by Zecharia Sitchin
Was I.D. an E.T.?
In March 1925 the Tennessee legislature outlawed the teaching of any
doctrine denying the divine creation of Man as taught by the
In July of that same year, John T. Scopes, a high
school teacher, was brought to trial for teaching Evolution
in violation of the state law.
The ensuing Scopes Trial (or,
deridedly, the "Monkey TriaI”) drew worldwide attention to the
seemingly irreconcilable conflict between Creationism (the
old fashioned belief in the biblical account) and
Evolution (based on
Darwin's findings of Natural Selection).
John Scopes was found guilty and was fined $100; the
Tennessee law was repealed in 1967; but the debate has not ended: Is
Man, Homo sapiens, solely the product of a long process of natural
selection (“Evolution"), or the result of a divine decision, a
deliberate act by a Creator ("Creationism”)?
The Evolutionists cannot fathom how the other side can ignore
the overwhelming evidence for life’s beginnings billions of years
ago and claim that it is all the result of six days of creation.
Creationists, pointing out that a complex watch required a
watchmaker, cannot see how the sudden appearance of Homo sapiens as
the most complex life form can deny the Hand of God.
In the past several years the debate has manifested itself again,
with greater vigor, not only in the so-called Bible Belt
states, but also in unexpected places as the Michigan House of
Representatives and the Pennsylvania education system.
recent instance is Ohio, where the arena is the state's Board of
Reports of these developments in the liberal media do not hide a
degree of alarm at these developments -- not so much because they
continue to occur, but because the attack on Darwinian teachings now
come from “Creationism in disguise,” and “a good disguise” at that (Time
The disguise is called "Intelligent Design” (“I.D.”
for short); Its proponents, by and large, do not take a position on
how Life got here; they just deny that natural selection (i.e.
evolution) alone could have brought us about. Somewhere along the
way, they hold, there had to be an Intelligent Designer.
What alarms the media and the scientific community is the fact that
the proponents of ID are not Bible-waving old ladies, but
intellectuals and academics from varied disciplines in science,
philosophy and theology.
Their concerted attack on Evolutionism
has been called by the established scientific community “a wedge
strategy to restore Creationism in disguise” (Science
the Intelligent Designer
The proponents of the new version of Creationism, one must
conclude from a study of their writings and arguments, find it
easier to make a case for Intelligent Design than to answer
If so, who was the
While many scientific critics of ID hold
that the neo-Creationists are conservative Christians
upset about the displacement of God from school curricula,
“the fact is that many leaders of the new movement prefer to skirt
the question, or even allow an abstract 'God' to be embedded
in the very beginning of the universe.
“No one really knows how the
universe got built with DNA that can replicate itself,” (in the
words of William Demski, a professor of mathematics).
A New York Times
In its issue of April 8, 2001, The New York Times, in a
page-one article by James Glanz, informed its readers that in
spite of some wins by Evolutionists in Kansas, Michigan and
“find themselves arrayed not against
traditional creationism, with its roots in biblical liberalism,
but against a more sophisticated idea: the Intelligent Design
But who, if so, was the Intelligent
Designer? As I was reading the article on that Sunday morning, I
was delighted to learn that
The designer may be much like the biblical God, proponents
say, but they are open to other explanations, such as the
proposition that life was seeded by a meteorite from elsewhere in
the cosmos, or the new age philosophy that the universe is suffused
with mysterious but inanimate life force.
That proponents of ID consider the bringing of life to Earth
by a meteorite as one explanation, I felt, was close enough to my
Sumerian explanation that the Seed of Life (what we now call
DNA) was imparted to Earth by the invading planet
Nibiru during the collision
(“Celestial Battle”) some four billion years ago.
But it turned out from examining the newspaper’s website and earlier
editions, that the New York City edition that I was reading
excised an intriguing and key sentence from the original article.
Here is what the paragraph had read in its original version, with
the omitted sentence highlighted:
This designer may be much like the
biblical God, proponents say, but they are open to other
explanations, such as the proposition that life was seeded by a
meteorite from elsewhere in the cosmos, POSSIBLY INVOLVING
EXTRATERRESTRIAL INTELLIGENCE, or the new age philosophy that
the universe is suffused with a mysterious but inanimate life
Civilization from Another World"
As my readers know, what I have said in my books went beyond the
common origin of Life (=DNA) on Earth and elsewhere in the Universe.
I showed that according to
the Sumerian texts (on which the
biblical account of Genesis was based), Evolution took its
course both on Nibiru and on Earth.
Beginning much earlier on Nibiru, it
produced the advanced
Anunnaki on Nibiru but only early
hominids on Earth when the Anunnaki had come here some 450,000 years
Then, I wrote, the Anunnaki engaged in genetic engineering
to upgrade the hominids to Homo sapiens (to be in their likeness
and after their image, as the Bible says).
While I was still wondering how the extraterrestrial angle was
excised from the Times article in April 2001, I was delighted to
read thus in its editorial on March 17, 2002.
Struggle in Ohio, the editorial explained:
Adherents of intelligent design carefully shun any mention of
their proposals. They simply argue that humans, animals and plants
are far too diverse and complex to be explained by evolution and
natural selection, so there must have been an intelligent designer
behind it all.
Whether that designer is God, AN ADVANCED
CIVILIZATION FROM ANOTHER WORLD, or some other creative force, is
The emphasis of the astounding statement is mine.
Back to Enki?
This is quite an advance in acknowledging the Sumerian data - from
the general possibility of an involvement by “Extraterrestrial
Intelligence” in cosmic life, to an Intelligent Designer from “an
advanced civilization from another world.”
It is progress spanning the tale of the collision that spread the
Seed of Life to the genetic engineering by the Lord Enki.
Have the editorial writers of the New York Times read my
The Lost Book of Enki?