WHERE IS AFRICAN PHILOSOPHY AND SCIENCE?

Frustrated African youths often ask me: "Where are our philosophy and science?" This is a good question that I wish African intellectuals would answer, but they cannot, for majority of African intellectuals seem to think that scientific and philosophical thought processes are universal. According to them, developing an African scientific thought process that's grounded on African epistemological framework is a waste of time since one can be expatriated "ready made" into Africa from Europe - this is what I call "ready made" pathology. Ironically, it's these same intellectuals, who constantly lament the lack of scientific and technological development in Africa, not realizing that Africa cannot develop in these areas using "ready made" or imported epistemological and philosophical frameworks. However, Africa can only develop scientifically and technologically when Africans endeavor to formulate their scientific thought processes based on African epistemology and philosophy.

I respectfully submit that while science, as an objective knowledge of nature, is universal, the thought processes that go into the formulation of scientific principles are totally relative to one's environment. In fact, in the sequential order of the evolution of knowledge, the environment is anterior to everything else. That is, it's the environment that shapes people's psychology. People's psychology, in turn, shapes their ecology. Their ecology goes on to shape their mythology and spirituality. Their mythology and spirituality shape their epistemology. Their epistemology goes on to shape their metaphysics and philosophy. And lastly, their metaphysics and philosophy shape their scientific knowledge - this is the natural sequential order of the evolution of knowledge anywhere on this planet.

So, if the environment plays a major role in the evolution of knowledge, and if no two environments are quite alike, then it is counterproductive to import European philosophy into Africa to help develop African scientific thought process. I contend that African philosophical and scientific thought processes can only be developed through the development and promotion of African-centered curriculum.

African-centered curriculum must be premised on two areas: African moral philosophy and African natural philosophy. The moral philosophy curriculum must cover African customs and customary laws, ethics, value system and African moral principles such as the moral principles of IFA and MAAT. Conversely, the natural philosophy curriculum must cover African arts, history, psychology, metaphysics, philosophy, herbology, medicine and economics.

All in all, it is through the development of an African-centered curriculum that African youths can begin to engage in philosophical and scientific thought processes of their own.

THE ORIGIN OF THE NAME "PALESTINE."

The origin of the name "PALESTINE" is almost lost in another matrix of lies. 

According to the biblical and some traditional scholars, the name Palestine is an Anglicized corruption of the name Philistine. This is how the lie goes: the Philistines were said to be non-Semitic enemies of the Israelites in "Ancient Judaea." But for one reason or another, the name Israel was abruptly changed to Philistia or Philistine, now Palestine.

There is circumstantial evidence linking Roman emperor Hadrian with the name change, but the precise date is not certain and the assertion of the scholars above that the name change was invented by emperor Hadrian to blot out Israel from history, and to complete the dissociation of the Israelites with Judaea is strongly disputed by serious scholars, for the name Philistine is not even mentioned once in the SEPTUAGINT (i.e. the first Bible).

Now, let's move from the realm of history to the realm of common sense. The word "philistine" is neither an ancient word nor a Semitic word. The word "Philistine" is an English word! The question now is: why would an ancient people of the so-called Judaea bear, as a collective, an English name (Philistine) when England was non-existed at this time? 

Anyway, the name Palaistine(Greek), Anglicized Palestine, is a corruption of the original name Palistan. Etymologically, the word Pali is of Dravidian origin, meaning Shepherds, and the word Stan of the same origin means: house, space or land. Consequently, the word Palistan simply means the Shepherd house or land. Is this why the "Isrealites" were said to be Shepherds?

According to a number of esoteric scholars (Godfrey Higgins et al), Ancient Palestine was a colony of Egypt, and was originally inhabited by a group of Ethiopians from the Western Cush (Chaldeans), and was later inhabited by the immigrants from the Eastern Cush or the Ethiopia of the East (the hyksos, Palis or the Brahmins). Could this be why it's said that the progenitor of the Israelites was Abraham? Abraham or Brahma?

Pay attention!!!

DID HISTORICAL MUHAMMED EXIST?

The mainstream historical narratives of most religions are replete with tall tales and mythologies, which are revised and reinterpreted by later generations. Regarding Islam, Karl Heinz and Gerd Puin used overwhelming epigraphic and numismatic evidentiary facts to challenge mainstream Islamic narratives - facts so compelling that no critical opposition has been able to refute them with comparable and linguistic evidence.

In their book, "The Hidden Origins of Islam," Karl and Gerd make the following claims:

1. The most reliable literary sources about the life of Muhammed were written nearly 200 years after the event they describe.

2. Muhammed and the first four Caliphs, in Islamic narratives, are characters of myth.

3. The name "Muhammed" first appeared on Arab coins during the reign of Abd Al-Malik and not prior.

4. The name "Muhammed" was originally a title like "Christ."

5. The inscription on the Dome of the Rock, "Muhammad Abdu Llahi wa-rasuluhu": "praised be the Servant of God and his messenger," is a Christian statement and not Islamic.

6. The Dome of the Rock built in i.692 by Abd Al-Malik was not originally a mosque but a Byzantine-Syrian church.

7. Classical Arabic can be traced back to Syria. However, Quranic Arabic is a rework and intentional vowelization of the Syriac triconsonantal root systems of Classical Arabic.

So, who's the historical Muhammed.....did he even exist?

Flavius Josephus as a created interpolation on Joseph Scaliger

Flavius Josephus (Josephus hereinafter) is to evangelical scholars what Ronald Reagan is to conservatives - a Demi-God. According to the mainstream scholarship, Josephus was the only source, outside the New Testament, who confirmed the historicity of the existence of Jesus (see Testimonium Flavianum).  However, a few scholars, this writer included, have questioned Josephus' historical account, contending that Josephus and his historical account were Christian fabrications. In other words, the so-called "Testimonium Flavium" by Josephus was certainly the victim of Christian editing or interpolation. Let's deal with it!

Firstly, Josephus could not have written any historical account around first Century AD; the era it was claimed he had lived, for history as a subject did not exist at that time. History as a subject was formulated around 16th Century AD by Joseph Scaliger and other Jesuit scholars. And it's not implausible that Flavius Josephus himself was a Christian interpolation on the real or historical Joseph Scaliger, who lived around 16th Century AD. 

I want my readers to be aware of the following:

1.  Christian/Jesuit historians and translators often "assign" different dates and locations to different accounts of the same historical events, creating multiple "phantom copies" of these events. In other words, Flavius Josephus was a created "phantom copy" of Joseph Scaliger, and their works are different accounts of the same historical events - one is real, but the other is fake.

2. The B.C/A.D conventional or ecclesiastical chronology was largely manufactured by Joseph Justus Scaliger, and his Jesuit comrade, Dionysius Petavius, and it represents a vast array of dates produced without any justification whatsoever, containing the repeating sequences of dates with shifts equal to multiples of the major cabalistic numbers 333 and 360.

3. No single document in existence can be reliably dated earlier than the 11th Century AD.

4. Histories of "Ancient Rome," "Greece" and dynastic Egypt were crafted during the Renaissance by humanists and clergy - mostly on the basis of documents of their own making.

5. Histories of the so-called Hebrews and Sumerians are nothing but phantom copies of the historical template of dynastic Egypt - this is why Hebrew and Sumerian archeological records are non-existed!

 

BELIEF IS ANTITHETICAL TO NATURE

The nature of truth is the nature of what one can observe and verify; everything else is a belief in what others claim they bear witness to or observe.

The truth is that, in nature, humans can only reproduce through sex, but a belief system says otherwise - immaculate conception.

In nature, animals don't speak to humans, but a belief system says otherwise - a talking snake.

In nature, men and women come out of the female reproductive organ, but a belief system says otherwise - women came from man's rib.

In nature, nothing is born in sin, but a belief system says otherwise - human is born in sin.

In nature, death is the end of life, but a belief system says otherwise - 72 virgins await men after death.

Clearly, belief is in conflict with nature. The struggle between the observable truth and the unobservable belief is the source of almost all conflicts in the world.

The wise draw conclusions from what they observe in nature, but the followers believe the narratives of the wise. Whenever you're in doubt, observe nature, and there lies your answer. 

Everything you need to know in order to survive is right in front of you, but you're too busy believing the narratives and abstractions of other men.

THE METAPHYSICS OF ORI

Ori (I.e. the immaterial head) is the initial condition that determines the outcome of human events.  Human events/activities are very complicated and random for we exist in a chaos dynamic world. But under the concept of Ori, the outcome of these complicated human activities are totally deterministic and predictable. It is the concept of Ori that makes IFA divination possible; without Ori, IFA would not be able to track randomness and make accurate predictions about the outcome of human activities.

Many religious scholars and moral philosophers argue against the underlying concept of Ori for being too deterministic and for denying "free will." Contrary  to this ignorant argument, Ori does not deny free will, and it is not deterministic in the slightest. It is the outcome of human events that is deterministic for every event starts with an initial condition. And since Ori is the initial condition, then Ori is what determines the outcome of human activities. 

While the outcome of any human event  is totally deterministic; free will, being the controller of human activities, makes every outcome appears random and uncertain. And it's this free will-induced uncertainty (i.e. uncertainty principle) that made classical physicists (Einstein et al) conclude, erroneously, that a deterministic system could not be uncertain (i.e. Einstein determinism and Heisenberg uncertainty). But the concept of Ori teaches us that free will-induced uncertainty in human activities can be totally reconciled with the ever present determinism in a chaos dynamic world like ours. In other words, free will-induced uncertainty does not preclude determinism - it is a necessary nuisance in a deterministic world. Thanks to Quatum physics, the physics world is slowly catching on to the metaphysics of Ori and the fundamental teachings of IFA.

In conclusion, while the initial condition or Ori is fixed, IFA teaches that with iwa pele (i.e. good character), ise (i.e. hard work), sacrifice, and good information, free will-induced randomness and uncertainty can be drastically reduced in human activities.

IS TRADITIONAL HISTORICAL CHRONOLOGY RELIABLE?

It's interesting how we would sit in the history class, unperturbed, while we're being fed with endless narratives about events that happened thousands of years before our own era, and we would not even for once ask the professor the hard question about the accuracy of traditional historical chronology.

The hard question we fail to ask is: if the ancient people did not write their own history and if modern men were not alive in the ancient times, how then do modern men feel comfortable learning and teaching about historical events they neither witnessed nor experienced?

The world history that modern men teach to one another today was formulated based on the historical chronology that was developed by Scaliger and Pentavius around 16th Century AD. This traditional historical chronology is popularly known as the Scaligerian Chronology.

The Scaligerian chronologists, mostly Jesuits, relied solely on the star catalogue of Ptolemy Almagest for dating historical epochs. Ptolemy Almagest was considered the main source of astronomical knowledge and planetary theory before the time of Corpenicus. And since advanced knowledge of astronomy was required for dating historical epochs, the star catalogue of Ptolemy Almagest became a highly sought after astronomical manual in the Scaligerian era (15th-17th Century AD). 

However, it turns out that the star catalogue of Almagest, upon which traditional historical chronology was formulated, had been been tampered with and edited by Scaligerian chronologists around 17th Century AD to promote their Jesuit world view and to compress world history into the Biblical timeline.

Conscientious scholars and moral philosophers, around the world,  like: Isaac Newton,  Nikolia Morozov, Wilhelm Kammeyer, Robert Baldauf, Peter Krekshin, Fomenko, and Walter Williams had sharply criticized to no avail Scaligerian chronologists for falsifying traditional historical chronology.  

So, if the traditional historical chronology is known to be false, why is it that world history as we know it today is still being taught based on the same falsified chronology?