No. 5) Re: [hrl_2] The Book of Daniel as a con game?

Dear Friends,


Greetings. My response to Mr. James M. Rogers' posting is
interspersed within his text below.


emarhalys wrote:
>
> Dr. Kaya, I have looked over at the full length of your paper. In
> the Tower of Babel Part 3 you wrote:
>
> "DANIEL, supposedly meaning "God is my judge". This is sourced from
> an
> anagram of Turkish "TANYELI" meaning "morning wind". The mythology,
> as given by T. Norman, says that "Daniel's faith in God kept him
> alive in a den of hungry lions." However this is not a truthful story
> when the real identity of "Daniel" is identified as "morning wind" as
> the above Turkish source shows. Anyone will know that when a "wind"
> gets into the den of hungry lions, nothing will happen to the "wind".
> The Book of Daniel where his story is given is filled with fantastic
> achievements - as expected of "wind". Very clever con game."
>
> I am a bit lost in this explanation. In Hebrew Dan means "judge". It
> is not "supposedly". This is established fact. You further
> mention "T Norman's mythology." I see you have even referenced this
> in a May 2001 post
>

POLAT KAYA: Don't be lost. My explanation is very clear. If you
read it several times you will get it. First of all, DANIEL is the
personification of the morning wind. This is a revelation by me.
Most people do not know this. The ending IEL in DANIEL is pronounced
as YEL which in Turkish means "WIND". EL was the God of the Semites.
EL is a distortion of Turkish YEL. The ancient Turks were the AL
believers, referring to the red coloured Sun. Turkish AL and Yel and
EL are related words - homonyms if you like. The Semites have chosen
the Turkish word EL (Turkish Yel meaning "WIND" and also Turkish EL
meaning "HAND") as name for their God. But because EL (YEL) is so
similar to AL in form, there is a subtle usurpation of AL is also
going on.

Additionally, the God BAAL of the Turkic Canaanites was a form of
Turkish ABA-AL or APA-AL meaning FATHER-RED referring to the Sun whose
ancient Turkish logo was the BULL. So you see, when the Semites chose
EL (YEL) as their God, DANIEL became one form of the WIND God that
they believe in - and God is always a JUDGE. That is how DANIEL
became a JUDGE - but he is still a personification of WIND - which is
why nothing happens to him when he goes in a lion's den or if he goes
into fire as talked about in the Book of Daniel.

Related to JUDGEMENT is the Turkish word ATA (meaning "FATHER") which
is a scriptural representation of the scales of JUSTICE. Take a look
at the Turkish word ATA and you will see the scales of justice. The
Father (ATA) of a family behaves like a JUDGE to his family and the
Father (ATA) in the Sky behaves like a JUDGE to humanity.

C. J. Gadd, in his book entitled "A Sumerian Reading Book" [] gives
Sumerian "DE" as meaning "to pour out a voice, i.e., to speak, utter
words". Of course this Sumerian word is the same as Turkish "DE"
meaning "to speak". Similarly in the same reference, is given the
Sumerian word "DI" meaning "lawsuit, judgement,; DI-TIL-LA meaning
"legal decision, verdict; "DI-KUD" meaning "judge". Turkish "KADI DI"
means "he is judge". It should be noted that Sumerian "DI-KUD" and
Turkish "KADI-DI" are very related. Turkish "KADI DE" would be the
"decision of Judge or judge's verdict". Turkish "DIEN" (DIYEN) means
"he who speaks", "he who decides" or "He who commands". A"judge"
represents such an authority.

In view of these background infpormation, and if the name "DAN", i.e.,
a reading of the consonants set "DN" means "Judge", then it surely is
from Turkish "DIEN" (DIYEN) meaning "he who speaks", "he who judges"
or "He who commands". Additionally even the term "JUDGE" where J=I,
and its rearrangement being "GEDI U", is an anagram of the Turkish
expression "GADI U" (KADI O) meaning "he is judge".

The latin "DICERE" meaning "to say, speak, tell, mention" when
rearranged as "ER DEIC" is an anagram of Turkish "expression "ER
DEYIK" meaning "man's say, speak, tell". Similarly, Latin "DICO"
meaning "to say, speak, tell", when rearranged as "DOIC", is an
anagram of Turkish "DEIK" (DEYIK) meaning "speech, spoken words, what
is said".

The Latin word "IUDICARE" or "DIUDICARE" meaning "judge", when
rearranged letter-by-letter as "DEICU AR", is an anagram of Turkish
expression "DEYICU ER" meaning "man who speaks, man who decides"
referring to a "judge. Similarly, the Latin word "DIUDICARE", when
rearranged letter-by-letter as "CADI ERDI U", where C=K, is an anagram
of Turkish expression "KADI ERDI O" meaning "he is the judge man".

The Italian word "DIRE" meaning "to speak, talk", when rearranged as
"DIER" is the Turkish word "DIER" (DIYER) meaning "he/she speaks,
says, talks". Thus again its source is Turkish.

As can be seen over and over again here, we are able to find all of
these correspondences indicating that all these IE words are among the
abducted Turkish words and fall in the "stolen and repainted car"
examples. Similarly is the word DAN from Turkish "DIYEN".


You write:

> www.groupsrv.com/science/ viewtopic.php?t=21824&view=next
>
> but who is this "T. Norman"? Jay T. Norman? T. Norman and B.
> Setterfield 1987 supposedly "creationist scientists from the mid-
> 1980s"? How old is this theory you have been working on?
>
> You also write "Anyone will know that when a "wind"
> gets into the den of hungry lions, nothing will happen to
> the "wind.." So you day Daniel was a wind, if he was a wind how were
> they able to shackle him and toss him in with the lions. Daniel
> throughout the book is referred to as a man. In the literature of
> the book of Daniel he is man not wind.
>

POLAT KAYA: First, age does not matter for any theory. Second, myth
writers have all kinds of concoctions in their back pockets. So the
answer to your question is no problem for them. In the book of Daniel
which is a lot of mythology itself, DANIEL is a personification of
wind no matter which way you look at it. If you want to turn your back
on the truth, then be my guest. But do not attempt to con me with
ancient peoples' concoctions. If you believe that a "man" named Daniel
was shackled and thrown into a lion's den - but somehow survived, then
you are naive. Additionally, no wind can be shackled. Look at a wind
tower, i.e., a "tornado" which has deceptively been presented as the
"Tower of Babel". See if you can shackle it or any other wind for
that matter.


You say:

> Dr. Kaya, you ask me to read your paper with an uncritical eye, but
> how can I when you make such outrageous claims? Some of your
> examples are good, but then some are misguided. Ezer means "servant
> or slave" in Semitic languages like Hebrew. But for you it is no
> more than a "bother". People & scholars alike do not know "the true
> meaning" of Ezer?
>

POLAT KAYA: On the contrary, the "outrageous claims" are those
appearing in such books of mythology where all kinds of outrageous
claims have been made e.g., The Book of Daniel. Ordinary,
non-questioning people have been readily deceived and taken to the
water hole without letting them drink a drop of water (i.e., truth).
If you wish to be in that category, be my guest.

You wrote:

> I will read on if you would like. You make many bad examples. Many
> misconstrued thoughts. But for me there are other matters to study
> that are more based on fact than this Turkish anagrammatizing idea.
>
> James M. Rogers
> emarhalys@...
>

POLAT KAYA: Now listen carefully. By saying "this Turkish
anagrammatizing idea", you are misquoting me. While the notion of
anagrammatizing is associated with Indo-European and Semitic languages
that stole Turkish expressions to form words for themselves, you are
now turning the tables around cunningly and associating it with
Turkish, by deceptive verbology You are being deceitful by being an
untruthful interpreter.

I reject your saying that I give bad examples. My examples are valid
and cut to the heart of the deception. On the other hand, with your
demonstrated ill-behaviour, you are being a bad example of
scholarliness. And by the way, do not try to present yourself as an
indispensable reader. You have already lost your credibility.


Best wishes to all,

Polat Kaya

=================

emarhalys wrote:
>
> Dr. Kaya, I have looked over at the full length of your paper. In
> the Tower of Babel Part 3 you wrote:
>
> "DANIEL, supposedly meaning "God is my judge". This is sourced from
> an
> anagram of Turkish "TANYELI" meaning "morning wind". The mythology,
> as given by T. Norman, says that "Daniel's faith in God kept him
> alive in a den of hungry lions." However this is not a truthful story
> when the real identity of "Daniel" is identified as "morning wind" as
> the above Turkish source shows. Anyone will know that when a "wind"
> gets into the den of hungry lions, nothing will happen to the "wind".
> The Book of Daniel where his story is given is filled with fantastic
> achievements - as expected of "wind". Very clever con game."
>
> I am a bit lost in this explanation. In Hebrew Dan means "judge". It
> is not "supposedly". This is established fact. You further
> mention "T Norman's mythology." I see you have even referenced this
> in a May 2001 post
>
> www.groupsrv.com/science/ viewtopic.php?t=21824&view=next
>
> but who is this "T. Norman"? Jay T. Norman? T. Norman and B.
> Setterfield 1987 supposedly "creationist scientists from the mid-
> 1980s"? How old is this theory you have been working on?
>
> You also write "Anyone will know that when a "wind"
> gets into the den of hungry lions, nothing will happen to
> the "wind.." So you day Daniel was a wind, if he was a wind how were
> they able to shackle him and toss him in with the lions. Daniel
> throughout the book is referred to as a man. In the literature of
> the book of Daniel he is man not wind.
>
> Dr. Kaya, you ask me to read your paper with an uncritical eye, but
> how can I when you make such outrageous claims? Some of your
> examples are good, but then some are misguided. Ezer means "servant
> or slave" in Semitic languages like Hebrew. But for you it is no
> more than a "bother". People & scholars alike do not know "the true
> meaning" of Ezer?
>
> I will read on if you would like. You make many bad examples. Many
> misconstrued thoughts. But for me there are other matters to study
> that are more based on fact than this Turkish anagrammatizing idea.
>
> James M. Rogers
> emarhalys@...