• Secrets Of The Dark Game

Hello Everyone Its been a while since I've posted anything but this is a message really worth sharing. Anton Parks is now available in English!

Some personal opinions about the importance of these books: a) There is little that I haven't read in the last 20 years from the alternative fields. These are by far the most valuable books I have ever come accross (because they cross reference real physical. You know things you can actually touch. Archeology with other sources of information) b) A lot of personal memories and experiences that were confirmed years later through these books c) They may not be a as wishy-washy or ego-boosting as other sources in the alternative fields but nobody said the real truth is pretty.

The Secret of the Dark Stars: AMAZON.FR: AMAZON.UK: AMAZON.DE: AMAZON.ES: AMAZON.IT: Eden: AMAZON.FR: AMAZON.UK: AMAZON.DE: AMAZON.ES: AMAZON.IT: What makes Anton unique is his combination of different sources of information with cross-reference of unearthed tablets from Mesopotamia as well as with analysis of old languages. Things you can actually see & touch. Which is pretty rare for anything in the alternative community. You can find the summary here I already own the two books above and they are worth every penny.

Please support these books so the rest of them can be also translated. We need to support the sharing of the real history of this planet now more than ever. Thanks TheChosen, I have bought the whole five books of Anton Parks, I knew that, at least his first book had been translated in English, now two, great! I have been mentioned Anton Parks on different Treads here, but, not many were aware of his work, now, part of his work translated, we will be able to share ideas on his research.

There is a lot of information pertaining to Anton Parks first book in French, his 5th edition was release in 2007, so his work started way back, and Anton have been interviewed by many! The best to you! Some talk about Anton Parks here. This is new material for me.

I wonder if anyone knows of a critical analysis of him and his work, in English (or a translate-able source, which I guess Google and other services can translate almost anything). I always like to read both sides, positive and negative views on people who claim extraordinary abilities and knowledge. Reading a very early brief on his work (which is interesting if his background is clean), I came upon this: 'The Kadištu (good guys) observe us more than ever before, and communicate via the intermediary of people they contact directly or telepathically. But such communications must be taken with great care, because of the possibility of wrong interpretation of what was received. Furthermore, many abductions are conducted by the Greys, who are usually in the service of the Gina'abul (bad guys). The Kadistu live in 'higher dimensions' (Angal) and very few of them can enter our third dimension; this doesn't facilitate direct contact and explains their circuitous fashion of approaching us.' (good guys / bad guys) added to quote.

Secrets Of The Dark Game

Such Great Mysteries! Anton Parks makes certain mistakes in his book Eden (I have it in French), as concerns Hebrew words. He states that the 'Tree of Knowledge' would be called 'etz jada' in the Bible. In reality it is called 'etz ha-daat' which means 'tree of WISDOM'. There is no 'etz jada' anywhere in the Bible and his attempts to 'confirm' from the Bible that the tree could be understood as 'tree of 'penetration' therefore fail. The explanation from Sumerian texts of the tree as 'tree of 'penetration' is, furthermore, very far fetched and lacks in logic. I might, furthermore, add that Parks' translations are very often considerably more wordy and thus longer than translations by scholars.

Regrettably, he has few references to others in the text, merely giving codes for the clay plates, and this makes it a bit difficult to compare. But when done, one find the texts of others remarkably shorter. Parks also has additional words in his translations that cannot be found in comparative translations.

Thus it appears that Parks' translations are more interpretative than literal, and makes a subjective impression in comparison.