(urth) An Old mystery ...

[Son of Witz]

On Dec 4, 2008, at 8:49 PM, James Wynn wrote:

>
>> Absent their astrological connotations, this silly theory could not  
>> be
>> seen to correspond to the Christ story at all. Nor is the Crucifixion
>> observed on December 22nd, as this theory requires, or even "three  
>> days"
>> before he resurrection--it's "the third day".
>
> This theory shows shocking naïveté about cosmology considering the  
> interest its creator must have had in the subject:
>
> "Thirty years after Christ's birth he was baptized. Thirty days  
> after the Sun is born he enters the sign Aquarius, the water-bearer  
> (Baptismo). "
>
> Actually this count is off by 5 days, but lets leave that aside.  
> 2000 years ago, the Sun entered Aquarius around (guessing) 40 days  
> or more later than it does today. This holds true for all the other  
> dates assigned to astrological signs.
>
> There is much to recommend the connection between cosmology and  
> myth, but this explanation is like trying to present Quantum Physics  
> through Nancy & Sluggo cartoons.


too funny.

I don't know shit about it. it's fun to see it punctured so readily.
you geeks who can keep track of the stars positions over eons are too  
cool for school.

I did quickly google that one cause I couldn't remember the better  
presentation I saw.
anyway, I guess I'm naive enough to find the notion interesting, but  
not interested enough to check it's veracity.
probably makes more sense filtered through bongwater.  ;)

~witz