Home Pharos Fiction Site Map Updates Search


                                                                                                                        Back Next

Halexandria Foundation
Sacred Mathematics
Connective Physics
Chronicles of Earth
Justice, Order, and Law
Extraterrestrial Life
Creating Reality
Tree of Life

Zecharia Sitchin

Updated -- 1 December 2010


"We regret to inform you that Zecharia Sitchin passed away on the morning of October 9th. A small, private family funeral was held the next day.

"The family asks that you respect its privacy during this difficult time and refrain from contacting family members directly. Instead, to offer tributes to Mr. Sitchin or to contact those handling his affairs, please email tributes@sitchin.com tributes[at]sitchin[dot]com or send a letter to P.O. Box 577, New York, NY 10185. We appreciate the support that you have given over the years. Please continue to monitor this website for further updates." [http://www.sitchin.com/]

Zecharia Sitchin was a world famous author, who has used ancient Sumerian and other texts to present pictorial and textual evidence showing that “we are not alone.”  Recounting the incredible firsts of the Sumerian Civilization, Sitchin has argued that there is one more planet in our own solar system from which intelligent beings (Nefilim, Elohim, Anunnaki) had come.  He has gone on to suggest that they arrived on Earth from their planet, Nibiru.   

For Updates and more thoughts, visit the Halexandria Forums 

Sitchin has been prolific in his writings, penning such titles as: The 12th Planet, The Wars of Gods and Men, The Cosmic Code, The Stairway to Heaven, Genesis Revisited, The Lost Realms, Divine Encounters, When Time Began, The Lost Book of ENKI, and most recently, There Were Giants Upon the Earth.  The Lost Book of ENKI, according to Sitchin's website, tells the story of the leader of the first expedition to earth, “a great scientist called ENKI (‘Lord Earth’).  It was circa 2000, B.C., that ENKI, after traumatic events (i.e., the demise of the great Sumerian civilization on account of the use of nuclear weapons to obliterate an Anunnaki space port in the Sinai Peninsula), decided to write his autobiography.  In The Lost Book of ENKI, Zecharia reconstructed ENKI's autobiography from almost 800 fragmented texts.”  

Zecharia Sitchin can be credited with a Herculean effort in making the Sumerian ancient texts -- as well as many other sources -- come alive and reveal what has become clear is a fascinating account of every human’s heritage.  If any criticism can be leveled at him, it is that his explanation for the reason for the Anunnaki’s extreme interest in gold is faulty (and does not recognize the part that the Star Fire or ORME has played in the drama).  A second criticism is that Sitchin does not use references in a scholarly fashion so that others can verify for themselves his sources.  [This is in contradistinction from authors such as Laurence Gardner or Immanuel Velikovsky, which show extensive references.]  

In recent years, Sitchin has been criticized for more aggresively than in his earlier years. Most of this criticism often sounds plausible, but the blanket statements against him suggest strongly the reason for such black and white arguments (often the hallmark of closed minds) is that someone's religious fundamentalism may have been triggered. Undoubtedly, this is not always the case, but any paradigm that is threatened inevitably results in knee jerk reactionary impulses by just about anyone. Certainly Immanuel Velikovsky received such a response for his Worlds in Collision in 1950... and continuing for the next sixty years. Ironically, Sitchin did not agree with Velikovsky, but I dare say he would have agreed that Velikovsky did have the right to argue his case.

The real problem with Sitchin is that he has persevered against notable obstacles until his basic theories are accepted and elaborated upon by many other authors and experts -- even if there remains a contingent of the blind-leading-the-blind remnants of the “old guard”, who cannot imagine extraterrestrials, much less their involvement in mankind’s affairs then (and now?).   The difficulty is that Sitchin has a rather large and devoted following... and those following other celebrated semi-deities simply don't like that.

To appreciate Sitchin, it’s worth reading his writings.  A recent sample, taken from his “official” website, is “The Case of the ‘Intelligent Designer’.”  It is presented here as a convenience [© Z. Sitchin 2002 -- Reprinted with permission].  


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 Bible.  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; the 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.  

 Enter “Intelligent Design”  

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.  The most recent instance is Ohio, where the arena is the state's Board of Education.  

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 magazine).  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 magazine).  

Identifying 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 the question:  If so, who was the Intelligent Designer?  [emphasis added]  

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 Puzzler  

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 Pennsylvania, they “find themselves arrayed not against traditional creationism, with its roots in biblical liberalism, but against a more sophisticated idea: the Intelligent Design theory.”  

But who, if so, was the Intelligent Designer?  As I [Sitchin] 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 [Sitchin] 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 4 billion years ago.  [e.g. Epic of Creation]  

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 force.”  

"An Advanced Civilization from Another World"  

As my [Sitchin’s] 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 ago.  Then, I [Sitchin] 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 [Sitchin] 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.  Headlined “Darwinian Struggle in Ohio,” the editorial explained:  

“Adherents of intelligent design carefully shun any mention of God in 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 not specified.”  

The emphasis of the astounding statement is mine [Sitchin’s].  

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 [Sitchin’s] latest book, The Lost Book of ENKI?



This article may be reprinted when including the statement

© Z. Sitchin 2002                     Reprinted with permission



The Tower of Babel         Sodom and Gomorrah         Adam and Eve

Adam’s Family         Deluge         Enki and Enlil         Anunnaki

Forward to:

Laurence Gardner        Night Falls on the Gods        Immanuel Velikovsky



                                                                                      The Library of ialexandriah       

2003© Copyright Dan Sewell Ward, All Rights Reserved                     [Feedback]    

                                                                                                            Back Next