Timothy Jay Schwab's new book "The Search For King Solomon's Treasure" is such "a farrago of nonsense that is contravened by a multitude of eyewitness accounts, inconvenient facts, and simple common sense," that I was not able to cover it all in my initial review. This time around I want to take a look at some of the outright absurdities in Tim's book. Things that simply do not belong but which make up "The Monumental Case For the Philippines No One Can Disprove." Each page is a head scratching, "Did he really write that?," moment.
Let's start off with something that Tim did not write. From the Foreward by "Dr." Butch Belgica:
The accepted scientific way of determining the land of creation is biodiversity. Southeast Asia, as declared by science journals and hundreds of scientists, is the world center of biodiversity - marine, mammals, plants and animals - with the Philippines as the epicenter in all.
p. 10
A word about The God Culture calling this a Foreward instead of a foreword. They claim that its a double entendre and the reason they use it can be found on page 9 of the book.
FYI - Someone asked why we chose the word Foreward with an A rather than the traditional Foreword with an O. Read Page 9 of Solomon's Treasure and we explain why Foreward is far more appropriate for our book as we employ a double entendre and it is intentional and on all our books that way. Yah Bless.
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=698485840711436&id=376627072897316
There is nothing on page 9 to explain this word choice. As for it being a double entendre, I fail to see what is "socially awkward, sexually suggestive, or offensive" here. The correct word for this type of speech would be a pun. (Note: TGC has altered both Solomon's Treasure and their version of the Book of Jubilees to explain what they mean by foreward. You can read that at this link on page 9.)
The claim Belgica makes about biodiversity determining the land of creation shows up later in the book on page 64 where Tim writes the following:
Mankind and animals rebooted during the Flood and are no firm scientific measure to determine the origin of species. However, marine life was not wiped out by the deluge as such. Therefore, we have a credible measure by which to allocate the root of life in region. If we can locate the most bio-diverse population on earth, we would have actually found the Land of Creation scientifically. In the past twenty or so years, marine biologists have now determined that this center of life, without even actually realizing what they have found, is he measure of the origin of species. Sorry Charlie, Darwin that is.
p.64-65
I hope my readers are astute enough to see what is wrong with these claims. For one thing they contradict each other. Belgica says biodiversity in toto can determine the land of creation. Tim says only marine biodiversity can determine the land of creation because everything else was wiped out by the flood. Though Tim does write about mammal diversity further on page 66 where he quotes a press release from Chicago's Field Museum.
Where is the world's greatest concentration of unique species of mammals? A team of American and Filipino authors have concluded it is Luzon Island, in the Philippines.
This PRESS RELEASE goes on to reference a scientific study which Tim neglects to reference. Imagine writing a book that is supposed to be "The Monumental Case For the Philippines No One Can Disprove" and instead of analyzing a scientific paper you are satisfied with quoting from a press release as your source. "Though this be madness, yet there is method in't." The method is to be as shallow as possible and we shall see it crop up several times in this book as Tim prefers to quote newspaper articles about studies rather than analyze any of the scientific studies to which they refer.
Neither Belgica nor Tim explains how locating the center of biodiversity can scientifically lead us to the land of creation. They just assume it. They don't quote any scientists or offer any reasonable proof why the most biodiverse land is the land of creation. The Earth is a large planet and it could be that God created different animals in different lands and not all in one place. How does Tim explain the unique biodiversity of Australia or the Amazon rainforest?
Noah's flood actually destroys Tim's thesis about marine biodiversity. Tim correctly notes that the fountains of the deep and the windows of heaven were opened during the flood. But if that is the case then all life in the sea would have been dispersed. If underground geysers were spouting up then they would spread abroad all they touch. Post-Flood there would be no center of marine biodiversity. This is especially case since Tim teaches there was no ocean before the flood. More on this below.
First let's look a little closer at what Tim's three sources say this diversity consists. These are all found on page 65.
Source one is from http://oneocean.org/flash/philippine_biodiversity.html.
The Philippines forms an ocean region that has long been recognized as the world’s center of marine biodiversity. With the Malay archipelago, Papua New Guinea and Australia, the country forms the ‘Coral Triangle,’ so-called because of the abundance of its coral reef life. Some 400-500 species in 90 genera of reef-forming corals are believed to exist in this region. Sulu-Sulawesi Sea, a 900,000-square-kilometer marine eco-region that lies at the apex of the Coral Triangle (70% in the Philippines, 20% Indonesia, 10% Malaysia), is home to some 2,500 species of fish.
A 2005 report (Carpenter 2005) suggests that the Philippines is not only part of the center but is, in fact, the epicenter of marine biodiversity, with the richest concentration of marine life on the entire planet.
That 2005 report is actually a little difficult to find but it can be read here:
 |
| The center of the center of marine shore fish biodiversity: The Philippine Islands |
Analysis of distribution data for 2983 species reveals a pattern of richness on a finer scale and identifies a peak of marine biodiversity in the central Philippine Islands and a secondary peak between peninsular Malaysia and Sumatra. This pattern is repeated in diverse habitat and higher taxa classes, most rigorously for marine shore fishes, supporting geohistorical hypotheses as the most general unifying explanations.
Why is this report not the source Timothy uses? Because it does not fit his thesis. The title of this report is: "The center of the center of marine shore fish biodiversity: The Philippine Islands." The focus of this study is not marine life in general but shore fish in particular! The other marine life which composes this diversity is mostly corals which form their habitat. But how exactly does this diversity prove that the Philippines is the land of creation? Tim does not say. He simply assumes it.
The next source is literally a Google search!!!
NOTE: This is an old search on Google from 4 years ago. CNN has since purged his report and link but we have it captured. Notice, it is also widely report by the Philippine Star, Manila Times, etc, Our route is taken from the CNN report but all are similar. We are keeping the one from our original video in which his was very widely circulated and quoted from CNN as you can see on this page.
If there is anything that can convict Timothy Jay Schwab of being a shameless fraud it has to be this. First of all this source is a Google search and not the actual article so he doesn't have it captured as he claims he has and if he does he should have used that instead of this malarkey. Second of all this CNN report is actually an ireport! The url is: http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOCS-783629. CNN retired this feature in 2015. Ireports were akin to Wikipedia and thus unreliable. Anyone could report on anything. I do not have this article so I cannot read their sources but neither can Timothy. Third of all this is a GOOGLE SEARCH!!! It does not prove a thing. A fine source for Tim's "Monumental Case For The Philippines No One Can Disprove."
His third source is from a newspaper and is of no account.
Some 100 scientists have declared the Philippines as the world’s "center of marine biodiversity" — not the Great Reef Barrier off east Australia — because of its vast species of marine and coastal resources, according to the World Bank.
That is sufficiently vague enough for Tim to prove his point and is not worth commenting on. Why not link to the World Bank study and explain exactly why the Philippines is the center of marine biodiversity? Why not tell us all more about this biodiversity and how it proves that the Philippines is the land of creation? Why is Tim content with newspapers and secondhand reports? Since Tim does not bother to link it I will not bother to search it out.
Let's return to the first source. In that source the marine biodiversity is located in the Sulu Sea. But Tim does not believe there was a Sulu Sea when God created the Earth! He teaches that the oceans and seas were formed as a result of the flood.
....after the Flood with the new World Ocean formed...
pg. 54
Prior to the Flood, the water system of the Earth was described as five mega-rivers with fountains of the great deep within. There is no mention of a world ocean....
pg. 269
...no ocean and a lot more land.
pg. 271
The implications of this teaching are obviously quite ridiculous. There would be no large bodies of water for the great whales to swim in. Imagine blue whales swimming in a river, even a mega-river. What is a mega-river anyway? Tim offers no precise explanation as to what they are or how they would function.
By the way those mega-rivers are now known to us as ocean trenches according to Tim. How does Tim know this? He doesn't. He quotes again from an article about a study and jumps to the conclusion that these trenches must have been rivers before the Flood buried them.
“If you drained all the water away, it would look exactly like a river system with bends and meanders, except there are no trees along the banks...”
– Dan Parsons, PhD, Sedimentologist, University of Hull, UK to BBC News (studies undersea rivers)
pg. 254-255 of the Sourcebook
Tim's source for the above quote is an interesting article at the BBC from which Tim draws unwarranted conclusions and assumptions which he cannot prove. Has he studied these trenches with underwater excavations? Of course not. It also references a study Tim neglects. But that is par for the course.
If there was no Sulu Sea then that means God did not create all marine life or an abundance of marine life in those waters. Instead where the Sulu Sea is now was the Garden of Eden. According to Tim the Garden of Eden is actually at the very bottom of the Sulu Sea. Tim thinks this scientifically proves the Philippines is the center of marine biodiversity.
As we covered before, the Carpenter Report, CNN, World Bank, and many others now record the Sulu Sea specifically the Verde island passage from Mindoro to Batangas as "The Center of the Center of Marine Biodiversity on Earth" and as we established, that indicates the origin of life on Earth not old bones of humans nor animals. Therefore, this even proves out scientifically as that is just above the Garden of Eden which is enclosed within the Earth. Somewhere to the East is an entrance and we do not claim to have found the entrance nor do we wish to attempt to enter. We believe we even find support in the Hebrew name if a large underwater reef famous for diving in the center of the Sulu Sea in fact just above the Garden.
Tubbataha Reef
Hebrew: Tub: טוּב: good things
Hebrew: ba: בָּא: in the
Hebrew: ta: תָּא :chamber
Hebrew: ha: הא: The
Our interpretation: The Good Things in the Chamber
To what chamber might this be referring? Perhaps the enclosed Garden of Eden just below. If this is coincidence, calculate the odds of such impossibility.
pg. 310-312
What nerve to claim he has covered the Carpenter report when that is not the case at all as I showed above. He does not even cite it!
If the Garden of Eden is BELOW the Sulu Sea then that means God did not create the Sulu Sea during the seven days of creation. Therefore there will have to be an alternate explanation as to why there is so much diversity in the region. It cannot be because God created it so because the Sulu Sea did not begin to exist until AFTER the flood according to Tim's cosmology. Has Tim not thought this through?
According to Wikipedia Tubbataha means:
The word tubbataha is a combination of two Sama-Bajau words: tubba and taha, which together means "a long reef exposed at low tide".
This is a good point to segue into Tim's use of Wikipedia. Tim cites Wikipedia authoritatively in this book.
This further affirms the claim that the Philippines was mining gold in 1000 B.C. as...Wikipedia and others stake.
pg. 43
But on page 99 he shows why Wikipedia is not a reliable source:
...someone has now changed that Wikipedia article...
We advise special caution when using Wikipedia as a source for research projects. Normal academic usage of Wikipedia and other encyclopedias is for getting the general facts of a problem and to gather keywords, references and bibliographical pointers, but not as a source in itself. Remember that Wikipedia is a wiki. Anyone in the world can edit an article, deleting accurate information or adding false information, which the reader may not recognize.
Tim would be wise to learn this lesson but as it stands Wikipedia is part of his "Monumental Case For the Philippines No One Can Disprove." All it takes is a few edits and his case is disproven.
The Garden of Eden is not the only thing the flood buried beneath the newly formed World Ocean. Lemuria and Atlantis were also buried in the deluge.
Many recall the fabled Lemuria. It is no sunken continent that disappeared into the sea. It was inundated and overcome by the new World Ocean as was Atlantis. If one desired to discover a treasure trove of prehistoric archaeology, they would need to penetrate into the Flood sediment there on the bottom and entire large societies would emerge. However, man has no such capabilities in this age. Is it not odd that the Flood buried this and Atlantis to such degrees that we cannot even locate them today?
pg. 277
It is quite fitting that Tim writes about the existence of those fictional places in a book that is full of fictions about the Philippines. Apparently Tim is unaware that Plato invented Atlantis to illustrate his philosophical ideas and Lemuria was postulated in the 19th century by a zoologist to explain why lemur fossils appeared in disparate places. Hence the name Lemuria. Any embellished accounts of Lemuria that Tim has read have most likely come from Theosophists such as Helena Blavatsky who made Lemuria a central part of her occult teachings. This passage is tainted with occult, new-age quackery.
Speaking of occult, new-age quackery Zechariah Sitchin's work forms part of Tim's "Monumental Case For the Philippines No One Can Disprove." He is the author of the famous Earth Chronicles series of books where he writes about ancient aliens visiting the earth and creating man.
However, in the Book of Enki, the Nephilim also built an ark which landed on Turkey on their Mount of Salvation now called Ararat or near there. That's not Noah.
pg. 319
Is this some kind of joke? Is Tim for real? Is he actually interpreting the Bible narrative of the flood through the Book of Enki which is about aliens who came to earth to mine for gold and genetically engineered mankind to be their slaves!!?
Some 445,000 years ago, astronauts from another planet came to Earth in search of gold. Splashing down in one of Earth's seas, they waded ashore and established Eridu, "Home in the Faraway." In time the initial settlement expanded to a full-fledged Mission Earth-with a Mission Control Center, a spaceport, mining operations, and even a way station on Mars. Short of manpower, the astronauts employed genetic engineering to fashion Primitive Workers-Homo sapiens. The Deluge that catastrophically swept over the Earth required a fresh start; the astronauts became gods, granting Mankind civilization, teaching it to worship. Then, about four thousand years ago, all that had been achieved unraveled in a nuclear calamity, brought about by the visitors to Earth in the course of their own rivalries and wars.
Mt. Ararat in Turkey has the wrong name, in the wrong direction, 12,000' too short, is not mountains but is the site where the Nephilim claim to have landed when they survived.
 |
| https://www.ophirinstitute.com/sources |
Guess what else forms part of Tim's "Monumental Case For The Philippines No One Can Disprove." A rant against Oprah Winfrey!
 |
| pg. 57 |
We know media mogul, Oprah, would like to disparage Yahuah because He supposedly told Adam where the gold was which is complete ignorance as He never had to tell Adam where the gold was because Adam was created in the Land of Gold. It is the marker resource in identifying this region which is preserved to this day. Let us not pretend Oprah, as a billionaire is not serving Mammon (god of money) herself thus this was a very hypocritical statement from her.
What is he talking about? Why is this in the book? What does this have to do with anything!? I tried to look this up and I think it has to do with her review of John Steinbeck's book East of Eden but I just don't know and since Tim does not tell us I'm not going to bother to search further.
Ezekiel 38:13 KJV
Sheba, and Dedan, and the merchants of Tarshish, with all the young lions thereof, shall say unto thee, Art thou come to take a spoil? hast thou gathered thy company to take a prey? to carry away silver and gold, to take away cattle and goods, to take a great spoil?
Some focus on the young lions in this passage. The word כְּפִיר: kephiyr is also defined "village (as covered by walls)" which the Philippines has walls or concrete especially fences everywhere. It is one of the first icons once notices when they visit there.
pg. 77
Again, this is where some attempt to force Britain into this when it is interpreted "young lions." However the word in Hebrew is also defined as "a village covered by walls." Anyone visiting the Philippines quickly notices the entire nation is a walled village. Most properties are fenced in with large concrete walls or the like.This is a further fit to the rest of Isaiah's prophecies about the Philippines in context as Ezekiel knew as well the significance of this land.pg. 251
Now that we know who is not the Queen of Sheba is there a way to pinpoint where she originated? We believe this can be accomplished by using the Hebrew language in her island for Sheba is in fact Cebu.
pg. 84
The name "Cebu" came from the old Cebuano word sibu or sibo ("trade"), a shortened form of sinibuayng hingpit ("the place for trading"). It was originally applied to the harbors of the town of Sugbu, the ancient name for Cebu City. Sugbu or Sugbo, in turn, was derived from the Old Cebuano term for "scorched earth" or "great fire"
Ophir had a brother named Sheba had a descended ruling his region in 970 B.C. who was visited by Solomon's navy in her land of Sheba...
pg. 78-79
Matthew 12:42 KJV (Parallel in Luke 11:30)
The queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: for she came from the uttermost parts of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and, behold, a greater than Solomon is here.
The Queen of the South still remains a designation of Cebu and Iloilo to this day and she will rise up. This means Messiah knew she would be put down for a season. She will judge this generation which is the final generation as in the passage, He defines this era where people will be seven more times demon possessed. Who came to hear the wisdom of Solomon? The Queen of Sheba. This is the Philippines which ascends to a position on the world amphitheater . It ill have a say in the judgement of the world and it's hierarchy. this is significant. We believe we are already beginning to witness the grass roots moment which will lead to this fulfillment. Ezekiel confirms the timing as Sheba, Tarshish and DDN, Philippines will rise up early in the narrative not at the end.
pg. 252
These isles in the East will judge the New World Order and the final generation not on Judgement Day but now. In order to become a judge one must have an adherence to the law or they have no measure by which to judge. Wait til you find out Yahuah will restore His law in the archipelago.pg. 245
Matthew 12:41
Jonah 1:17 KJVNow the LORD had prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah. And Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights.We know in Sunday school we are told this was a whale. However, it says simply great fish. Whatever it was Jonah survived in it's belly for three days and nights. We have no hesitation in positing on a thought on this however. Science has proven a man could not likely survive in a whale's stomach and it leaves scholars with no answer. So consider this as a theory on this side note. This would have to be a sea creature with the capacity for Jonah to breath while inside it's inners and large enough to support a man. This stumps the best of scholars if they are honest about it. Our theory is this may have been, and we cannot prove this, Leviathan, the great sea creature recorded in the Book of Job as living at the bottom of the sea but also breathing fire. This requires oxygen within his apparatus and he was massive in size thus it would make sense that Yahuah sent Leviathan to swallow Jonah. Again, we cannot prove that as we have yet to see Leviathan but it does make sense.pg. 121
If Jonah was only headed to Spain or Britain, then he would have been swallowed in the Mediterranean Sea which is certainly not known for the severe tempests over the ocean like this.pg. 123
Lanzones appears to be the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil in Enoch's description as it is a perfect fit in every way. Could there be such a history that Lanzones could be poison?Lanzones originates in the Tagalog word Lason for "poison to morals or mind." This is perfectly fitting an very similar to the Hebrew "Lashon" which denotes essentially a poison tongue in some applications and even a golden wedge or bar in others tying to Ophir and Havilah. To the right, you will notice insets of the Carob and Lanzones Trees. Notice the leaves and branches revery similar as Enoch recorded. The Lanzones fruit certainly appears as grapes growing on a tree as described.Can we really say this? Well, we were not there but in reading Enoch's very obvious reference this does match. However, we are not the first to say so as Philippines legend concurs. It was purged of such poison but one must ask how this can possibly end up matching the Book of Enoch
pg. 316
 |
| pg.317 |
According to this oral legend passed through generations in Laguna, Lanzones was once known to be poison. Where might a legend like that derive? The Book of Enoch yet again? An angel removed the poison and the tree was good to eat after that. Of course, this is a legend and there is no need to verify the story as much as we realize, legends like this usually have some sort of basis in ancient events many times. In this case, this happens to match what Enoch was describing in the Book of Enoch. Thus, we believe there is a connection.pg. 318
Though our leader who is of mixed Native American and European descent.......pg. 18Some of this author's ancestors were Native American Indians who were all but wiped from the face of the Earth when they rebranded them as "savages."pg. 252
In history, red skin is considered that of Native American Indian or the Filipino.
