words, and the exact meaning chosen by the King James translators, or any others for that matter, would depend on the expectations and religious views of the translators.For example, it is well known that there is no Hebrew word that can be directly translated as ‘God’. The Hebrew uses the word ‘Elohim’ which is plural and literally means ‘strong ones’ or ‘mighty ones’. Chapter one verse one of Genesis actually says that the heavens were created by ‘Elohim’.
Perhaps, before we go further, I should present the reader with my alternative translation to the Babel story.It is much the same as the King James version, I have merely allowed myself to explore some of the nuances of meaning in both Hebrew and English.It should not trouble the reader that I am not an expert on Hebrew, if my translation is wrong, then it does not matter.A wrong translation will lead nowhere. Only a correct translation will yield positive results. The reader might like to assess the accuracy of the translation later, when the results of the investigation are considered.The chapter and verse references are just that, for ease of reference, they mean nothing of themselves and should be ignored when reading the text.
The translation that follows should not be seen as authoritative, for the most part it is derived from the alternative meanings that can be found in all languages. The particular sense of meaning that emerges is just one of a range that are possible from the semantics of the passage. If critical experts disagree with the translation, then I can do no more than point to the reasoning already expressed. If it is wrong, it will lead nowhere.

Genesis Chapter Eleven

1) And the whole Earth was of one language. United.

2) And it came to pass, as they journeyed westward, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar, and they dwelt there.

3) And they said one to another, go to, let us make brick, and burn them thoroughly. And they had brick and stone and pitch for mortar.

4) And they said , Go to, let us build us a town and a place of pillars whose top elevation, or plan, may connect with the heavens: and let it be for a memorial to our name, lest we be scattered across the earth and forgotten.

5) And the Mighty Ones came down, to see the town, and the place of pillars, which the children of men were building.

6) And the Mighty Ones said, Look, the people are one, and they have all one language: and this they begin to do:

Now nothing will stand in their way, they can do anything they can imagine.

7) Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand each other.

8) So the Mighty Ones scattered them across the Earth, and they stopped building the town.

9) Therefore is the name of it called The Gate of Strength, or the Gate of God, because the Mighty Ones did there confound the language of all the earth and from thence did the Mighty Ones scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.

It is worthwhile drawing attention to verse two, which claims that they ‘journeyed’. Now it matters not, for the moment, which direction they were moving in. The point I would wish to bring out is that this was a smallish group of people, on the move as one united body. It was not a global population of many billions, as might be inferred from words like ‘The whole Earth’. A truly global population would not be considered as being capable of journeying as a united body.

The context refers to a smallish group of people who, because of their unique circumstances, were the only people in the world, and could therefore be described accurately as ‘The whole Earth’.


After the confusion of tongues and the scattering, the narrative jumps back to chapter ten verse ten, where it is reported that one section of the fragmented society under the leadership of Nimrod, established a kingdom centered on Babel, while the others were scattered abroad.

Chapter ten, verse five, describes the process in more detail.

“By these were the isles of the gentiles divided in their lands, every one after his tongue, after their families, in their nations.”


I would like to remind the reader that I am making no claim for the literal truth of these verses, nor am I trying to prove a point. My purpose is to relate the sequence of events that led to the discovery of the mathematics on web site An Astronomical Enigma

Once discovered, the math is independent of the path that led to its discovery.

I could have obtained the mathematics by following a false trail, it matters not. The math is what matters.

I started with the information reported above, be it true or false, I considered that it had meaning. Someone took the trouble to preserve it for thousands of years, so the least I could do was take it seriously.

Let us return to the narrative, and use it firstly to clear up a few misconceptions promoted by ‘experts’.


We may note again the comment that the people were united under one leader, presumed to be Noah, and that they travelled westward away from Ararat. This would bring them into Europe, and not Mesopotamia.

The ‘land of Shinar’ is often said to be located in Babylon by those same experts, who presume that because Babel was a ziggurat (according to them) and because Babel was built in ‘Shinar’, then, using false logic, it follows that Shinar must be a region or sub district of Babylon. That ties it all down neatly, but is not necessarily correct.

If the people moved to the west of Ararat, then there can be no connection whatever with a country that did not even exist at that time.

So, the first misconception to correct is the notion that Babel or Shinar was in Mesopotamia.

Since we conclude it was not Babylonian, we can further conclude that it was not a Ziggurat, since they came later, and were only built by Babylonians, as far as we can tell.

The people who built Babel, were not Babylonians. They were the only people on Earth, they were united, with a common language, and they moved westward into Europe.

There is another commonly held misconception that is somewhat easier to clear up. Babel is often shown in rather lurid pictures as a toppling tower, in the process of being destroyed by the wrathful hand of God.

In the narrative, the structure of Babel was not destroyed.

The Mighty Ones did not destroy it, nor is there any indication that they wished to do so.

The scripture simply reports that building work was stopped on the ‘city’ or town. The people subsequently scattered.

No mention is made, not anywhere in the Bible, of a destruction of Babel. It was simply taken over by Nimrod after the scattering.

To summarize the misconceptions….

A) Babel was not in Babylon.

B) Shinar was not in Babylon.

C) Babel was not a ziggurat.

D) Babel was not destroyed.

E) There is no indication that Babel was a temple.

F) The population was small.

G) Babel was a memorial of some kind.

Let us turn our attention to item ‘C’.

It is valid to say that Babel was not a ziggurat, but it could have been some other kind of tower. Why have I changed the word ‘Tower’ into ‘Place of Pillars’?

I did this for several reasons, not least amongst these reasons was the fact that the language allows for the use of the word ‘pillars’. A pillar is a small tower, a tower is a large pillar.

The literal translation is “upright things”.

Another reason is related to the statement that the top “may reach unto heaven.”

The King James translators were in the habit of inserting words to make better sense of a dubious translation, these they dutifully rendered in italics. The words in the text, reading, ‘may reach‘ were not in the original, and can be omitted.

This leaves us with “Whose top unto heaven” as the King James English version of the Hebrew.

The language seems to indicate that the top connected with the heavens, rather than reached towards the heavens.

The text appeared to me to read ‘connected’ but this could not be literal, on the understanding that the people who built it were not stupid, nor were the people who wrote the text. They must have had experience of mountains, they had recently departed from mount Ararat.

The people who built Babel would have known that the mountains do not literally reach the heavens, as the scribe who wrote the story would also have known. Knowing that the high mountains did not reach heaven, would they be likely to think they could build a tower, so much higher than the mountains ?

The structure was built on a plain. Had they wished it to reach the heavens, surely it would have been better to build the foundations on a mountain top ? Starting at the top of a mountain would mean they were at least half way there, it would reduce the amount of work considerably.

If the monument top did not reach the heavens literally, and if the words do not really indicate ‘towards’, then we must seek some other meaning.

I inserted the words ‘connect’, since it covers several possibilities, including the literal.

It is often claimed that the structure was to serve as a pagan temple, a claim that may have been deduced from the apparent displeasure shown by ‘God’, however, the context indicates it was built under the auspices of Noah, and he is elsewhere described as righteous, he would not be expected to build a pagan temple. The structure is nowhere described as a temple, pagan or otherwise.

In fact the text describes it as a ‘memorial’. (Verse 4).

It is expressly stated that the structure was to be some kind of memorial, a monument to the builders who anticipated being forgotten by posterity.

It seemed to me that these people wanted to build something special, or to record some special knowledge, as a memorial to their name. They wanted to build something that future generations would look upon, marvel at, and be impressed by. It was to be something grand, to perpetuate the name and the memory of the builders.

It was this thought, that the structure was a memorial, built to last, that hinted at the possibility of stored knowledge. If the people who built it were survivors of a global disaster, as described by the text, then they might well wish to preserve some record of what happened.

Such knowledge, if it existed, could be preserved in architecture, designed into this ‘memorial’.

The thought led me to examine the text even more closely.

The understanding of ‘Top reaching unto the heavens’ was imposed by the translators, they could only conceive of such a literal meaning, because they viewed the structure, and the scripture, as being primitive.

Having decided that ‘Top reaching the heavens’ was to be understood in a primitive literal sense, that it meant ‘High’, the early translators left themselves no option but to use the word ‘Tower’. No doubt their translation made sense to them, since they were always ready to equate ‘old’ with ‘ignorant’.


The original language, and the English, allow for my version.

‘A place of pillars whose top elevation (plan) connects with the heavens’ is a legitimate translation.


There is another reason for changing the meaning of ‘tower’ to pillars, but this is a little more complex.
It may be recalled that in verse four of Chapter eleven of Genesis, the people who built Babel were in effect suggesting the building of a memorial.

In several times and places, later in scripture, many of the early Israelites built memorials of significant events, but they did so by erecting stone pillars.
The erection of stone pillars as memorials seems to be a cultural trait, with particular regard to the characters in the Bible.

In Genesis Ch 28, vs 18 and 22 there is a record of Jacob erecting a stone as a memorial, and he even calls the place by a similar name to Babel. In verse seventeen he calls the place ‘the gate of heaven’. However, this is not Babel, it is a different time and story entirely, only the events are similar.

Moses, one of the most famous characters, came much later in time than Babel, and we see him erecting a kind of monument made of twelve ‘pillars’ as part of a religious memorial.
(Exodus Chp 24 verse 4)

See Joshua Chapter 4 V 9, and v 20 where another such incident is described. The story of Joshua is part of Israel’s history, and also comes much later in time than Babel, yet here we see the erection of twelve stones, one for each of the tribes, to commemorate the crossing into the promised land.
The size of the stones is not mentioned, but the scribe notes they ‘remain to this day’ (Josh Ch 4 v 9), the impression given that a long period of time had elapsed, that the stones were still there.
We can conclude that the stones were large ones, or they would not have ‘remained’ for long.

There are other such incidences described elsewhere.


The erection of pillars appears to be a cultural trait, or tradition, of the early Biblical patriarchs, and if this is so, then we may expect that they would have acquired such a tradition from their forebears.

The forebears of Abraham were the builders of Babel.

(See genealogy in Genesis 11, from Babel through to Abram, who was later renamed as Abraham, who was the forefather of those mentioned above, who erected pillars as memorials.)

The genealogy of scripture provides a continuity between the builders of Babel and the later ‘erectors of pillars’. The tradition of erecting pillars is seen as originating with Babel.

From this observation, we may deduce that the builders of Babel started that cultural trait, and that the monument at Babel would have been similarly built, that is to say, it would have been a memorial made of vertical stone pillars.


It is also noted that the erection of vertical stone pillars is a cultural trait of the Neolithic peoples of western Europe.

It is a known fact that many of these Neolithic structures were aligned with the heavens, and details of the alignments can be found in many books on Neolithic archaeology.

We may also observe that, in the context of the Biblical narrative of Babel, the structure was the first to be built after the flood.


We need not concern ourselves here with the vexed question of the reality of Noah’s flood, that is for later, or for others to discuss. Here we need only note that in the context of the scriptural story of Babel, the entire planet had been recently wiped clean of any trace of humanity. Babel, and the enigmatic ‘place of pillars’ would be seen as the first, and at the time the only, man made structure visible on the planet.

If it still existed today, it would be very, very old. It would be older than any other structure, older than the pyramids, older than the Bible, older than anything made by man except for the remains of Noah’s Ark.

It follows from this that the supposed ‘City’ or town, which was made of mud brick, would have turned to dust long ago. No trace of the city would remain.

Only the pillars stood a chance of remaining, and then only if they consisted of large and durable stones.

The thought then occurred to me that it was built to last. The scripture reports its supposed purpose, as a memorial, to make a name for the builders, lest they be forgotten.

They seemed to have had some prescient foreknowledge of their fate, ‘Lest we be scattered’, as indeed they were.

If it was built to last, and if it were built of durable stone, then it seemed to me to be at least possible that it might still exist, or some trace of it might still remain.

It might even be known to modern archaeology, but if so, it would be under a different name. The thought entered my head that I might be able to find it.


Babel was built by a group of people shortly after a global catastrophe that had wiped the Earth clean. No matter what their previous technological capabilities, these survivors of the catastrophe would have been reduced to a primitive, Neolithic condition. They may have retained knowledge, but they would have lost any prior industrial infrastructure.

We might expect that Babel would have been constructed using primitive tools and methods. Were it to exist today, it would possibly show signs of having been so constructed.

In other words, it would look primitive, it would look Neolithic.


I decided to review everything I had deduced about the structure, and list all those properties that might help to identify it. I had very little to work with, only the Bible, which was no more than mythology, according to all the experts.

I felt sure that the structure would be monumental, in keeping with its declared function as a memorial.

It would be something that would attract attention, something splendid, at least when it was new. It was intended to ‘make a name’ for the builders. A mere pile of rubble would not do that.

I considered that it might be Neolithic, and it was almost certain that if it did exist to this day, it would be regarded as Neolithic by modern science.


I also had to consider the attitude of the Mighty Ones, as reported in the text. They seemed to think the structure was very significant, dangerous even. It was something more than mere idolatry. Men are always building places of worship for idols, and the world is full of pagan temples. God never seems to bother much with such places.

There was something about Babel that was more significant than a pagan temple, and it seemed to me, again, in context with the narrative, that it may have been a repository for antediluvian knowledge, and that thought served to explain the enigmatic statement that the ‘top’ connected with the heavens. It could connect in a mathematical or symbolic sense, but not in a physical sense.

After all, when Noah embarked on the ark, he took with him all that he was told to take. He took his family, his wife, his sons and their wives. He took all the animals, two by two, and we can only assume he took along enough in the way of provisions, food, water, and fodder, to last for the duration.

He would have packed many things that were not mentioned in scripture, if it were a real story.

He would have taken all sorts of trivial things, like a means to make fire to cook his dinner, just as an example.

There is something else he would have taken, could not avoid taking. He and his family, all eight people on the boat, would by necessity have taken all their knowledge acquired over a long lifetime. Noah was six hundred years old when the flood came upon the earth, (Or so it is claimed by scripture, see Gen Ch 7 v 6), and it is possible to learn a lot of scientific knowledge in six hundred years.

Certainly, under the imposed condition that the context is true, Noah would have taken antediluvian science onto the ark, and would still have it when he built Babel after the flood. (Noah lived for three hundred and fifty years after the flood, see Gen Ch 9 v 28)

This observation was supported by my attempt at translation, that it had a ground plan layout that somehow connected with, or mapped, some part of the ‘Heavens’.

A monument that contained advanced knowledge would certainly be an anachronism, and could be seen as unwelcome by some putative ‘God’, but I could not quite understand how it would lead on to the builders being able to do whatever they imagined.

Perhaps the translation should read “If they can do this, they can do anything, we’d better intervene” or words to that effect. I mean that the confusion of languages was not imposed to stop them building what must have been almost completed, but to stop them from doing even worse things.

In short, they were reduced to confusion, not as a punishment for what they had done, but to prevent them from doing whatever it was they “imagined” to do afterwards.

If the Mighty Ones had disapproved of the actual structure, they could surely have destroyed it. Fortunately they didn’t.

I considered that there was a good chance that some trace of it might still exist, and decided to give some thought to a possible location. I reasoned that if I found it, I could identify it in a positive manner by extracting new, advanced knowledge from it. One would not expect to extract new knowledge about the heavens from a primitive structure.

If I could learn something new, not previously known to science, then I would have proven the case and identified Babel. The problem was I had no idea how to go about it, not at that time, but I persevered anyway.

There were some indicators in scripture that point to a general location, many I have already mentioned.

It was built on a plain, somewhere in Europe, possibly, or one might say, probably, in the area of Neolithic culture, which was western and northwestern Europe.

Europe is a large place, and there are many areas of land that could be called ‘plains’. There are many Neolithic structures, all of large upright stones, all could be described as ‘Places of pillars’. A very great number of them have some form of primitive alignment to the heavens.

I felt sure I was on the right track, but I needed something much more precise if I was ever to obtain a positive identification.

I returned to the text of the narrative, looking for some clue that would narrow down the search area.

My attention focussed on an enigmatic statement in verse five of Genesis chapter ten.

‘By these were the isles of the gentiles divided…’

This struck me as odd. The term ‘gentile’ literally means a Greek, and there were no Greeks in the time of Babel.

It also means ‘Non-Jew’, but there were no Jews in the days of Babel, and hence no need for a word meaning ‘Non-Jew’.

It is true that the text was written long after the events it claimed to describe, but surely the scribe would have been familiar with Jewish history ? He must surely have known he was using an anachronism ?

I saw here a clue, a superfluous and anachronistic reference to islands of Greeks, or non-Jews. The only other possibility was perhaps the scribe was referring to islands that would become Non-Jewish in the time period during which the scribe was writing.

Even this alternative was enigmatic. There are not, and there never were, any islands that could be called ‘Jewish’. So again there was no need for reference to islands of gentiles.

ALL islands are ‘of the Gentiles’ and always have been.

A look at a map of Europe and the middle East will quickly reveal that there are not many islands to choose from.

There are the Mediterranean islands and there are the British Isles.

That is about all there are in the area covered by the text of scripture. It seems there is limited choice of islands.

If the term ‘Gentile’ meant ‘Greek’, then the verse seems rather meaningless, the Greek Islands are all very small, and boast little in the way of megalithic structures.

We could consider the other Mediterranean islands, but apart from Malta, there are not many candidates for Neolithic monuments.

Malta is possible, but the scripture uses the plural, ‘Isles’, so we are looking for a group.

The British Isles are the only group of islands that fit the requirements. They are non-Jewish, they are a group, and can be described in the plural, and they are very rich in Neolithic structures. They also lie more-or-less to the west/northwest of Ararat.

If the verse in Genesis means anything at all, it appears to be pointing the finger at the British Isles. There are not many others. There are none in the Red sea, none to speak of in the Persian gulf, and certainly none in the deserts of Babylon, modern Iraq.

Where else could one look for ‘Isles of the Gentiles’ ?

I decided that the monuments of Britain would be the first to be examined in detail. There are a great many, but most are simple circles, only a few have enough complexity to hide knowledge.

Stonehenge was a prime candidate.

I spent some time looking at other places, such as the stone arrays in Brittany, France, but there seemed to be no way of connecting them to the heavens, apart from some rather dubious alignments. All my indicators seemed to point to the British Isles, and the most obvious Neolithic Structure in those islands is Stonehenge.

It became necessary for me to study the monument, since to start with I knew very little about it. I visited libraries, and book shops, collecting as much information as I could.

I was surprised to find that the ‘experts’ seem to know very little about it. It was a mystery.

Of course, there were guesses, and many theories, but by and large the monument seemed to have the experts stumped.

There are several aspects of Stonehenge which should be pointed out in connection with Babel.

Stonehenge is in roughly the right area to accord with the Biblical story, people could have walked here from Ararat in less than ten years, crossing the channel in boats.

It isn’t as if Stonehenge were in Australia, or on Easter Island, its location would be accessible to the people from Ararat, so it cannot be ruled out on grounds of distance or inaccessibility.

Stonehenge is built on a plain, (Salisbury plain) and the scripture describes Babel as being on a plain.

(Gen 11 v 2, ‘they found a plain and dwelt there’)

According to archaeologists, Stonehenge was never finished, just like Babel.

(Gen 11 v 8 ‘They left off the building..’)

Nobody knows exactly how old Stonehenge is, but it could easily be one of the oldest structure on Earth.

Stonehenge is a grand structure, and would make a fitting memorial for the builders. It was certainly built to last.

It could be described as ‘A place of pillars’ but not as a ‘tower’. It is located in ‘Isles of the Gentiles’

Perhaps the most telling of all is the archaeological fact, attested to in many books, that Stonehenge has no known precedent.

It appears out of the mist of history as a unique structure.

There is no verified or proven case for its origin.

There it stands, on Salisbury plain, where it has stood for thousands of years, and, though many books have been written about it, and many theories and guesses applied, it still remains a complete mystery to the experts.

SUMMARY of similarities between Babel and Stonehenge.

1] Both very old.

2] Both constructed with primitive tools.

3] Both constructed with primitive methods.

4] Both grand monuments.

5] Both located to West of Ararat.

6] Both built on a plain.

7] Both built to last.

8] Both were unfinished.

9] Both consist of pillars. (Babel probably)

10] Both are unique.

11] Both have no precedent.

There is another point to add to the above list, both connect with the heavens.

I could not include this point at this stage in my investigation, the full extent of the connection had not emerged. However, it is a known fact that Stonehenge does connect to the heavens in a simple way.

The alignment with the summer solstice is well known, as is the use of the Aubrey circle as an eclipse predictor.

12] Both connect to the heavens.

On consideration of all these points, not forgetting references to the Isles of the Gentiles, I concluded that if Babel were to be anywhere, then Stonehenge had to be top of the list of possible candidates. Twelve points of similarity had to mean something.

The only way to prove it would be to show that Stonehenge had a ground plan that ‘connected with the heavens’ and revealed new, verifiable, information about the heavens.

This I was able to do….See Stonehenge Equation

The information obtained is new, and has been validated many times by professionals. It has been examined by most of the elite scientific institutions in the world, and at over 950 universities.
Nobody has yet reported any significant computational error. The mathematics/astronomy is presented in formal manner on ‘Astronomical Enigma’

The astronomical information is ‘stand alone’, that is to say, it is unaffected by its origin in an ancient monument. It would remain valid, even if Stonehenge ceased to exist. The material is important in its own right, since it proves beyond doubt that the ‘Nebular Hypothesis’ is not completely correct.

Although I personally consider the case proven, there has been no comment from any of the experts who have examined it, and in the years that have passed since the discovery, I have not been able to publish.
Stonehenge is indeed ‘A place of pillars whose top elevation (ground plan) connects with the heavens.’

In all respects, Stonehenge fits the description of the ‘Tower’ of Babel.

Back to Start
Visit ‘Astronomical Enigma’
Visit ‘Stonehenge Equation’



Leave a Comment »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at

%d bloggers like this: