by Goro Adachi
August 9, 2003
from Etemenanki Website

Introduction

What lies at the core of the ‘Time River Theory’ is more than just a theory, but a factual ‘smoking gun’ capable of utterly decimating what is being passed off as ‘reality’ today. The Time River Theory is undoubtedly an ‘extraordinary claim’.

But it is one that is supported by ‘extraordinary evidence’. Indeed, it is this author’s position that the discovery of the Time Rivers heralds the last tick of the ‘time bomb’ that ends the illusion of the ‘Matrix’, so to speak. The new reality lets us discern who we really are, where we came from, and where we are going.

The Time River Theory primarily involves two ancient river systems: the Nile in Africa and the Tigris-Euphrates in the land of Mesopotamia.

By the end of this paper, the reader will come to understand the explosive implication of the strange configuration depicted in the image right - that our planet’s major rivers have been intelligently designed. It would represent the closest thing mankind has seen to the ‘fingerprints of the gods’.

The strength of the theory lies in the fact that its basic claim can be presented concisely and understood by the average people without much difficulty. It is the unusual combination of clarity and seeming impossibility that makes this ‘extraordinary claim’ extraordinarily plausible, if not undeniable.

It would ultimately come down to the question:

‘Do you believe your own eyes or not?’

It is of course ridiculous to think that major rivers such as the Nile are intelligently created ‘monuments’ bearing encoded messages. But that is exactly what is logically demanded by the body of evidence presented in this paper.

The Nile or denial - that may already be the real issue.

Having expressed the level of confidence, the author would like to sincerely encourage all to critically examine the following discussion, designed to present a key portion of the Time River Theory.

For a complete presentation of the wide-ranging theory and its unsettling implications for our own time, please see the book The Time Rivers (2003) by the author.
 

Hints of Intelligent Design

Shown below is an overview map of the Nile in Africa, the world’s longest river.

This is the ancient river that gave rise to the mysterious ancient Egyptian civilization thousands of years ago.

And here are the initial clues hinting at the existence of intelligence behind the river’s layout:

1. The Nile is distinctively vertical (longitudinal), and it is the only notable river on this planet to flow directly northward.

2. The Nile begins at the equator and disintegrates precisely at 30°N latitude, marked by Egypt’s capital Cairo and Giza, the home of the great pyramids and the Sphinx.[1]

3. The generally straight Nile makes a dramatic turn southward near the halfway point. The northern peak of this remarkable bend - sometimes referred to as the ‘Great Bend’ - pinpoints latitude 19.5°N.

The significance of #3 comes from the fact that 19.5° is considered a ‘tetrahedral constant’, deriving from the geometric configuration of a circumscribed tetrahedron shown below.

In terms of the ‘hyperdimensional physics’ model promoted by researcher Richard Hoagland, well known for his investigation into the ‘monuments of Mars’, the angle even represents an inter-dimensional ‘gateway’ of some sort. This notion is echoed by the great pyramids at Giza - a place traditionally signifying a 'gateway' (Rostau) - in that their layout prominently produces this very angle.

The fact that the longitude pinpointed by the same Bend’s peak is 33.0°E intensifies our curiosity as ‘33’ too happens to be a key number detected by Hoagland’s team, The Enterprise Mission.

Indeed, 19.5 and 33 are said to be the two ‘ritual numbers’ repeatedly encoded into various aspects of NASA space missions.

In 1997, for example, the Pathfinder space probe landed on Mars at almost exactly 19.5°N. 33°W.

That this was no coincidence is evidenced by the fact that:

1. the lander dropped on the ‘tetrahedral latitude’ was tetrahedral in shape;

2. at the moment of touchdown, Earth was positioned 19.5° above the eastern Martian horizon as seen from the landing site.

As Mike Bara, Hoagland’s right-hand man at the Enterprise Mission, wrote:

Pathfinder’s unique tetrahedral spacecraft design geometry, coupled with the totally “recursive” tetrahedral geometry of the landing site itself, was obviously intended by NASA “ritualists” behind the scenes to celebrate - on their first return to Mars in over twenty years - the two key Hyperdimensional numbers underlying all the NASA rituals - “19.5” and “33.”[2]

Whether or not NASA intentionally conducts such ‘rituals’ is still a contentious issue, of course. But the coincidence of the two numbers is difficult to ignore.

Where there is smoke, as they say, there is usually fire.

So how should we interpret these geographical hints provided by the Nile? Are we to believe that the Nile is a 'monument' carrying some sort of message?
While admittedly a wild speculation, this is certainly not the first time such an idea has been put forward.

There is, for example, researcher Livio Catullo Stecchini, whose view is presented in Peter Tompkin’s Secrets of the Great Pyramid:

The Egyptians were proud that their country had some unique geographic features which could be expressed in rigorous geometric terms and had a shape which related to the order of the cosmos as they saw it. They believed that when the gods created the cosmos they began by building Egypt and, having created it perfect, modeled the rest around it. …[The] Egyptians put great stress also on the geographic peculiarities of the course of the Nile.[3]

So the question is: Are these Nilotic ‘peculiarities’ a result of some deliberate design? Did the ‘gods’ literally construct the Nile and encode into its layout their cosmic knowledge?

Throughout history much has been said about ancient monuments - such as those at Giza (the pyramids and Sphinx) - bearing very advanced knowledge surpassing all that came afterward. It is of course a controversial view that many find uncomfortable.

But it pales in comparison to the much crazier possibility emerging here... that the world’s longest river, clearly visible from space, may be a gigantic ‘monument’!
 

A Literal ‘River of Time’?

Suspending our disbelief for a moment, let us ponder just what the encoded ‘cosmic knowledge’ may be. What kind of information could be so important as to be transmitted this way?

This question leads us to the next clue. As noted earlier, the latitudinal length of the Nile is almost exactly 30 degrees.

The number ‘30’ happens to be closely attached to the notion of time:

• Saturn, traditionally considered the god/planet of time, has an orbital period of ~30 years.[4]

• One month - the Moon’s orbit around Earth - is approximately 30 days. (In ancient Egypt, each month was exactly 30 days.)

• The apparent path of the sun in the sky (the ecliptic) is traditionally divided into twelve zodiacal ‘signs’ (Pisces, Aires, Taurus, etc.), 30 degrees each, corresponding to the sun’s movement in two hours. (The Babylonians, the Chinese, etc. actually divided the day into not 24 but 12 equal parts, and so one subdivision of the day corresponded to 30 degrees [i.e. 360/12=30].)

• The seb festival of the ancient Egyptians, commemorating the symbolic death/renewal of the king, was held in the 30th year of the reign.[5]

So the implication here is that the Nile is to be viewed as a ‘river of time’. This is poetically appealing at least. After all, it is often said that ‘a river is like the flow of time’.[6]

The above interpretation is reinforced by certain information transmitted by Plutarch, a renowned Greek writer and biographer from around AD 100.

It concerns Saturn, the god of time, who was called ‘Cronus’ in Greek (related to the term ‘Chronos’ meaning ‘time’[7]):

There is also a religious lament sung over Cronus. The lament is for him that is born in the regions of the left, and suffers dissolution in the regions on the right; for the Egyptians believe that the eastern regions are the face of the world, the northern the right, and the southern to the left. The Nile, therefore, which runs from the south and is swallowed up by the sea in the north, is naturally said to have its birth on the left and its dissolution on the right.[8]

Not only does Plutarch reveal here that Cronus/time arises in the south and ends in the north just like the Nile, he even goes on to draw a direct parallel between Cronus/time and the Nile!

This is almost an open and direct acknowledgement that the Nile may indeed represent the flow of time.
 

God of Time, God of the Nile

Another telling clue is found in the fact that various mythological gods associated with time are also often associated with the Nile.

For instance:

• Cronus-Saturn’s otherworldly domain called Ogygia is applicable to the Nile since the river was similarly called ‘Ogygian’ by the ancient Greek writer Aeschylus.[9]

• The Moon, associated with the ‘temporal number’ 30 via its orbital period (30 days), is traditionally identified with the Egyptian god of wisdom called Thoth. Not only was Thoth considered the measurer of time, he was also represented by the ibis, an animal closely associated with the Nile.[10]

• More striking is Osiris, the most revered and complex deity in ancient Egypt, popularly described as the god of the dead.

• Osiris is quite simply the ‘god of the Nile’. This can be established through his traditional identification with Apis and Hapi, both considered to embody the Nile. Osiris was also known as Serapis, a name deriving from Ausar-Hapi, meaning ‘Osiris of the Nile’. We also have Herodotus’ well-known statement: ‘the Nile is the gift of Osiris, but Egypt is the gift of the Nile’.

• And we find that Osiris, the god of the Nile, is also a god of time not unlike Saturn. Osiris was identified with the phoenix, the mythical fire-bird of cyclical rebirth and the patron of all time division.[11] In the ancient Egyptian Book of the Dead is found the statement: ‘I am Time and Osiris’.[12]

• And in ancient India the name given to Orion (the celestial form of Osiris) was Kal-Purush, or ‘Time Man’.[13]

• To all intents and purposes, Osiris is the Egyptian version of Cronus-Saturn, the god of time.[14] In confirmation of this, historical epithets of Orion (= Osiris) include ‘Saturnus’ - i.e. Saturn.[15]

So, at least mythologically, the Nile-time connection is well supported.
 

Giza Producing ‘Anchor Dates’

If the Nile really is a literal river of time - a ‘Time River’ - then the possibility must be considered that there is a tangible timeline encoded into its design.

And it can be reasonably assumed that the river’s beginning point at the equator represents the earliest point on the timeline, and Giza/Cairo at the edge (30°N) the ‘end of time’. (See Appendix 1 for discussion on the beginning latitude of the Nile.)

The most sensible time-encoding system here would be one based on latitude, where a linear, northward-moving timeline is superimpose on the Nile.

To derive a timeline in this system, it is necessary to first have at least two ‘anchor points’, or 'anchor dates', placed upon the Nile. The rest would be just a matter of simple calculation. (The distance between the two anchor points will have the function of a base unit for the timeline.)

But there needs to be a good rationale for selecting these points/dates.

For this, we turn to the Giza monuments, evidently an integral part of the Nile scheme (marking the river’s northern edge). Giza, through its astronomical alignments, manages to give us just what we need to turn the ancient river into a tangible map of time.

The key here is Robert Bauval’s popular ‘Orion Correlation Theory’ (or more broadly the ‘Star Correlation Theory’) which traces the Giza layout back to the stars. The basic idea is quite simple. The theory essentially says that the arrangement of the three great pyramids standing there closely emulates that of the three Belt Stars of Orion, the heavenly Osiris.

Bauval demonstrates this first by noting that the smallest pyramid is slightly offset from the diagonal line made by the other two pyramids.

He then compares this to a similar offset seen in the Orion Belt Stars, with the dimmest star congruently corresponding to the smallest pyramid.

This sky-ground correspondence is supported by a passage from the ancient Egyptian ‘Pyramid Texts’ which makes it plain that the pyramid and Osiris-Orion are closely linked:

O Horus, this King is Osiris [= Orion], this pyramid of the King is Osiris, this construction of his is Osiris; betake yourself to it, do not be far from it in its name of ‘Pyramid’…[16]

Next, based on this initial ‘as above, so below’ connection, Bauval points out that there was an extraordinary set of alignments around 10,500 BC:

 Around 10,500 BC:

1. Orion reached its lowest point at the meridian in its 26,000-year precessional cycle. (Precession slowly shifts Orion and other stars up and down the meridian, the imaginary north-south line drawn in the sky where the stars achieve their highest daily altitudes.)

2. On the vernal equinox, the Great Sphinx, directly facing east, witnessed the rising of its two celestial counterparts - the sun and Leo.

At the moment of equinoctial sunrise (c. 10,500 BC):

3. Orion was positioned right at the meridian.

4. In the southern sky, the Milky Way was seen roughly vertical and positioned in such a way that it appeared to be an extension of the Nile. Orion was situated just to the right of the celestial river - closely mimicking the configuration of the Giza pyramids and the Nile.

It is reasonable to conclude that the builders of the Giza monuments intended to commemorate the extremely ancient epoch of 10,500 BC.

We can refine the date by taking a closer look at Point #1, i.e. Orion’s lowest transit point (‘southern culmination’). It occurred more exactly c. 10,600 BC. This, then, is our first ‘anchor date’.

As for the second ‘anchor date’, the answer turns out to be the ‘Pyramid Age’ when the pyramids themselves were built - around 2500 BC.

The date can be refined through another Giza celestial alignment, this time involving the four ‘air shafts’ (or 'star shafts') emanating from the so-called King’s Chamber and Queen’s Chamber inside the Great Pyramid.

Expanding on the theory of Alexander Badawy and Virginia Trimble,[17] Bauval found that these shafts, targeted at the meridian (i.e. due south/north), are angled just right so that around 2400 BC they aligned with key stars crossing the meridian ('transit').

The southern shafts were aimed at Alnitak (of Orion) and Sirius; the northern ones were aimed at Beta Ursa Minor (‘Kochab’) and Alpha Draconis (‘Thuban’, the ancient Pole Star).

Bauval claims that these alignments collectively pinpoint c. 2450 BC, but this is not quite accurate. It should be more like c. 2350 BC. All the star-shaft alignments occurred at the latter time except for Orion’s alignment with the King’s Chamber southern shaft (c. 2490 BC). But as Dr. Thomas G. Brophy points out, the same shaft did come into alignment with the Galactic Center around 2350 BC.[18]

At this point, then, the Giza monuments have given us two solid anchor dates, 10,600 BC and 2350 BC.
 

A Timeline Emerges

The next step is to figure out where to place these anchor dates along the Nile.

For 10,600 BC, it is actually a simple matter. Since the ‘10,500 BC epoch’ appears to signify the mythical ‘First Time’ (Zep Tepi), as postulated by Bauval and Hancock, it would naturally go to the source of the Nile at the equator.

It is where ‘time’ begins, as the Nile flows out of Lake Victoria. In support of this designation, we find that the same epoch also happens to mark the establishment of the Nile’s equatorial Lake Victoria outlet.[19]

Additionally, the usage of the equator as the beginning latitude is strongly encouraged by Giza’s 10,600 BC celestial alignment.

Let us examine it again:

• Orion was positioned due south and as close to the horizon as possible, thus guiding our attention toward the southernmost source of the Nile (Lake Victoria) situated due south of Giza.

   

• Point 1 was accompanied by the equinoctial sunrise with Leo due east. Since the equinoxes are when the sun is at the extension of the equator (called the ‘celestial equator’), it tells us that 10,600 BC is to be seen as an equatorial (anchor) date.

As for the 2350 BC anchor date, we can assume that it will go to one of the following key points on the Nile:

1. the confluence at Khartoum

2. the Atbara confluence

3. the Great Bend peak

4. Giza/Cairo

The question is: Which one?

A big clue here comes from Sirius and Orion’s Alnitak, two prominent stars from the Great Pyramid's star-alignment scheme. They happened to produce the angle 19.5° around 2350 BC.

When Sirius was rising at the horizon as viewed from Giza, Alnitak we seen hovering 19.5° above the horizon. (See illustration below.)

This suggests that the date 2350 BC and the angle/latitude 19.5° are to be united. Hence we are encouraged to assign the second anchor date to the Great Bend’s peak at 19.5°.

There are other clues supporting the arrangement - including the fact that the general region of the Great Bend (Nubia/Kush) was once called the ‘Land of the Bow’ (Ta-Seti), which strongly resonates with the ‘Sirian’ nature of the 2350 BC-19.5°N anchor point, because Sirius’ various epithets happen to include ‘Bow Star’ (as well as ‘Arrow Star’).

So, with the two anchor points firmly established, we are now ready to move on to the critical step - the conversion of Nilotic latitudes into dates.[20]

As the highlights below show, what emerges is a startling timeline:

• Khartoum at 15.60°N. corresponds precisely to 4000 BC.

• The Atbara-Nile confluence at 17.67°N. corresponds to 3124 BC.

• Giza/Cairo at 30.00°N. corresponds to AD 2093.

For those familiar with the general outline of ancient history, the significance of the first two dates, 4000 BC and c. 3100 BC, should be immediately clear. The third date c. AD 2100 is intriguing too for its close proximity to our own time.

For those not very familiar with ancient chronology, 4000 BC is in various ways - historically, religiously, and esoterically - the ‘beginning of the world’:

• It was around 4000 BC that the first known high civilization called Sumer suddenly rose in Mesopotamia (present Iraq) to begin ‘history’.

   

• The year 4004 BC is the standard Christian date for Adam, the first man, based on the scriptural calculation done by Archbishop James Ussher in the mid-seventeenth century (Annales Veteris Testamenti). In his calculation, Ussher even applied the date 2348 BC to the Great Flood, which almost exactly matches one of our anchor dates (2350 BC)!

   

• 4000 BC is the beginning date used in the calendar adopted by Freemasonry - a quasi-esoteric fraternal organization whose enigmatic tradition can be traced back to various ancient cultures, including ancient Egypt. (Remarkably, the highest rank in Scottish Freemasonry is called ‘33rd Degree’ as if in reference to the key Nilotic longitude, 33°E.)

The other ancient date pinpointed, c. 3100 BC, has similar implications:

• The date coincides with the beginning of ancient Egypt - none other than the ‘gift of the Nile’ itself!

• It was indeed around 3100 BC that King Menes commenced the Dynastic period as he unified Lower Egypt and Upper Egypt - an event known as the ‘Unification of the Two Lands’.

• The date coincides with what the Mayan calendar calls the ‘Birth of Venus’ (3114 BC), the beginning of the current age.[21]

• For the Hindus, too, c. 3100 BC was the beginning of the present age called Kali Yuga.[22]

It is quite evident that the Nile Timeline is very meaningful.

Now, before moving on to the next step, let us divide up the Nile according to the zodiacal Ages, each lasting roughly 2160 years. (We are currently living near the end of the 'Age of Pisces' and about to move into the 'Age of Aquarius'.)

The illustration below shows the Nile so rendered.

We see that the river covers exactly six Ages - Leo, Cancer, Gemini, Taurus, Aries, and Pisces. Notice that the middle section around the Great Bend corresponds to the Age of Taurus.

This will be shown to have a profound implication shortly.

Tale of Two Rivers

The historical importance of the Tigris-Euphrates river rivals that of the Nile.

Just as the Nile gave rise to the great ancient Egyptian civilization, so did the Tigris-Euphrates to Sumer in Mesopotamia (modern Iraq), the first high civilization in history.

That there is a hidden connection between the Nile and the Tigris-Euphrates is initially hinted by the latitudinal position of the latter’s mouth. It is at 30°N exactly - the very latitude of the Nile’s ‘edge’ marked by Giza/Cairo!

This means the Mesopotamian river’s mouth is in precise alignment with the Great Sphinx’s eternal gaze which is fixed on the distant horizon due east.

This subsequently leads to the following observations:

1. The arrangement of the Tigris-Euphrates - two roughly parallel and diagonal rivers - resembles that of the Blue Nile and the Atbara.

2. The Tigris-Euphrates’ northernmost region overlaps the Taurus mountain range, perfectly echoing the Nile tributaries’ northernmost region coinciding with the ‘Age of Taurus’ segment.

3. There was indeed a widespread belief in ancient times that the Nile and the Euphrates ‘were but different portions of the same stream’.[23]

4. The epoch marked by the Blue Nile/Khartoum (c. 4000 BC) approximately coincides with the rise of Sumer in Mesopotamia, the land of the Tigris-Euphrates. It flourished throughout the Age of Taurus.

These correspondences unmistakably hint at some kind of ‘geographical transposition’ scheme.

This is even acknowledged in ancient myth:

5. The Nile’s Taurus Age section and the Taurus Mountain in Turkey are both associated with the saga of the ‘fallen angels’ (the ‘Watchers’, ‘Nephilim’, or ‘Anunnaki’) and the ‘Great Flood’.

6. The passages in Genesis relating to the ‘Garden of Eden’ reveal a clear link between the Nile tributaries and the Tigris-Euphrates.

Point 5 is supported by the work of researcher Andrew Collins who has come to the conclusion, as detailed in his book From the Ashes of Angels, that the homeland of the Watchers (‘fallen angels’) - analogous to Eden - was situated around the headwaters of the Tigris-Euphrates in Turkish Kurdistan.

He also found that the same location is where ancient tradition pinpoints as the landing site of the Ark (of Noah).

But how are the ‘fallen angels’ and the Ark related to the Nile’s Taurus section?

The answer here is quite interesting. First, the ‘Taurus’ region around the Great Bend is very much associated with the notion of a flood, and by extension the Ark, because the Nile’s annual inundation was caused by the Blue Nile and Atbara that join the main stream there. The Great Bend being a ‘great arc’ adds more weight to the connection in that the words ‘ark’ and ‘arc’ likely derive from the same root.

As for the ‘fallen angels’, the connection is made through Prometheus, the Greek god who gave ‘fire’ to mankind. Prometheus is the embodiment of the rebel angels.

This then leads to the following:

• As if in allusion to the Bend, Prometheus is closely associated with the idea of ‘churning’, ‘twisting’, or ‘turning’. For instance, the ‘mantha’ part of the Sanskrit term Pramantha (i.e. Prometheus) has the meaning of ‘churning’.[24]

• The Vedic fire-god Agni, a form of pramantha, is said to come from the confluence of the rivers as if in reference to the Nilotic confluences (Khartoum and Atbara) of the Great Bend section.[25]

• The same Agni is associated with the mythological character Heimdal/Hallinskidi/Vindler whose name is said to mean ‘a bent, bowed, or slanted stake’ (Hallinskidi) and ‘to twist, turn, etc.’ (Vindler) - seemingly alluding to the Great Bend.[26]

There is an even more striking basis for Point 6 - i.e. the Eden connection - as discussed below.
 

Four Rivers of Eden Identified

The region around the Tigris-Euphrates’ headwaters is the site of Eden which according to Genesis was connected to four rivers, two of which were the Euphrates and Tigris. The identities of the other two - called ‘Pishon’ and ‘Gihon’ - have not been conclusively determined by scholars.

As we examine the relevant biblical passage in Genesis (2:10-14) with the foregoing findings in mind, however, it becomes clear that the two mystery rivers are none other than the Blue Nile and the Atbara!

A river rises in Eden to water the garden; outside, it forms four separate branch streams. The name of the first is Pishon; it is the one that winds through the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold… The name of the second river is Gihon; it is the one that winds through all of the land of Cush. The name of the third river is Tigris; it is the one that flows east of Asshur. The fourth river is the Euphrates.[27]

Where is this ‘land of Cush’ through which the Gihon river is said to flow?

The shocking answer here is made plain in the King James Version of the Bible, according to which the Gihon winds through the ‘land of Ethiopia’ - that is, the land of the Nile tributaries! This is a rather blatant clue, and yet it was never understood until now.

But the ‘land of Cush’ more accurately refers to the ancient kingdom of Cush (or Kush) that existed in Nubia as early as 2000 BC. Nubia closely corresponds to the Nile’s Taurus (Great Bend) region where Eden would be if the Tigris-Euphrates was ‘transposed’!

And this is exactly where the Nile indeed ‘winds’ - i.e. the Great Bend - just as described in the Genesis passage!

The other Eden river in question called the ‘Pishon’ is also described as ‘winding’.

But here it is said that the Pishon winds through the land ‘where there is gold’. Could this relate in any way to the same region of Nubia/Cush? The answer is definitely yes. To the Egyptians, Nubia was known primarily as a land of gold!
 

To top it off, Graham Hancock informs us in The Sign and the Seal that,

‘the Abyssinians themselves firmly believed the Blue Nile to be nothing less than the Gihon of Genesis 2:13… [and this] was a very old tradition’; in fact, ‘the twin springs regarded as the source of [the Blue Nile] are known to this day as Giyon by the Ethiopians themselves’.[28]

Hence it can be confidently concluded here that the ‘Gihon' is the Blue Nile and the ‘Pishon' the Atbara. The four rivers of Eden have thus been all identified for the first time in known history.

They are the:

1. Euphrates

2. Tigris

3. Blue Nile

4. Atbara

It is now practically undeniable that the Nile tributaries and the Tigris-Euphrates are portions of the same scheme and are designed to interact.

This realization leads to the next big revelation - indeed, a ‘smoking gun’.
 

Smoking Gun: Overlay Interaction

It is revealed when the two ‘Eden river’ systems are brought together in superimposition.

This is when we realize that we are looking at the ‘fingerprints of the gods’. That’s the best way to describe the ‘impossible’ occurrence witnessed here anyway.

Obviously the paths of the two river systems do not match exactly. But we discover that the Tigris and Euphrates do manage to cross the two Nile confluences simultaneously (Khartoum and Atbara) in one particular position. And this is just the beginning.

We find next that, while still in the same position, the Euphrates’ northern path precisely ‘touches’ the peak of the Great Bend at 19.5°N 33.0 E!

In other words, in one fixed overlay configuration, the Tigris-Euphrates manages to simultaneously pinpoint all three key points of the Nile’s Taurus section!

And don't forget that this configuration is something strongly encouraged by the two rivers’ ‘Taurus’ parallel.

This is still not all. We discover next that the Euphrates’ Bend-contact point was originally at 39.6°N latitude.

Recall that ‘39.6°’ is the exact angle of the Great Pyramid’s southern-lower shaft designed to align with Sirius in c. 2350 BC - i.e. the very date assigned to the Great Bend’s apex! (Note also that Sirius and the Great Bend are both linked to the Nile inundation.)

Here are additional observations to intensify the coherence of the overlay configuration:

1. As already mentioned, the Tigris-Euphrates’ Taurus mountain region directly overlaps the Nile’s Taurus-Age section.

2. The Tigris and the Euphrates very closely follow the Atbara and the Blue Nile respectively near the Nile junctions.

3. Mount Judi - the traditional resting place of the Ark - nearly marks the Atbara confluence.

4. The Tigris-Euphrates’ mouth (originally at 30°N) appears to rest on the Nile’s 10°N parallel, the very latitude accentuated by the Blue Nile’s W-shaped double bend.

5. Lake Tana is seen situated in southern Mesopotamia and in between the two rivers - i.e. exactly where the Sumerian civilization resided.

(Note: For the overlay configuration, the Nile’s longitude 33.0°E running through the Bend-Euphrates contact point is used as the ‘anchor meridian’, to which the Tigris-Euphrates’ 40.2°E is aligned. See Appendix 2 for more on this issue.)

This is the ‘Eden Overlay Configuration’ (‘EOC’) scheme residing at the heart of the Time River Theory. With it the earth suddenly transmutes into a planetary jigsaw puzzle. The overwhelming visual and conceptual coherence witnessed here virtually proves the validity of the Time River concept.

There is even an ancient Egyptian drawing - shown below - that appears to allude to the overlay interaction. It is a depiction of the ‘Primeval Mound of Creation’ - associated with Osiris - that bears an uncanny resemblance to the ‘EOC’ arrangement:

As shocking as these findings are, this is actually still only the tip of the iceberg. This is the beginning of a forbidden tale now finally resurfacing from the dark abyss of time.

The Time River Theory in its entirety is much bigger than what is presented in this paper, and it is continuously evolving and expanding. Indeed - believe it or not - there are many more ‘smoking guns’...

Conclusions & Portents

In conclusion, this paper has demonstrated that:

1. The design of the Nile works superbly with the time-marker monuments of Giza.

2. Through the interaction of #1, the Nile turns into a shockingly precise and meaningful timeline.

3. The Nile timeline pinpoints the two earliest and most mysterious ancient civilizations, Sumer and Egypt.

4. The same two points on the Nile marking 4000 BC and 3124 BC, plus the 19.5°N/2350 BC anchor point, are also pinpointed by a ‘transposed’ Tigris-Euphrates (in the ‘Eden Overlay Configuration’).

5. The Tigris-Euphrates is designed to be a ‘version’ of the Nile tributaries, the Blue Nile and the Atbara. These two sets of rivers interact coherently in superimposition.

6. All this is encouraged and supported by ancient myth.

The Time River system is visually striking, conceptually elegant, internally consistent, and quite easy to understand.

It is strongly supported by numerical, archeo-astronomical, textual, and symbolic evidence. And yet its existence is clearly ‘impossible’ according to the accepted model of reality. Unless there is a fatal flaw in the theory, this appears to be a checkmate situation. It is finally reality’s turn to back off.

One key thing that has become abundantly clear from the findings presented in this paper is that there is a higher intelligence monitoring - or even guiding - the evolution of mankind, and that we are not ‘alone’.

But what are we talking about here really? The ‘gods’? The ‘fallen angels’? Extraterrestrials?

The answer does not come easily. But what we now know for sure is that we are not the supreme ruler of our domain as many of us had arrogantly assumed. All history - the past, present, and even future - is already mapped out and carved in stone, quite literally. But the difficulty we encounter here is the emerging necessity to imagine someone or something that is intelligent and powerful enough to have produced such a planetary-scale ‘time map’.

‘They’ are, however, not totally faceless. For example, we do find clues in certain ancient Mesopotamian texts.

These describe god-like beings called the ‘Anunnaki’ designing and digging out the courses of the Tigris-Euphrates (which is even associated with ‘destinies’):

Now that the destinies of Heaven and Earth have been fixed,
Trench and canal have been given their right courses,
The banks of the Tigris and the Euphrates have been established...
 

[Oh Anunnaki, you great gods of the sky, what else shall we do?][29]
The Anunnaki of the sky
Made the Igigi bear the workload.
The gods had to dig out canals,
Had to clear channels, the lifelines of the land...
The gods dug out the Tigris river (bed)
And then dug out the Euphrates.[30]

Elsewhere we are told that the god named Enlil was,

‘in charge of the gods who toiled endlessly away day and night, year after year, digging out the Euphrates and the Tigris’.[31]

It is also written that, to keep the Tigris’ waters from going east into the mountains, the ‘lord directed (his) great intelligence to it’ and built a dike to control the river’s course.[32]

A message in a bottle from the ‘Anunnaki’ gods - this seems to be what the Time River system represents. And the indications are that the intended recipient is those living in the the 21st century, i.e. us.

After all, it wouldn’t make much sense if history ended before anyone has read the message, and we are already part of the last generations facing the imminent arrival of the ‘end of time’ c. AD 2100 marked by Giza at the northern edge of the Nile timeline.

(It is certainly appropriate that Giza is the site of the great pyramids and the Sphinx, i.e. monuments often thought to be a time capsule of some kind.)

So there is actually a sense of ominous urgency. Because time is short. And we can only infer that it must be very important for us to decipher the mysterious message from the abyss of time, perhaps so that we can prepare ourselves for the mysterious ‘Event X’ scheduled for our immediate future.

And it promises to be the most profound event for human civilization in all history.

It is quite synchronistic that the author’s book The Time Rivers came out in 2003 to reveal the Time River scheme to the general public, because 2003 happens to be the year of the Earth’s historic close encounter with Mars - the closest in recorded history.

As discussed in the book, the ‘edge of time’ (c. AD 2100) turns out to be inseparable from the Red Planet.

Consider this for instance: the Great Sphinx there, the guardian of Giza, had the same name as Mars in ancient Egypt; and the name of the present Egyptian capital right next to Giza, Cairo, denotes ‘Mars’.

Indeed, Mars is actually the main theme carried by the entire Time River system. The Red Planet, it appears, represents none other than the realm of our own Genesis and destiny. It signifies an essential, but secret, part of who we are, where we came from, and where we are going.

The explosive truth had been hiding in the shadows for millennia - patiently waiting for its time to rise back into the light. At the beginning of the third millennium, the secret is finally out.

This paper represents just the tip of the iceberg, just the beginning of a momentous story. But it opens up the Gateway...
 

Appendix 1
The Nile’s Beginning Latitude

While ‘30’ is a ‘temporal number’, based on the orbital periods of Saturn and the Moon it may be expressed more precisely as ~29.5. We find that Saturn’s orbit around the sun takes ~29.46 earth-years and the Moon’s orbit around the earth (the ‘synodic month’) is ~29.55 earth-days.

Remarkably, when examined closely the Nile too reveals itself to be about 29.5 degrees in latitude because the river’s beginning point happens to be just slightly north of the equator. (Somewhere between 0.4°N and 0.5°N.[1])

The slight ambiguity surrounding the river’s beginning latitude can be resolved through proportional analysis.

We find that using 0.41°N. (= ~0° 25’N.), the ratio between the resultant length of the Nile and the extra 0.41 degrees would become 29.59:0.41 or ~72.17:1, which could then be simplified to 72:1.[2] The significance here is that ‘72’ is known to be something of a ‘sacred’ number that shows up frequently in ancient myths.

As propounded in the book Hamlet’s Mill, the esoteric importance of the number ‘72’ can be traced back to the stars - specifically a astronomical phenomenon known as ‘precession’, an extremely slow (apparent) movement of the stars caused by the slight ‘wobbling’ of the Earth’s axis. The basic unit of this very slow time-keeping mechanism - the vernal point shifting 1 degree - happens to equal 72 years.

So ‘72’ can be seen as a ‘time number’.

Corroborating this view is the fact that the ancient Egyptian calendar saw the year as being 360 days with 5 extra ‘epagomenal’ days during which five important gods - Osiris, Horus, Seth, Isis, and Nephthys - were said to have been born. The ratio between 360 days and 5 days happens to equal 72:1.
 

These consequently tell us that 0.41°N (which produces the 72:1 ratio) is to be considered the designated beginning latitude of the Nile.
 

Appendix 2

On Map Projections and Interaction

Working with maps without understanding their subtle mechanics can easily lead to inconsistency and confusion.

The level of complexity involved is actually quite surprising. Although probably of minute significance to the average reader, those seeking to investigate the Time River system in depth are advised to know the following basic points. 
 

Orthographic Azimuthal Projection

Because there are countless ways to express a spherical globe on a two-dimensional plane, there are many types of map projections. People use different projections for different purposes.

For the Time River overlay scheme, we are forced to use a virtual globe computer program and nothing less. Conventional maps containing various spatial distortions are just not suited for the purpose of this operation - which is to see two or more different geographical regions in superimposition. We really need the digital flexibility and precision of a virtual globe to create large-scale geographical overlays.

And preferably the simulated Earth is an ‘orthographic azimuthal projection’. It shows a natural-looking globe, but its geometry is as viewed from infinitely far away. (See Figures A2.1 and A2.2.)

Figure A2.1

Orthographic Azimuthal Projection.


Figure A2.2

Comparison.

If the required operation is to just make a map overlay, it doesn’t really matter whether the virtual globe is an orthographic azimuthal projection or a truer representation of the earth (i.e. a perspective view from a fixed point in space), as long as the size, or distance, is consistent.

But if the operation requires you to combine a map with something else (such as a sky projection or a painting), the globe’s projection type becomes an important issue, because there would be varying results depending on the selection.

The orthographic azimuthal projection becomes a better choice in this case because it would eliminate one variable - the distance between the viewpoint and the earth - in determining the overlay configuration. This makes the whole process much simpler.
 

Aligning Maps

How to align multiple maps/globes in superimposition is another important and tricky issue for the Time Rivers.

It turns out that comparing two areas of the planet separated by a great distance - especially in terms of latitude - is not as simple as it sounds.

First, it is imperative that the centers of all the projections used in an overlay composite would coincide when put in place so that the spatial distortions are uniform among the maps.

Figure A2.3

How to produce a large-scale map overlay.

(The end product of this example is the ‘Eden Overlay Configuration’ discussed in the Nile Decoded paper.)

But this alone still does not ensure consistency. We also need to carefully decide where to place the centers of the projections before bringing them together, as this would actually produce varying results. (See Figure A2.4 for a demonstration of this.)

This process can be rephrased as choosing the ‘central meridian’ or, as I like to say, ‘anchor meridian’.

Figure A2.4

The position of the anchor meridian (central meridian) affects the overlay configuration.

As made clear in the author’s book The Time Rivers, the prime ‘anchor meridian’ selected, or detected, for the Time River system is 33°E longitude.
 

All these points should be carefully taken into account when attempting to replicate, confirm, or criticize findings presented in the book or the Nile Decoded paper.
 

The Nile Denial

A Guide to Objective Evaluation
August 9, 2003

Regardless of merit, a radical new theory that wildly contradicts the mainstream model of reality will not be welcomed by academics. Depending on the theory’s strength and clarity, however, the general public may respond positively. And if the buzz becomes loud enough, even the mainstream media may decide to pay attention.

This is when certain elements of academia become alarmed. They feel their territory has been infringed upon - perceiving the theory as some alien virus contaminating the holy ground of ‘science’. Instinctively, they will attack the ‘virus’ until it is dead.

One way or another, therefore, most ‘heretical’ theories are forced to fade into oblivion. Often this fate is justifiable, but certainly not always. The process is obviously prone to throwing out the baby with the bath water - as there are always exceptions.

The Time River Theory, I contend, is the ‘baby’ that should not be automatically thrown out. A brief guide to logical thinking is provided below to help implement a fair evaluation process that will hopefully bear this out.

 

Intellectual Vaccination

One effective way to ‘vaccinate’ the mind against flawed reasoning/criticism is to cite examples. Another is to provide preemptive answers to anticipated questions and objections.

So let us first take a look at what are known as ‘informal fallacies’, which are various types of illogical arguments (in this case against the Time River Theory): Straw Man 

Example:

“The idea that our ancestors dug out the paths of the major rivers with shovels, or that little green men from Orion came here to construct the rivers is extremely implausible.” 

This statement is distorting what the Time River Theory claims. The theory does not argue that ancient people created the rivers with primitive tools, nor does it argue that space aliens produced the Time Rivers. (These are mere speculative possibilities). A valid argument has to argue against the true form of the theory, not a conveniently corrupted form.

 

Appeal of Force 

Example:

“The organization CSICOP believes that the Time River Theory is one big joke, and it believes that any scholars who take the theory seriously should be investigated for their intellectual integrity.”

This statement is essentially a threat and has nothing to do with the legitimacy of the Time River Theory. Many academics often succumb to this type of peer pressure, and their intellectual integrity does go out the window.

 

Appeal of Authority 

Example:

“The whole Time River thing is surely utter nonsense because according to Dr. [X], a respected expert on geology, it is absolutely laughable to think that the Nile, the Tigris-Euphrates, etc. have been intelligently designed to transmit some strange information across time.” 

Citing expert opinions does not translate to a valid argument, as being an expert does not make one infallible. Since the Time River Theory covers a lot of ground, one should be particularly careful about ‘expert opinions’.

 

False Alternative 

Example:

“Because it is clear that the ancients did not have the technological capability to construct major river systems, the Time Rivers simply cannot be real.”

This is a flawed argument because it fails to take into account other possibilities. For example, perhaps it was a covert group of highly advanced beings from elsewhere (spatial and/or temporal) that created the Time River system, leaving behind no clear evidence of their existence. Or perhaps it was some unknown non-physical ‘force’ that gave rise to the Time Rivers - not unlike the ‘force’ of evolution that has managed to produce incredibly complex life forms on this planet.

 

Ad Hominem (Personal Attack)

Example:

“Since Goro Adachi is not a member of academia, there is no reason to take his ideas seriously.”

My credentials (or character) have nothing to do with the validity of the Time River Theory itself. For example, if it were a convicted murderer who came up with the theory of Relativity, would this alone cause the theory to become invalid? No. It would still be just as valid.

 

Appeal to the Masses 

Example:

“Everyone I have talked to has told me that the Time River Theory is just a product of an overactive imagination, so obviously it must be just that.”

At one time, almost everyone would have told you that the earth was the center of the universe. Enough said.

 

Begging the Question

Example:

“The Time River Theory is clearly fallacious because it claims that the Nile River carries an intelligent message, which it does not.”

This is a circular argument because the premise and the conclusion are stating essentially the same thing. This is like saying: ‘Einstein must have been insane, because it is clear that he was crazy’.

 

Appeal to Pity 
Example:

“The existence of the Time River system will upset many nice religious people. So, please, I beg everyone to reject the theory!”

Truth does not care whether it hurts anyone or anything. A valid idea does not stop being valid just because it is considered undesirable on an emotional level.

 

Composition 
Example:

“In his book, Goro Adachi gets the date for [event X] wrong and he also confuses [event Y] with [event Z]. If he is inaccurate about these things, we can safely assume that the entire content of his book is pure rubbish.” 

If this argument were valid, it would also be valid to state that the United States is a stupid nation because there are some dumb Americans. 

 

Converse Accident 
Example:

“Since many theories put forward by researchers in the ‘alternative history’ field have already been debunked, the Time River Theory must be flawed as well.”

Racial profiling is based on the same thinking process. Even if there are patterns and trends, with room for exceptions, individual cases must be judged separately.
 
 

Preemptive Responses
The following are ‘preemptive’ responses to anticipated objections to the Time River Theory:

Criticism: Since we have no physical or historical evidence suggesting that any of our rivers are artificial, the theory must be considered a baseless speculation.
Response: In terms of geology, it is true that the rivers in question are not considered anomalous (as far as I know). The Time River Theory, however, does not claim anything tangible regarding the process responsible for the rivers’ intricate designs. So the apparent naturalness of the rivers’ geology does not invalidate the theory.

How the rivers attained their seemingly intelligent arrangements is still an ‘X factor’ - a mystery. If the Time River Theory was weak, then this missing piece could cast more doubt on its validity.

 

But because the theory is actually very strong without the missing piece, a more reasonable approach would be to put effort into figuring out what the mechanism ‘X’ may be, instead of lazily viewing it as evidence against the theory.

Criticism: The Time River theory necessitates the existence of an astoundingly advanced group of people in the distant past, and yet we have no evidence for that.
Response: This is not quite true. We have the Giza monuments from the dawn of history, for instance, which still boggle the mind of modern man. Indeed, even with today’s technology it would still be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to replicate them. And while the ancient Egyptian culture in general may not have been very advanced by today’s standard, we do detect a curious disconnect between the intellectual sophistication expressed by the Giza monuments and what we are taught about the ancient Egyptians. It is almost as if there was a small but truly advanced elite group that guided the building of the monuments from behind the scenes.

This is an important clue suggesting that our view of history may be quite superficial.

 

And it would certainly be naïve for us to assume that the intelligence responsible for the Time River system would have left their cultural ‘footprints’ behind. If the intelligence was powerful and sophisticated enough to have produced the Time Rivers, then it surely must have been very much aware of the importance of leaving, or not leaving, evidence of its existence behind. Or, to put it another way, it is quite feasible that we are today seeing what the intelligence in question had intended us to see.

 

Thus, absence of evidence certainly does not represent evidence of absence here. 

Criticism: Since rivers’ paths change with time, they cannot possibly carry coded messages for a long period. Consequently, whatever their layouts may indicate today must be of no significance.
Response: This is seemingly a good point. But it is presumptuous. In view of the level of intelligence required, it’s actually more reasonable to hypothesize that the creators of the Time Rivers were well aware of the inevitable future geological changes. The more coherent the encoded message is today, the more probable it is that the changing river courses do not represent corruption but pre-arranged evolution.
 

Criticism: The angle/latitude 19.5° is central to the Time River scheme, and yet its significance originally derives from the questionable geometric interpretation of the Cydonia structures on Mars. Similarly, the Orion Correlation Theory, a major part of the Time River design, is still a controversial theory. This means that the Time River theory is built on a very shaky foundation.
Response: The significance of 19.5° does not rely on the Martian ‘monuments’. The angle is very much meaningful in terms of pure geometry, as it’s considered a ‘tetrahedral constant’ (t). So, regardless of the legitimacy of the Cydonia research, the importance of 19.5° is a geometric fact.

As for the Orion Correlation Theory (developed by Robert Bauval), it is true that some academics are not fond of it.

 

But as mentioned in Chapter 3 [of the book The Time Rivers], those critics’ arguments are quite lame. In almost every case, they are infected with the fallacy of ‘composition’ (where some little inconsistency is somehow treated as a proof of the illegitimacy of the whole theory). And it is also important to point out that the Time River Theory does not depend on the validity of the Orion Correlation Theory.

 

The rivers’ overlay/transposition schemes alone are solid enough to make the theory compelling.

Criticism: A scientific theory must be falsifiable.
Response: Falsifiability - the capability to be falsified - is a key scientific principle and it is clearly met by the Time River theory. Although the theory has many components with varying levels of certainty, what is at the core are numerically and geometrically precise findings that are tangible and falsifiable.

References

[1] Even though the southern most source of the Nile is technically the Ruvironza River which drains into Lake Victoria, the first river to bear the name ‘Nile’ is the Victoria Nile that comes out from Lake Victoria approximately at the equator. To all intents and purposes, Lake Victoria can be considered the source of the Nile and the river begins roughly at the equator.
[2] www.enterprisemission.com/Path-sphinx.html
[3] Livio Catullo Stecchini, ‘Notes on the Relation of Ancient Measures to the Great Pyramid’, in Peter Tompkins, Secrets of the Great Pyramid (New York: Galahad Books, 1997), p.292.
[4] Since the practice of dividing up the circle into 360 degrees was already in use at the time of the Sumerians (the first known high civilization in history), comparing latitudinal measurements, such as 30°, to other measurements such as 30 years and 30 days should not be any more arbitrary than comparing 30 years to 30 days. Incidentally, 30 days is the length of the ‘reign of Saturn’ (Robert Graves, The White Goddess, p.163).
[5] Margaret Bunson, The Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt (New York: Gramercy Books, 1991), ‘sed’.
[6] See, for example, Giorgio de Santillana and Hertha von Dechend, Hamlet’s Mill (Boston: David R. Godine, 1977), p.201; J.E. Cirlot, A Dictionary of Symbols (New York: Barnes & Noble Books, 1995), ‘River’.
[7] See Giorgio de Santillana and Hertha von Dechend, Hamlet’s Mill, pp.134-5, 373-6.
[8] Plutarch, On Isis and Osiris, 363E.
[9] Robert Graves, The White Goddess (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1948), p.277, cf. Hamlet’s Mill, pp.200, 209.
[10] Jean Chevalier and Alain Gheerbrant, Dictionary of Symbols (Penguin Books, 1996), ‘ibis’.
[11] Rundle Clark, Myth and Symbol in Ancient Egypt (New York: Grove Press, 1960), p.246.
[12] E. A. Wallis Budge, The Book of the Dead (New York: Arkana, 1989), p.598.
[13] Anada K. Coomarswamy, Myths of the Hindus and Buddhists (New York: Dover Publications, 1967), p.384, cited in Graham Hancock and Santha Faiia, Heaven’s Mirror (New York: Crown Publishers, 1998), p.198.
[14] The Osiris-Saturn identification is acknowledged by mythologist Robert Graves who writes in The White Goddess (p.197), ‘…Osiris, the Egyptian Saturn’.
[15] Richard Hinckley Allen, Star Names: Their Lore and Meaning (New York: Dover Publications, 1963), p.308.

[16] Pyramid Texts, line 1657.
[17] See Robert Bauval and Adrian Gilbert, The Orion Mystery (New York: Crown Publishers, 1994), pp.99-103, 237-241.
[18] Thomas G. Brophy, The Origin Map (Writers Club Press, 2002), pp.86-9.
[19] D. A. Livingstone, ‘The Nile - Palaeolimnology of Headwaters’, in Rzóska (ed.), The Nile, Biology of an Ancient River, pp.23-5, 27; Said, The Geological Evolution of the River Nile, p.6.
[20] Corresponding year for latitude L = [(10600-2350)/19.5] x L - 10600. (If the resultant number is a negative number, it means it is a ‘BC’ date. Also, if the year yielded is zero or positive, technically an extra year has to be added to make up for the nonexistence of the year ‘0 AD’.)
[21] See, for example, Adrian Gilbert and Maurice Cotterell, The Mayan Prophecies (Rockport, MA: Element Books, 1995), pp.33, 136, 184.
[22] Coomarswamy, Myths of the Hindus and Buddhists, p.393, cited in Hancock, Heaven’s Mirror, p.150.
[23] Allen, Star Names, p.216.
[24] See de Santillana and von Dechend, Hamlet’s Mill, pp.139-40, 159, 377-383.
[25] Ibid., pp.140, 382, 429.
[26] Ibid., pp.157-9.
[27] Speiser (trans.), The Anchor Bible: Genesis, Genesis 2:10-14.
[28] Graham Hancock, The Sign and the Seal (New York: Touchstone, 1993), pp.205, 450.
[29] Alexander Heidel, The Babylonian Genesis (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1951), pp.68-71.
[30] From the Atrahasis Epic (Tablet 1).
[31] Thorkild Jacobsen, The Treasures of Darkness (London: Yale University Press, 1976), p.117
[32] Ibid., pp.130-1.