Episode VI -- The Adam's Family

Congratulations! By virtue of reading this Episode of the magnificent Annals of Earth, you have demonstrated your vast superiority in taste, breeding, and other attributes of a discriminating and brilliant mind. (This assumes, of course, that you've read the first five Episodes!)

Not only have you had an incredibly rare opportunity (books sales by this author having been really dismal lately) to peruse and learn about the creation and character of our  Solar System, the  evolution/creation of life on Earth, the esoteric theories of  Zero-Point-Energy, mitochondrial DNA,  Complexity, and so forth... But in addition you have also been privileged to discover the  origins of Man, marvel at the descriptions of ancient  Sumerian texts, and even come to the astounding realization that the book of  Genesis might actually be true, the latter in fact a literal description of what really happened! Of course, there is the minor detail that it was necessary, albeit upon the basis of massive evidence, to theorize that much of the details of man's origin hinged on there having been  extraterrestrials (also known as "angels," "gods," goddesses," and so forth) showing up on Earth a half-million years ago -- and then having these same visitors stay as they discovered that the Earth was not only a nice place to visit, but one where they might even want to live!

According to Al Worden, Apollo 15 astronaut: "In my mind the universe has to be cyclic; in one galaxy there is a planet becoming unlivable and in another part or a different galaxy there is a planet that is perfect for habitation, and I see some intelligent being, like us, skipping around from planet to planet, as South Pacific Indians do on islands, to continue the species. I think that's what the space program is all about...  I think we may be a combination of creatures that were living here on Earth some time in the past, and had a visitation by beings from somewhere else in the universe; and those two species getting together and having progeny...  In fact, a very small group of explorers could land on a planet and create successors to themselves who would eventually take up the pursuit of inhabiting the rest of the universe."  [emphasis mine]

Hey! If we can imagine ourselves doing it... Why should it not be equally plausible that someone did it to us?  And for their own reasons which may be different from our agendas. The fact every human on the planet Earth has an ancestry whose earliest members were slaves should not send us into denial. We should not endeavor to mimic Cleopatra, de Queen of de Nile. We should be bigger than that, accept the straightforward possibility that the  Anunnaki, specifically Enki and Ninti, made us in their image, jump-started evolution; made our ancestors work the gold mines of the Abzu (and later to till the soil of Edin); and in the process, establish a mitochondrial DNA tract, one traceable back to the single mommy of us all.

This, in fact, agrees with the joint conclusion of many scientists in the field: that after a hiatus of 1.2 to 1.5 million years in the lives of Homo erectus, Homo sapiens made a sudden appearance some time around 300,000 years ago. The Neanderthals "differentiated" from those early Homo sapiens ("Wise man") about 200,000 years ago, and after that, Cro-Magnon Man made his (and more accurately her) appearance, and beginning, apparently, with a single mother. Genesis 3: 20 states:

 "And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living."

The Hebrew text of the Bible also attributes the creative act of Man to certain Elohim -- a plural term that at the very least should be translated as "gods" (and not a single "god"). In the two versions of the creation of man, first God (Enki) created man, male and female. In the second, after creating The Adam, God provided the new kid on the block with a female counterpart out of his rib.

[Adam, by the way, meant "the Earthling" (not necessarily a person named Adam), and comes from the same root as Adamah, "Earth," the dam meaning "blood."  The Sumerian term for "Man" is LU, but its root is not human being. It is, instead, "worker, servant."  Bummer!]

A mutiny of the Anunnaki had precipitated the necessity for God (aka Enki and Ninti) to create a Primitive Worker to take over the dirty work. All that was needed was to "Bind upon it the image of the gods."  Enki and Ninti "summoned and asked the goddess, the midwife of the gods, the wise birthgiver:"

"To a creature give life, create workers! Create a Primitive Worker, that he may bear the yoke! Let him bear the yoke assigned by Enlil, Let the Worker carry the toil of the gods!"

Ninti had come to Africa to be at the side of Enki. Texts tell of much passionate and torrid love making between them (but alas, the issues of the love making were always female, and thus not the making of a male heir material). Ninti's name meant "Lady Life," but later on she was nickname Mammi (the source of the universal Mama/Mother?).

But even before the fateful decision to create a primitive worker, Enki and Ninti had been experimenting with genetic manipulation. It is quite plausible they created Sphinxes (bulls or lions with human heads) or, according to Berossus, a prehuman period where "men appeared with two wings" or "one body and two heads," or with mixed male and female organs, or "some with the legs and horns of goats."  Or perhaps the Minotaur (half bull, half man) or the Centaurs of which  Chiron is the most noted member (half man and half horse -- making many of them horse's asses, but with a real head (human) on their shoulders). All of these ancient creatures of fable, myth, and yore may very well have been trial and error experiments by Enki and Ninti.

In effect, the two Elohim had already set out to manipulate and speed up the process of Evolution! Modern man would undoubtedly have eventually evolved on Earth, just as the Anunnaki had done on Nibiru, both possibly having come from the same "seed of life."  But 300,000 years ago, man was behind. Not much. Just a little bit. Keep in mind that if in the course of 4 billion years, the evolutionary process had been earlier on Nibiru by just 1%, evolution there would have been forty million years ahead of that on Earth.

The details of the Sumerian text, The Tale of Adapa, are fascinating. Enki gave Ninti the following instructions:  "Mix to a core the clay from the Basement of the Earth, just above the Abzu, and shape it into the form of a core. I shall provide good, knowing young Anunnaki who will bring the clay to the right condition."

The specific location is southeast Africa, just north of the mines of Southern Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe). The "clay" comes from the Sumerian TI.IT (tit?), meaning literally "that which is with life."  In effect it was the female egg of an apewoman. The "divine elements" were obtained by Ninti. One extract was from a young Anunnaki, which was taken from his blood. It was TE.E.MA, "that which houses that which binds the memory," i.e. a "gene."  The other element was the male's "semen," the sex or reproductive organ's "that which binds."  The two extracts were mixed in the Sumerian SHI.IM.TI, literally translated as "house where the wind of life is breathed in."  (All of which is reminiscent of Elohim, after having fashioned the Adam from the clay, "blew in his nostrils the breath of life."  In fact, the biblical term, Nephesh, sometimes translated "soul" rather than "breath of life," appears in the Akkadian account exactly.)

The egg of the Apewoman, fertilized in the "purifying baths" with the sperm and genes of the young Anunnaki "god," was then deposited in a "mold," where the "binding was to be completed. The fertilized and "molded" egg was them reinplanted in a female womb -- not the apewoman's but the womb of a "goddess," i.e., an Anunnaki female. In fact, Ninti ("Lady of the Earth") had volunteered for the task in the first trial. Enki announced:

"Ninti, my goddess-spouse will be the one for labor."

"The newborn's fate thou shalt pronounce; Ninti would fix upon it the image of the gods, and what it will be is 'man'."

If the experiment succeeded, fourteen other female Anunnaki would act as Birth Goddesses. While "The birth goddesses were kept together, Ninti, sat, counting the months. The fateful tenth month was approaching, the tenth month arrived -- the period of opening the womb had elapsed."  In what was apparently medical intervention, Ninti "covered her head" and "made an opening."  Grabbing the newborn baby, she was overcome with joy. "I have created it! My hands have made it!"  As depicted in the figure, the first Adam was brought forth.

Then they went into production!! "Ninti nipped off fourteen pieces of clay, Seven she deposited on the right, Seven she deposited on the left; Between them she placed the mold."  Enki and Ninti then... "The wise and learned, Double-seven birth goddesses had assembled. Seven brought forth males, Seven brought forth females; The birth-goddesses brought forth the Wind of the Breath of Life."  As in the Bible, first The Adam was created by himself; and then, the next phase, the Elohim created the first humans "male and female."

Modern science has confirmed the necessary ingredient of adding blood serum to the mixture of nutrients and sperm in order to achieve success, in essence following the very same procedures that Enki and Ninti had employed. Science has also noted that there was something in the male sperm that promoted the process, something beside the chromosomes: "the sperm might also be contributing some unidentified spur that stimulates development of the egg." (A kick in the keester?)

Science has also done the trial and error routine, and in one example crossed a goat and a sheep, yielding a "geep."  Such mixed creatures are called chimeras (after the monster in Greek mythology that had the forepart of a lion, the middle of a goat, and the tail of a dragon). In the 1980s, gene splicing became the rage for modern science, and in 1989 [Science, Aug 11] a team of Italian scientists announced success in using sperm to act as the carriers of a new gene. This is  the natural medium, but the idea caused quite a ruckus. The fact the creation of The Adam by Enki and Ninti had been accomplished by mixing the Apewoman's egg in a test tube with the sperm of a young Anunnaki in a solution also containing blood serum, did not fade the protests. In 1987, the dean of anthropology at the University of Florence, had already raised a storm of fundamentalism by suggesting science could create "a new breed of slave, an anthropoid with a chimpanzee mother and a human father."  This bold, scandalous, and wholly new idea was a mere 200,000 years behind the time that the idea had first been proven in the laboratory!

This then is the first chapter of Genesis version. Both male and female created. But as we mentioned before, they're hybrids! And while the Anunnaki might not have been the type of bigots who would put someone down just because they were hybrids, there was the disconcerting factor that the continuing production of hybrids required the continuing presence and the continuing pregnancy of the birth goddesses, the female Anunnaki. This deplorable state of affairs of Anunnaki females constantly making like blimps led Enki and Ninti to the creation of Adam, a worker who could have offspring with a compatible female -- the gist of the Bible's second creation of man episode

It is there, of course, that we encounter the inexplicable tale of creating a female from the rib of a man. Think about it... A rib!?  Why this particular part of a man's anatomy?  Is this the origin of "spareribs," barbecued or otherwise?  Admittedly, man might have a plethora of ribs (as opposed to one neck, two arms, etcetera), but why require any part of a man's anatomy to create woman?  If this wonderment has ever puzzled you, never fear. For modern science has come to the rescue!

Adam's rib may have been needed to overcome some immunological rejection by the female Primitive Workers of the male's sperm. The sexuality between Adam and Eve, their acquiring "knowing" -- a biblical term that connoted sex for the purpose of procreation -- allowed Eve to become pregnant by Adam and have children, and not have her immune system balk at the intruder genes carried by the sperm.

Modern science has also, unbeknownst to itself, supported several other of the inevitable implications of Enki and Ninti creating a living, working, moderately intelligent being, capable of taking instruction, learning the rudiments of mining, and capable of walking straight, chewing gum and seeing lightening all at the same time. Modern science, for example, has noted that: "Evidence amassed over the past 60 years suggests that there is a genetic component to intelligence." [Scientific American, March 1989]  This is the same premise as in the recent, highly controversial book, The Bell Curve. Other scientists have shown a "close biological correlation" in mental abilities attributable to genetic heredity. Thus the creation of Man by the Anunnaki had the advantage of including the superior intelligence genes of the extraterrestrials in the DNA of humans. Thus the primitive workers could find their way to the mines (but not necessarily know about the lack of fringe benefits).

[There is also the implication that one's genetics -- even the purity of one's race -- carries an intelligence quotient connotation! What it does not consider is the random nature of procreation and the ability to some rather dumb creatures to occasionally (one in a hundred kind of thing) create a really highly intelligent offspring.]

There is also evidence from modern science for a genetic source of the life cycle of living organisms.  How long any organism lives, for example, may be actually programmed into the its genes. Furthermore, some creatures are preprogrammed to self destruct, i.e. die after reproducing  (e.g. octopus and salmon). But the more relevant question to which such considerations inevitably lead is whether or not man's individual life-line is programmed! To this, we turn to the Sumerian text, which makes it clear which genetic traits were intentionally included:

"Wide understanding Enki perfected for him... Wisdom he had given him... to him he had given Knowing; Eternal life he had not given him."

Well maybe. But genetics have a way of getting out of hand, of evolving. More on this later.

c. 200,000 B.C.E. Meanwhile, the plot has thickened! Sort of like Avolemeno Soup. Enki and Ninti had, unbeknownst to Enlil, given to their little hybrids the ability to have offspring, the sexual "knowing" for having children. Sex education classes had become all the rage! The primitive workers were now having primitive sex, and being introduced to the Tree of Life! It was party time!

It was also time for the Biblical Adam to make an appearance with his lovely sidekick, Eve; and for the two of them to cause a ruckus about which we're still writing brilliant treatises and engaging in wondrous discourses. For back at the ranch in E.DIN, there was trouble in paradise. It seems as if Enki had somehow failed to mention to Enlil that his progeny were having little progeny of their own. Obviously an oversight or not telling the overseer the obvious. According to the Sumerian depictions, the primitive workers had indeed been seeded with the  Tree of Life and offered the forbidden fruit. When the obvious became obvious, even to Enlil, it occasioned an angry encounter between the "Lord God" and the "Serpent."

Angry?  The "Lord God" lost his temper?  Sounds very human, or barring that, very Anunnaki (whom we have learned, don't exactly fight or wrestle fair). When it's the heir apparent of Nibiru, Enlil, who has suffered the slings and arrows of outrageous Anunnaki miners, mischievous half-siblings, and fortune-hunting cousins, one can understand that the Commander in Chief on Earth of the Anunnaki had felt his authority questioned once too often. Enlil would be fully justified in engaging in an "angry encounter" with the perpetrator of this latest insult to Enlil's command. The "Lord God," Enlil, was clearly upset by the actions of the "Serpent."

And who, pray tell, do you suspect is the serpent?  Let me give you a hint. The Serpent God is written in archaic Sumerian as BUR, BURU, or BUZUR, all terms roughly translated as "God Who Solves Secrets," "God of the Deep Mines," and variations thereof. The Bible (in the original Hebrew) calls the god who tempted Eve, Nahash, which is translated as "Serpent," but which has the literal meaning of "He Who Solves Secrets" and "He Who Knows Metals," the exact parallels of the god's name in the Sumerian depiction.

Does this sound a bit like our old friend, Enki?  Could be! Keep in mind that Enki's emblem was that of the entwined serpents, a symbolism that may very well represent the double-helix structure of DNA. (It's interesting that Moses evoked this sign when he made a nahash nehosheth, a "copper serpent" to halt an epidemic affecting the Israelites. Recent experiments on copper, for example, have found this element useful in imaging blood flow. Furthermore, copper compounds can carry pharmaceuticals to living cells, including brain cells.)

The Sumerian version also shows Enki being arrested for his unauthorized deed. Enlil had not been pleased, to say the least. Moreover, in his anger, Enlil ordered the expulsion of The Adam -- the Homo Sapiens Earthling -- from the E.DIN ("The Abode of the Righteous Ones"). It's worth noting, in this regard, Enlil's reasoning for this expulsion of the gardener from the garden:

"And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever;  "Therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life." [Genesis 3: 22-24]

There are several points worth noting here. The first is that the "Lord God" (aka Enlil) seems uncommonly concerned about man becoming "as one of us, to know good and evil" and most specifically, to "take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever."

Obviously, this is not a transcendental supreme being, a creator of the universe. This is a slightly paranoid creature worried about man becoming his equal! Such a description fits Enlil, but not a supreme universal deity. Note also that at this point, man had only tasted of the tree of knowledge of good and evil; he had yet to even try the fruit of the Tree of Life! One would not think that having some sort of moral code, or knowing which direction was up, would constitute a serious threat to the gods.

Sumerian texts state that when the Anunnaki landed on Earth, there were no "domesticated" crops and animals; it was the Anunnaki who brought them forth in their "Creation Chamber."  Together with Lahar ("woolly cattle") and Anshan ("grains") they also brought forth "vegetation that luxuriates and multiples."  It was all done in Edin; and after The Adam was created, he was brought there to tend it all.

The amazing Garden of Eden was thus the biogenetic farm or enclave where "domesticated" crops, fruits, and animals were brought forth. (After the  Deluge, the  Anunnaki again provided Mankind with the crop and animal seeds, which they had preserved, to allow man to start anew. But this time, Man himself had to be the husbandman. The Bible confirms this and attributes to Noah the honor of having been the first husbandman. His first cultivated food was the grape, which besides being a nourishing food, is also a strong gastrointestinal medicine. Thus when Noah drank the wine (even in excess), he was, in a manner of speaking, taking his medicine.)

[In this latter regard, it might be worth mentioning that, according to the National Seed Storage Laboratory in Fort Collins [a USDA brochure], "Aside from sunflowers and corn, almost all the plants that (North Americans) eat and the fibers for our clothing were imported from other countries."]

But I digress. Again. I had previously warned you that I would. In any case...

Back to the paranoid being who was worried about man putting forth his hand and then to "take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever."

Eat of the tree of life and live forever!?  Man?  This is in the cards?  There is the possibility that Man, or his ancestors, might come upon a Tree of Life, growing in the wild, eat of its fruit, and live forever?  Really!?  How very interesting!

But as John Paul Jones was reported to have said, "We have not yet begun to speculate!"  [Okay, it's a different John Paul!]

Note, for example, the fact that the first mention of the Tree of Life is in Genesis 2: 9. Immediately following this is the announcement that "Thar's gold in them thar hills."  Does this juxtaposition of the Tree of Life, gold, and the rivers in which to pan for gold have some esoteric meaning?  Well, of course, it does! Why else would I have mentioned it!?  The only problem is... I don't think you're quite ready for this one. Perhaps in a few hundred thousand years. [Which in these annals is just a scroll away.]

Meanwhile, back at the closing of the local homeless shelter, we find Adam and Eve being summarily thrown out of the only home they had ever known -- a tear jerker worthy of the Nightly News. Imagine it, if you will...

LOCAL COUPLE TOSSED OUT OF HOME BY ANGRY LANDLORD!

Adam and Eve (their last names being withheld pending notification of their next of kin) were summarily ejected today from their garden homestead by their landlord god. Their home, located just East of Eden, had been in their family for some 50,000 to 100,000 years. The landlord god, a nefarious character if there ever was one, contends that the expulsion was done because the couple had eaten of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. The couple countered that they had merely wanted to improve their educational status, and with continuing education classes still some 200,000 years in the future, it was their only way to gain wisdom. 

For more background on this incident, we turn to Genesis 3: 1-6:

"Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?  And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden; But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.

"And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die. For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat;"

EDITORIAL COMMENT:  This is a true travesty of justice. It is truly disheartening to see a young couple, just starting out in the first few thousand years of their life and trying to educate themselves while simultaneously raising Cain (their first-born son), to have to go through what is -- to all extents and purposes -- a pure case of entrapment. Imagine, if you will, that you were to leave home for a period of time, and leave your two young children alone. You tell them, before you go, that they can do anything in the house that they want, with the single, solitary exception that they must not look in the refrigerator! They can go anywhere, do anything, play whatever game they like... BUT they must not look in the refrigerator. Now. Guess what the kids do the moment you are out of the house!?

But let's assume that your kids are exceptionally well-behaved, and resist the overwhelming temptation to look in the refrigerator (else why would you have been so adamant about not looking?). However, as landlord, you also allow a devious fellow to enter your home, a fellow who urges and cajoles your children to look in the refrigerator. Then, when you come home and discover the fact that your kids have been in the fridge, you toss them out of the house and forbid them ever to return!

Does this strike you as a slight case of overkill, of possible entrapment in allowing the devious fellow in your home?  If you're the omnipotent being you like to pretend to be, how did this snake-in-the-grass get inside your home in the first place?  For that matter, why did you leave your children alone?  Why did you add insult to injury by making the refrigerator sound like such an intriguing idea?  What exactly is so blasted important about what you've got in the refrigerator anyway!?  And then you throw them out!?  Banish them forever!?  This is despicable! Outrageous! A clear violation of civil and uncivil rights, a blatant case of entrapment, a despicable miscarriage of justice, and a gross violation of the covenant of garden landlords and tenant rights.

Unless, of course, there's something going on we don't know about...

AND NOW, BACK TO OUR REGULARLY SCHEDULED COMMERCIALS.

There was, in fact, something going on, something which the writers of Genesis didn't know about (or else didn't want us to know about). The serpent was Enki, the co-creator of mankind, who wanted his creations to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil and thereby to have creations of their own, to know right from wrong, and to acquire a little  wisdom. Quite possibly, Enki may have also wanted his human progeny to also be allowed to eat of the Tree of Life, and thereby live forever.

The other major player of the little drama, the heavy, was the Lord God, Enlil, who did not want the same things, and in fact was worried to death that man would reach the same level as he and the other Anunnaki, and that man, too, would live forever (or at least, for a very long time). It was Enlil, a far-from-omnipotent being, who cursed the serpent (arrested Enki for his deed), multiplied the sorrow of the woman, cursed the ground upon which the man walked, promised him a life of toil and sweat, and threw  Adam and Eve out of the Garden. It was Enlil that committed major league overkill!

Then, no longer confined to the settlements of the Anunnaki, Man began to roam the Earth. At this point, according to the Bible, Man began to specialize in what would always constitute his favorite activity: begetting. Adam kicked off the process by "knowing his wife, Eve," and promptly was rewarded with Cain and Abel, the first becoming the farmer, and the other, the sheepherder.

Almost immediately, grand daddy Enlil began to play favorites, liking Abel's offering of sheep and finding Cain's offering of the fruit of the field inadequate. (Kind of makes you wonder what Enlil was doing with the sheep, doesn't it?)  In any case, this blatant favoritism resulted in Cain raising cain with Abel, and then heading east of Edin (despite the injunction of "Go west, young man, go west). The bible follows Cain's adventures for several generations, including his begetting a son, Enoch (the latter name meaning "foundation"). In the book of Jubilees, "Cain espoused his own sister Awan and she bore him Enoch at the close of the fourth Jubilee. Nothing like keeping it in the family.

One might wonder why the Lord God already had Cain down for a sinner (Genesis 4:7)  Was Cain, perhaps, born in the garden?  Keep in mind that somehow Enlil had managed to figure out that Adam and Eve were fooling around (and at the same time, failing to fool Enlil). Does this explain why God did not respect Cain's offering?  Was Enlil playing favorites, nursing an old grudge?  Maybe.

It is curious that God/Enlil in his benevolence decided to grant one last boon to Cain:  After committing Adam's eldest son to be a fugitive and a vagabond, and hearing Cain complain that his days as a traveler were surely numbered; God then gave Cain a passport to freedom, a mark upon Cain, advertising in effect, that anyone taking vengeance on Cain's body was going to have seven generations to regret the act. This doesn't sound like Enlil.

One would have to believe, therefore, that it was the god Enki who took pity on Cain (and certainly not Enlil)! It clearly makes no sense that after having cursed him and thrown him out of the state (not just the garden) that a single god would have provided him with diplomatic immunity for the homicidal sibling in his future travels. Unless that god had a split personality.

Meanwhile, back at the Sumerian ranch, there are references in the texts to the Amakandu -- "People Who In Sorrow Roam."  The Sumerian texts go on to state "Banned be thou from the soil which hath received thy brother's blood... a restless nomad shalt thou be upon the earth."  Then it talks of the Mesopotamian chief of the exiled people:

"He built in Dunnu, a city with twin towers. Ka'in dedicated to himself, the lordship over the city."

It doesn't take a Vulcan Grand Master of Logic to figure that Ka'in is Cain, and Dunnu is the biblical Nud. It is also noteworthy that the archaic Assyrian King List states that in the earliest times, when their forefathers were tent-dwellers, the patriarch of their people was named Adamu.

There is also the notable fact that the Bible then spends the next nine verses telling of Cain's lineage, and even suggesting additional divine intervention. For example, concerning Lamech, born of the fifth generation of Cain:

"And Lamech took unto himself two wives; the name of one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah. And Adah bare Jabal; he was the father of such as dwell in tents and of such as have cattle. And his brother's name was Jubal; he was the father of all such as handle the harp and organ. And Zillah, she also bare Tubal-Cain, an instructor of every artificer in brass and iron; and the sister of Tubal-cain was Naamah.

"And Lamech said unto his wives, Adah and Zillah, Hear my voice; ye wives of Lamech; hearken unto my speech; for I have slain a man to my wounding, and a young man to my hurt. If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold, truly Lamech seventy and sevenfold."  [Genesis 4: 19-24]

One might wonder why Lamech gets a VIP treatment even better than Cain, particularly when the Bible gives no hint of Lamech's resume -- other than that he had two wives and three sons, he killed a man to his wounding, and a young man to his hurt. Perhaps there is something significant about Lamech's sons. Or perhaps, Lamech was a hired assassin, and was being well paid for his work. Or perhaps the really great crime of Lamech was om naming his sons, Jabal, Jubal, and Tubal.

It's not at all clear but one can be certain of one thing: there's a reason for the biblical references. Was there a hint, for example, that the Bible is attempting to put into a better light, roaming cattle barons and/or rustlers, itinerant minstrels and organ-repair-persons, and traveling metallurgical instructors?  All of this is very curious. Like why the same name for Cain's fifth generation son as Noah's father?  Admittedly, Adam and his lineage were never at a lost for strange and bewildering names, but why would they choose common names?  Did Noah's grand daddy want to name his first-born son after a distant cousin who was known for his seventy and sevenfold protection plan?  The old rich uncle scenario?

And while we're asking questions which are unlikely to ever be definitively answered, one might also ask why it is that in the creation of the world and mankind, everything was attributed to God; but that beginning in Chapter two (verse 4) the attributes are to the Lord God or to the Lord. Why is that?  Did God change his name because of a problems in another state?  Was he running from something?  Are the weird and paradoxical questions raised by the Bible never going to end?

Actually, the Bible does give us a break, beginning in Chapter 5 of Genesis. Beginning then, almost everything is begetting and living to a ripe old age -- all of which we can readily understand. But even then,  it does raise a few questions. There is, of course, the dating problem. [No, no. I'm not having a dating problem! I've plenty of dates! Don't send me any dates! I've had entirely too many blind dates, lame dates, and dysfunctional dates! I don't need any more. Please!]

Rather the dating problem is the chronological problem, previously referenced, which stems from the lineage of Adam to Noah. First of all, these guys are living almost a thousand years each. At the same time, they are having their first-born sons at a relatively early age, and thereafter hanging around begetting nameless offspring. And then, of course, we have to somehow reconcile the dating from the Anunnaki and Sumerian texts with that of the Bible.

The extent of the problem can be understood if one takes the biblical lineage literally and dates Adam, and the creation of the world from the time of Abraham c. 2055 or 2123 B.C.E.). Then, according to this "logic," Adam birthday was sometime around 4004 B.C.E.

For simplicity, consider the following table:

KEY:   The first column of the Table gives the number of years from the time of Adam's birth, while each of the subsequent columns gives the time from the birth of the patriarch until the next birth or death. The underlined numbers give the age of the patriarch at the time of his death/transition.

There are several interesting implications. One is that Adam and his entire lineage were still alive when Noah's father was born. Also the average age of the patriarch at the birth of his first-born son was 117.33 years. In other words, it takes them a while to get into the begetting thing -- apparently a serious lack of marriage or sex counselors in that bygone era). Meanwhile, their average lifetime is 912.22 years (not counting Enoch, who's a special case).

There are also some problems. According to the Bible, Shem -- Noah's eldest son -- was born when Noah was 500. The flood occurred in Noah's 600th year, and subsequently Shem begot Arphaxad (his eldest son) when Shem was 100, but 2 years after the flood. Inasmuch as 100 + 2 does not equal 100, there is a certain slack in the mathematical integrity.

It's also worth noting that Methuselah lived 10 years after the flood, according to the Bible, but there's no mention of his being on the Ark. One can only conjecture that, perhaps, Methuselah may have taken the train instead. Otherwise, surely there would have been some biblical reference to Methuselah having missed the boat! And why! (Also, the mathematics don't work... suggesting Methuselah died at the time of the flood... which might actually make more sense, with Noah being the only surviving patriarch.)

Incidentally, the patriarchs after the flood had an even more notable problem. From  Noah to Abraham, there is a distinct reduction in lifetimes. The first three generations (Arphaxad, Salah, and Eber) lived an average of 446 years (438, 433, and 468, respectively). The next three generations (Peleg, Reu, and Serug) live an average of 236 years (239, 239, and 230, respectively). The subsequent generations are on the order of 148 (Nahor), 205 (Terah), 175 (Abraham), 180 (Isaac), 147 (Jacob), and 110 (Jacob's son). At this rate, assuming a linear, straight-line progression, Jacob's great, great, grate, great grandson would live a minus 3 years! This sort of thing has the undesirable effect of really shutting down a patriarchy. Or even a matriarchy.

Conceivably, the genetic errors that accumulate as DNA keeps reproducing itself in the cells can contribute to the aging process. As we have already mentioned, scientific evidence indicates the existence of a biological "clock" in all creatures, a basic, built-in genetic trait that controls the life span. AT the same time, some genes or viruses seem to possess fragments of DNA that can literally "immortalize" them.

Our falling life span, therefore, might be a symptom of the minute loss, from generation to generation, of what some consider "divine" elements and the increasing preponderance of the "animal which is within us."  The existence in our genetic makeup of what some call "nonsense" DNA -- segments of DNA that seem to have lost their purpose -- may be an apparent leftover from the original "mixing."  The other possibility is that our decreasing life span was externally generated -- perhaps by someone like the Anunnaki denying us the benefits of the Tree of Life.

"Wide understanding Enki perfected for [Adam], to disclose the designs of the Earth; to him he gave Knowing; but immortality he did not give him."

By virtue of humans having originated from the "mixing" of the DNA of Homo erectus and the Anunnaki, humans may have received a shot in the arm on the side of longevity. The genetic error accumulation, however, would then slowly degrade over time. This is alluded to in Genesis 6: 3 (quoted above) in that the spirit (aka genes?) of God (aka the Anunnaki) "shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh."  While this gives us a clear indication of the advantages of being born a "blue blood," of the right race or genetical ancestry -- or just in the right family -- it also suggests that succeeding generations do not necessarily carry on the glorious traditions of their forebears. There is always the subtle degradation of the gene pool, for whatever reason.

But this still doesn't tell the whole story. It is unlikely that the life span of the patriarchs would degrade in such quantum leaps, going from an average of over 900 years, to 600 for Noah, 450 for the next three generations, 250 for the next three, and then slowly degrading to something on the order of 100 years for Jacob's offspring. It is also noteworthy that the first major cutback occured at the time of the Flood (a traumatic time for everyone, including Enlil, Enki, and the Anunnaki), while the second turn down occured with Peleg. The latter partriarch is noteworthy in that, "for in his day was the earth divided." [Genesis 10: 25]  "Divided" is as good a word as any, when the lifetime average falls from 446 to 236 years!

The Bible describes the generations of Noah's sons in Chapter 10 of  Genesis, and in Chapter 11 describes the ages at birth and death of each succeeding generation, all the way to Abraham. In between these two versions, is the story of the  Tower of Babel. One might easily conjecture that this occurred in the time of Peleg, when the earth was "divided."  More on this, later.

In the meantime, there appears to be a connection between lifetimes of mankind and some external intervention by the Anunnaki. Distinct, abrupt reductions in the life spans of Adam and his descendents does not correlate well with the idea of a slow degradation of DNA genetic error accumulation. It speaks instead of some nefarious character (someone like Enlil, a god who regularly got angry, repenteth that he made or tolerated man, or felt threatened by man coming up to his level), who then decides to reduce the time span of man. The best bet is that it has to do with the  Tree of Life, about which much more will be said.

Meanwhile, there is the chronological problem in the dating in these Annals which is probably  quite obvious. The time span from Adam to the time of the flood, according to the Bible, is 1656 years. This does not quite jell with the time span which we have been advocating, namely from about 200,000 B.C.E. to approximately 11,000 B.C.E. It's close! And probably good enough for government work. But it's not quite there. Accordingly, we might want to find a fudge factor to make it look just a little bit better. Fortunately, the Bible provides precisely the factor we're looking for!

"And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh; yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years."  [Genesis 6:3]

For starters, this doesn't make any sense. A mere three verses after supposedly determining that the days of man "shall be an hundred and twenty years;" God repented "that he had made man on the earth."  Admittedly, the repenting god was probably Enlil -- who had never been enamored with Enki's creations -- but it really doesn't make sense to grant man an hundred and twenty years, and then wash his hands (arms, feet, and entire body) in the  Deluge that God allegedly engineered in order to wipe man from the face of the Earth. A major league problem here is that the use of the future tense just doesn't fly. Of course, if the phrase read that man's days had been an hundred and twenty...

In the original Hebrew version, the latter phrase is: "his days were an hundred and twenty years." Which gets us past the first hurdle. But then there's the second hurdle that in either case this phrase is utterly meaningless in its generally accepted context. In the Hebrew version the lifetimes of the patriarchs were on the order of 900, and in the King James version, a sliding scale from 450 years down to 100 years. Conceivably, the 120 year time span refers to men in general and not to the lineage of Adam, who may have been favorites of the Anunnaki, and thus allowed to partake just enough of the Tree of Life (which Enlil, et al controlled).

The other possibility, and the one to which we will diligently apply, is that 120 years is a multiplying factor; each "year" in the description of the Jewish patriarchs before the flood is actually 120 years. Thus Adam, whose lifetime is given as 930 years, actually lived 930 x 120 = 111,600 years.

Yes, I know; I'm stretching your credibility. Or at least your gullibility. The idea of lifetimes of over 900 years may have been hard enough to swallow... But over 100,000?  The latter comes more under the category of "Outrageous -- File Here."

However. According to the Sumerian texts, Enlil and Enki, among others, have lifetimes well in excess of 450,000 Earth years. This amounts to some 125 Sars (years on Nibiru) -- a lifetime of sorts which appears reasonable -- at least for Nibiruans. Note that modern science is well aware of species on Earth who live for a single day, making our lifetimes a factor of (365 x 80 =) 29,200 longer. The Anunnaki / modern Earthling factor is a mere 5,625. Keep in mind, also, that we have seen the remarkable accuracy of the Sumerian texts in describing our Solar System, and it would be unwise to discount their relevancy simply because it extends the lifetime of early Homo sapiens sapiens biblical into the 100,000 year time frame.

The fudge factor of 120 also provides us with a better dating mechanism. Thus the time from the birth of Adam to the time of the Flood goes from 1656 years to 1656 x 120 = 198,720 years. And if the Flood is dated at 11,600 B.C.E., then Adam arrived on the scene, c. 210,320 B.C.E., probably in April (Adam has got to have been an Aries!).

Therefore, if you would like to correct the above date, the heading of this incredibly long description of the time period, feel free to do so now. And if you're showing the slightest amount of hesitation, don't forget that one Yuga (432,000 Earth years) divided by the time for Nibiru to make one orbit (3600 Earth years) equals one hundred and twenty. So there! Just as we mentioned in Episode III, the number 120 does in fact prove to have strange and subtle significance. Or at the very least, maybe.

There is one last issue: What in the world does one do for 100,000 years?  Surely, one could attend every seminar, every workshop, every university, every trade school, every experiential event on the planet, and then some. One could attempt every mind-boggling and mind-numbing event (from Super bowls to planetary bungee-jumping, whoever-is-alive-at-the-end-wins contests). Such a life span has the potential for ultimately becoming very, very boring.

A related problem is that of the Anunnaki. As we have seen, Enki and Enlil arrived on the scene some 450,000 years ago, and as we shall see, they will still be arguing and getting in each other's face during the time of Abraham, circa 2,000 B.C.E. And while there is evidence they may have mellowed slightly toward the end of that very long time frame, the fact nevertheless remains that they managed to keep a sibling-rivalry going for well over 400,000 years. One would think that they would make a little more progress in their interpersonal relationship over that time span. One would also expect the Anunnaki to progress as a race a bit more in 400,000 years.

However, from the viewpoint of the butterfly who lives but a single day, human beings must appear to be incredibly slow witted. While the butterfly completes the whole process in a matter of hours, we could easily sleep as long a period of time. And so it is with the Anunnaki. Their time scale is simply much longer, and by the same token, their rate of progress is probably inversely proportional to their life time. A millennia to modern humans is immeasurably long (and ripe for a great deal of progress), but to the Anunnaki, it is but a little over three and a half months -- hardly enough time for a pregnancy to get beyond morning sickness! For pre-Deluge man, whose lifetimes were on the order of a fifth that of the Anunnaki, a millennia is just under a year and a half.

There may very well be a relationship between life time spans of a species and the rapidity at which it evolves, and it is likely that the relationship is an inverse one -- the longer the life, the slower the evolutionary rate. It's all relative, which is to say a matter of perspective and the fact that Adam and his progeny were all our ancestors. That's right:  All of us on the planet living today, are part of  The Adam's Family.

But before we go cascading down the twigs and branches of The Adam's Family Tree, we must pause to consider if there are any unturned stones (or unstoned turns) with which we have not yet dealt. Nope. Looks pretty clean from here. Except, of course, for the Lemurians.

 *************************Hic!******

And so, we reach the end of another exciting Episode. Admittedly, we rather got stuck on the time frame of circa 200,000 B.C.E., but there was a lot to say. We did, after all, flash through three chapters of Genesis (and it previously took us five Episodes to get through just Chapter One). In addition, we can now look forward to the all important Episode VII, where we will flat fly down the chronological events of Adam's progeny.

Yes folks, a virtual roller coaster ride, wherein we will endeavor to answer the really profound questions that have plagued each of us most of our lives:

1.         How and why did Enoch violate the covenants of the "900 Club" and depart the planet at the very young age of 365 years (or in our strange and  twisted logic) at the youthful figure of a mere 43,800 Earth years?

2.         What's all this about a flood, a  Deluge?  Does this really wash, or is it another of those very weird ideas of the author?

3.         Were there really chimeras in the family tree of all of us?  Are there still among us relatives with the buttocks of an equestrian stud?  Does this have anything to do with being anal retentive?

4.         What really happened to Cain and his descendants?  Did Jabal, Jubal, and Tubal go into their respective trades after talking to a career counselor?  Did they ever amount to anything, do something useful with their skills?  I mean, how much can you hope for someone with the name, Tubal-Cain?

5.         Who in the world were the Lemurians?

For these and other exciting questions, possibilities, and weird ramblings, tune into the next Episode when we will discover fascinating new secrets of our Earthly origins, fascinating tidbits about the zodiacal ages of man, the mysterious beginnings of civilization in Mesoamerica, and what Ptah, Shu, Geb, and Maat all have in common.

Are we excited, or what!?