[An interminable debate on 'methods']

Here GC (misunderstands or rather refuses to accept) the comparative
technique. He desires to have each myth told in its entirety and
analyzed, so the reader can learn the metaphorical meanings or ethical
lessons that are symbolized or defined. But this is not the way the
comparative method is properly used. It's purpose is not to explain the
detailed meanings of a single myth, rather it is a means of extracting
an unusual detail or motif and relating it to other myths from other
cultures with a similar unusual detail or motif. This process requires
that many elements of a specific myth must be ignored (it is a filtering
process) as local, and therefore irrelevant, embellishments. It is in
essence a forensic technique.

-- nick, ca Jul 22, 2010, EU blog

"In contrast, David Talbott, inspired by Immanuel Velikovsky's theory of
interplanetary upheaval, developed a method for comparing the myths of
far-flung cultures. His objective was to discover whether reliable
memories are embedded in the different stories. This method is similar
to the reasoning of lawyers in a court of law, questioning witnesses who
may be lying, or incompetent, or remembering incorrectly. When
statements from independent witnesses converge on unique details, they
tend to corroborate each other, even if the witnesses are not reliable
in other things they say. Similarly, according to Talbott, there are
hundreds of common themes in world mythology, where different words and
different symbols point to the same remembered events. The more peculiar
the points of convergence, the more unreasonable it is to dismiss them.

Talbott insists that a comparative
approach can demonstrate the common roots of such mythical themes.

The comparative method can also account for numerous details that
the experts have missed. Most dramatic is the connection between the
Scarface theme and the lightning of the gods. Talbott gives as an
example the god Enceladus, struck down by a thunderbolt of Zeus. The god
was remembered as "the lightning-scarred god". Enceladus appears to be a
counterpart of the monster Typhon, the "thunderstruck" god. Both can be
identified as the terrible aspect of the celestial warrior, according to
Talbott, for it was in his "man-slaying" rampage that Ares received his
wound.


-- *The Case for an Electric Universe*
by Amy and Nel Acheson


"Yes I desire each mythological tale to be analysed in its entirety but
not just so the reader can learn metaphorical or ethical lessons. I wish
the tale to be taken in its context not to be cherry-picked for a word
or phrase then abandoned. That there are metaphorical, ethical and
allegorical elements to myths is not my invention, it has been
recognised for thousands of years, e.g. by Plato. A further point which
I made in the critique and have mentioned more than once on this forum
is that every part of a given tale is information â it is not padding.
I still do not understand your (and the Saturn theoristsâ) use of the
word âforensicâ.

-- Grey cloud, same thread, answer to nick

"And the only way for anyone to discover what the original reports were
is to find all of the things, i.e. motifs, that all of the ancient myths
had in common, not the many details added by later generations in each
nation.

Why do you ignore the many scientists who contribute to this site
and the forum? Most of them probably haven't read Cardona's
expensive book, but many know the basic theme, based on some of the
material here and from Thoth and other sites.

-- Lloyd

Point me to the many scientists on this site and the forum who provide
evidence for the science involved in either Cardona's or Talbott's
planetary merry-go-round.

-- Grey Cloud

... later, responding to Stephen Jay

    You consistently maintain that the "humanities" cannot be examined
    via the scientific (forensic) method but, rather, must ONLY be
    metabolized in their larger philosophical context. Sorry, but that
    sounds suspiciously pseudo-religious to me.

Why do Saturn theorists and their supporters have to invoke the word
âforensicâ? Can a myth be recreated in a lab? The humanities are more
art than science as they rely on subjective judgement. Sure, artefacts
etc can be dated using scientific techniques but the Saturn theorists
don't accept the dating techniques, or the ice-core records or any other
science which disagrees with their theories anyway, so where does that
leave 'forensic science'?

What I actually maintain is that any mythological tale or episode should
be examined in context.

--Grey Cloud

(end)