5561BCE vs 3067BCE Reproducibility and Specifics

Did 5561BCE corroborate anything?
Did 3067BCE corroborate a lot of the evidence?

We often say that we have debunked 5561BCE. A long post detailing the specific findings against the 5561BCE war proposal are given here with a few videos and slides:

1. 14th war night Moonrise is a waning phase Moon (so is 10th war night Moonrise) and rules out an Amavasya start to the war and means that war must end close to an Amavasya in reality. Unfortunately in 5561BCE proposal, there is a conjecture of a dust storm which is not to be found in the text and war is made to start on an Amavasya which is a mistake. Here is a short video explaining the mistake:

Here is a short slide explaining the absurdities inherent in the Moonphase analogies given in 5561BCE to explain the war timeline.

Krittika Purnima followed by Vaishakha Purnima followed by Punarvasu Purnima in last 7 days of war according to 5561BCE war proposal … normally these are months apart.

2. Mission of peace data is also wrong:

The sequence in the Epic (and 3067BCE) is below:

Krishna’s departure (Revati)->Full Moon(Kartika, Lunar eclipse)-> Krishna-Karna ride(Uttaraphalguni)->Amavasya (at Jyeshtha, solar eclipse)-> war (does not begin on an amavasya).

The mistaken sequence of events, as per 5561BCE :

Krishna’s departure(Revati)-> Full Moon(Ashvina)->Krishna-Karna- ride(uttaraphalguni)->Amavasya(at Vishakha) -> Kartika paurnima -> war on Amavasya(at Moola, Solar eclipse). Here is a short video explaining the mistake:

3. The Arundhati Vasistha observation according to 5561BCE proposal is taken at the wrong part of the curve when Arundhati leads Vasistha for 5500 years already. (And not as an omen which is what it is). The AV observation only counts as an omen in the 4508BCE to 1000 BCE part of the curve.

Temporary nature of Verses of Chapter 2 Bhisma Parva before the AV observation

The verses after the AV observation verse are also temporary in nature and also illustrate the hiding of the mark on the Moon indicating refraction of the atmosphere having changed. A long workshop video which illustrates that AV observation in not a Falsifier and only a Nimmita is below.

Further the verse preceding the verse taken to denote Saturn and Jupiter’s position in 5561BCE actually clearly says that these two grahas must be comets having tails and obscuring the Saptarishis (Saturn and Jupiter cannot obscure Saptarishis no matter how bright they are and of course they are too far away from the Saptarishis or Ursa Major if their position were to be taken as near Vishakha as per epic)


4. Saturn is in the wrong position in 5561BCE (2+ Nakshatras away from Vishakha even if this was counted to be its position) and 150+ degrees away from Rohini as required by the epic.

Here is a short 5 minute film on Saturn’s position in the Mahabharata war which illustrates the precise problem:

The Position of Saturn During the Mahabharata War

5: Jupiter is also in the wrong position in 5561BCE and is unable to cause Nakshatra Peeda to Rohini as demanded by Karna Parva 68:49

The 5 minute short film on the three positions of Jupiter

Here is another short 2 minute film on Balarama’s pilgrimage which shows the facts clearly. Press play button to play :


6. Bhisma crosses the 58 nights in the battlefield deadline In 5561BCE against his own testimony given in the epic.

We must ask a) Which month is mentioned explicitly in the Mahabharata as Bhisma’s Moksha?

Answer: Magha (check my book free download from link on blog)

Next ask the question about whether it is mentioned anywhere in the Mahabharata that Bhisma spent more than 58 nights on the battlefield? Answer: No. 58 nights maximum only.

Next question ask: What Tithi and Nakshatra are mentioned for Bhisma Moksha?

Answer: Rohini nakshatra on Magha Shukla Astami at midday shown clearly in slide below:

Stringent conditions for Bhisma Moksha satisfied in 3067BCE

Next ask: What Uttarayan is explicitly mentioned in Anushasan Parva? Calculated or Observed?

Answer: Debunks all other theories: Verse 6 and 26 of Anushasan Parva say categorically that it’s an observed Uttarayan (4th day post Winter solstice) and not a calculated one. (which would be day of or after Winter solstice)

List of Assumptions for Bhisma Moksha in 5560BCE

7. Balarama’s pilgrimage timeline is completely wrong in 5561BCE. We corroborate all 4 timelines of the epic in 3067BCE. A short video explaining that is here:

8: Tivro graha hypothesis debunked for 5561BCE. Short 2 minute film:

Another day, another blunder in the hypothesis of #5561BCE: Pluto which is supposed to be at Krittika is 30 degrees away at Revati nakshatra. Pluto isn’t seen with the naked eye in any case and won’t drown out the Plaeides stars but facts don’t get in the way of a good fairytale!

Can 3067BCE be derived from first principles: is it reproducible?

The first criteria of any piece of research is whether it is reproducible or not? In the case of 3067BCE as our proposed year of the Mahabharata war we can clearly see that without taking any recourse to Kaliyuga or anything else, the basic point of Saturn at Aldebaran/Rohini is intersected with Mars going retrograde before Jyestha/Antares and at Anuradha. We can clearly reproduce that 210 points can be found of Saturn at Aldebaran/Rohini and this reduces to around 19 data sets when Mars going retrograde before Jyestha/Antares and at Anuradha can be found. Then the lunar eclipse at Plaeides/Kartika Purnima preceding the Solar eclipse at Jyestha/Antares before the war date produces 2 dates 2183BCE and 3067BCE. In 2183BCE, the war must commence on an Amavasya and this is impossible as we know from the 14th war night Moonrise data and Drona 159:42 hence 3067BCE must be the year of the war. Thus the 3067BCE war proposal is reproducible and therefore scientific.


Can we apply the same sort of reproducibility to the 5561BCE war proposal?

The data set purportedly taken in 5561BCE is the conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn at Vishakha. Can we check when this conjunction happened in the vicinity of that period?

Unfortunately we find that the actual conjunction occured at a completely different date. Jhora gives an option to actually find out conjunctions like this: It is found that a conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn could only occur in Jan 5547BCE and March 5566BCE.

However, a conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn near Vishakha to satisfy the criteria adopted in 5561BCE research does not occur for around 50 years on either sides of 5561BCE or in 5561BCE. Thus the date of 5561BCE falls at the first hurdle itself.

Next let us look at the Arundhati Vasistha observation context and see if the point of the war only being possible earlier than 4508BCE is reproducible?

The issue is that, proper motion wise, Harvard University proved in the 1930’s itself that Alcor Arundhati never went ahead of Mizar. However, hypothetically, let us though assume for a moment that what Nilesh ji says is indeed accurate. In that case at 5561BCE, Arundhati is leading Vasistha for 5500 years or so before and 1000 years after (till 4508BCE). The context of the verses before and after this verse (Bhisma 2:31) points out that Arundhati Vasistha observation cannot be anything more than an omen. That being the case, it cannot be an omen in 11091BCE to 4508BCE, it can only be an omen in the 4508BCE to 1000BCE sort of time frame (when Vasistha leads Arundhati again according to Shri Oak himself) when it would be noticed as an observation which is different to the norm. This is shown below and again 5561BCE is outside this period (we call this the modified Epoch of Arundhati and Vasistha which proves 3067BCE as the date of the war)

Temporary/Omen context of verses before the Arundhati Vasistha verse (2:31 Bhisma)

Secondly, at various points every year, outside Nilesh ji’s “theoretical epoch”, Arundhati is actually ahead of Vasistha anyway. This is happening for example in certain months of every year in that time period just before sunrise. It also happens in June, July and August every year.Hence, the question of an AV Epoch doesn’t arise using the very same logic of Karl Popper in which the 5561BCE is based on. This is shown below:

Alcor Arundhati ahead of Vasistha Mizar outside the so called Epoch and disproving it

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s