Perhaps (again) the first interaction was a thunderbolt between the approaching planet and Earth, or the planetary system the Earth was in. This thunderbolt could have occurred when the double layer of the approaching planet met the double layer of the Earth system of planets, which could have been the double layer of Saturn ( at the edge of it's magnetosphere). Then there could well have been a few weeks before a much closer encounter between the approaching planet and Earth. Also such an immense thunderbolt could transmute Earth rocks so as to make the fragments produced look alien.
So here is where Dwardu could help, because there would have been stories about the approaching planet and the thunderbolt which effects were survivable. And then later came possibly more thunderbolts, but also tsunamis and then the other planets receding with the extremely cold conditions.
I meant mammoths instead of bison in my previous post, but with similar results. Mo
Lloyd
Re: Saturn System Breakup 5,000 Years Ago
The Great Deep Was in the Sky, Not on Earth * This is to better answer the previous questions that doubted that the "Great Deep" meant the sky. Cardona states on page 268 of his first book, God Star, under the heading The Waters of Chaos, the following:
Up until 1979, I had held the view that the waters of chaos had actually been terrestrial. In fact I had already earlier described these waters as having been piled up in a tidal heap due to the gravitational pull of Saturn which hovered overhead. Although I still hold to a collection of water piled up at Earth's north polar regions, a topic which will be explored in a future volume, I eventually came to realize, primarily on following the advice of Roger Ashton and David Lorton, to reconsider ancient testimony concerning the celestial nature of the waters of chaos spoken of in relation to Creation. The celestial nature of these waters is perhaps best indicated in Egyptian myth. Traditionally, the Egyptian waters of chaos which, as we have just seen, were collectively known as Nu, were unequivocally described as having been in the sky. Of that there was naver any doubt. As Budge tells us, "the name Nu ... is expressed by three vases of water which indicate the sound, and the outstretched heaven ... and the determinative for water ... and the sign for 'god,' all of which show that this deity was the god of the watery mass in the sky." Moreover, in a hymn to Ra, we read: "Praise be to thee, O Ra ... thou shining one who dost send forth light upon the waters of heaven." Of Osiris also, it was said that "[his] water is in heaven." - In the Egyptian Book of the Dead, Ra is also made to utter: "I am the Great God who created himself." It is then asked: "Who is he?" And the answer is given: "The Great God who created himself is the water — it is the Abyss, the Father of the Gods." For that reason Ra was also known as Akeb-ur, the "god of the great celestial waters."
* He goes on to quote similar statements from the Indic Satapatha Brahmana and the Rig Veda, the Babylonian Enuma Elish, the Laws of Manu, the Bible etc. The rest of the book also explains his reasons for concluding that these waters were in the form of a circumstellar disk around Saturn and other related matters. North Polar Bulge * As you can see above, Cardona still thinks that there was a bulge at Earth's north pole, a bulge of land and water. The bulge must have been where the Arctic Ocean is now, or the waters must have settled down or been absorbed into the plasma column during the Golden Age, because the mammoths and other creatures and plants lived around the Arctic Ocean until the breakup. God Star goes on to describe evidence for the polar bulge etc.
Thunderbird
Re: Saturn System Breakup 5,000 Years Ago
Hello...
Have shared Saturn Theory over at Graham Hancocks forum for many years.
My personal view of Saturn Theory is that Saturn is a capture out of Sagittarius Dwarf Galaxy [sagDEG], /capture from the interface region of the 2 Galaxies, yet here....the date backward in time may leg out quite far.
Am familiar with Wal Thornhills view of electrical capture, what gives me pause,...is the Moon [Luna] I see her as a capture after the Earth was free of orbital lock to Saturn, where Earth,Mars and possibly another cored world [Exp planet hyp]....were in orbital diversion until capture/set into AU by the Sun.
Posnansky discovered the elongated 3x skulls of a race of giants in the flood alluvials around Tiwanaku, dates range from 13,000 bc...to possibly 26,000bc.
Mythology from this region speaks of a time before the Moon, Tiwanaku is called the City of the Moon, Horbiger/Bellamy and others consider the possibility of 1 or 2 smaller satellite moons breaking up near Earth. creating tidal distortions, these events and Luna's capture [which may have driven the smaller satellites in to break up], may have heaped up oceans equatorial,...with that breaking and surging towards the poles, which over topped continental areas, aka the destruction evidence noted by Velikovsky.
this may also have cause inertial wave form thru Earths atmosphere,...pulling down super cooled air and gases/plasma into Troposphere where it flash froze the landscape.
While outside EU theory....The GP of Giza which may* be from pre 10,000bc , has values for the Moon synced to its design ,hinting that Luna was captured before it was completed..or built. there is also the ident of the Zodiac ages of Cancer and Gemini, Cancer with its signatory boat theme suggesting migrations. If Earth was enveloped in Saturns sheath,....people may not have been able to see the stars,..or understand precession. Cancer and Gemini both reflect builder ages with mankind on the move and learning fast [Gemini...written form,trade,law societal architecture]
Alan Alfords adoption theory plugs in well here,...mankind migrated after catastrophism and adopted the extant ruins from long ages past. The time for Luna's capture is of high import when considering Saturn theory.
Dave
Re: Saturn System Breakup 5,000 Years Ago
Surely there were two components of the Axis Mundi between the Earth and Saturn: The World Mountain and The Tree of Life (or Plasma Column; I prefer tornadic Birkeland currents) with its many branches. When the column collapsed, ("slain" by Mars or Saturn and thereby severing Earth from Heaven), flooding the Earth, the World Mountain also collapsed, the effects of which are still reverberating today in the Northern Hemisphere. The salt water of the global flood could well have come from Saturn - http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... ristensen/
I think that Earth's electric gravity, and consequently all inertial mass, would have been minimal at that time (and way before the dinosaurs; also explains giant humans walking the Earth in those days) and for many decades, which may have been when the massive megaliths were built - Stonehenge, Giza pyramids etc.- all commemorating/worshipping Mars, Venus and the receding Saturn. Many Venus temple-observatories were also built - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bryn_Celli_Ddu ; http://www.anglesey-hidden-gem.com/bryn-celli-ddu.html - and human sacrifices made to her because she was mightily feared. The Mayans gave the Birth of Venus circa 3000 BC and based their famous calendar on this event. (Mainstream say that the Birth of Venus was when the planet was first spotted transitting the present Sun. Codswallop, I say).
From "Predicting the Past" by Roger Westcott (a good read, by-the-way, although I disagree with much that he writes): "... the well-frozen corpse of a Siberian mammoth ... its hide yielded a radio-carbon age of about 40,000 years, whereas the buttercups and other surprisingly non-Arctric plants in its stomach yielded the discrepant age of about 6,000 years. ... the discrepancy is far better explained [than mainstream "contamination"] by relative vulnerability to sudden catastrophic changes - stomach contents being shielded from the atmosphere should show a more reliable date, while the hide ... would indicate an earlier date based on the brief but massive injection of radioactivity into the air." IMO, by the same token, the buttercups are also given a much too early date.
So, I think we can safely say that the Saturnian break-up was much less than 6,000 years ago.
Dave
Re: Saturn System Breakup 5,000 Years Ago
Official timeline of ancient Egypt, that doesn't even take into account multiple parallel dynasties which, on that basis alone, makes it a monumental lie:
In the preface to the new edition of Newton's book, Newton's Revised History of Ancient Kingdoms, the reviser states:
"It is fascinating to see modern scholarship worship Manetho's dynasties of kings as if it were the Gold Standard. They know it contradicts other portions of history, but nonetheless, they cling to it like a drowning man to a piece of flotsam. Newton demonstrates that Manetho's dynasties are almost a complete work of fiction, and bad fiction, at that! They were so bad that priests who created them forgot to pass their lies onto the next generation of priests, and in a short time, the dynasties were soon forgotten by the Egyptian priests. By the time Diodorus Siculus wrote about two hundred years later, these dynasties were completely forgotten, and not a word of them was mentioned to Diodorus. Likewise, the Egyptian priests with whom Herodotus talked two hundered years earlier knew absolutely nothing of these dynasties. If they had known of them, why did they withhold this information from Herodotus? It is these fictitious dynasties that are used to date the Great Pyramid at around 2800 B.C. instead of around 800 B.C., and the same dynasties are the basis for the greatly exaggerated early Egyptian history. From the time of Herodotus to the time of Manetho, the list of kings covered from Herodotus had grown from slightly more than twenty to over one hundred and thirty and the time period had magically expanded from about five hundred years to well over twenty-seven hundred years. There are better rotten reeds to lean on when trying to recreate Egyptian history than the mess recorded by Manetho. Newton shows us a better way."
When you consider that this timeline is the bedrock on which ALL the chronology of ancient history is built, no wonder historians are all over the shop in their interpretations of the past. Unbelievable, disgraceful and inexcusable.
The question is: WHO is ensuring that these lies persist? When we have found the answer to that, then we shall know who is controlling all our lives.
promethean
Re: Saturn System Breakup 5,000 Years Ago
Thought you might be interested in this one : http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-19580558
"All we need for cloning is one living cell..."
Dave
Re: Saturn System Breakup 5,000 Years Ago
On a lighter note (some might say darker): No way could mtDNA or DNA - a code for building proteins, each with a very strict sequence of amino acids - have been spontaneously assembled by a mainstream-alleged non-intelligent entity known as Nature. Which came first - chicken or egg? Building a code requires serious planning. Ergo there is super-intelligence in the Universe and an universal information stream emanating from somewhere which can update DNA. This invalidates Darwin's hogwash (one specie cannot evolve into another by non-intelligent natural selection - what changes the DNA? The probability of many random benevolent changes occurring simultaneously by accident is statistically impossible) and kicks Herr Professor Dick Dawkins (methinks he protesteth too much) into touch.
Ponder this: If the Universe is eternal then a DNA package will be assembled that is exactly the same as the package I was born with. I will occur time and again on this planet or, if DNA is ubiquitous, on any other hospitable one. And so will you. This is not a high probability. It is inevitable.
Frozen Mammoths etc * In this post on page one of this thread http://thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&~ I quoted Brown regarding mammoths etc found in frozen conditions. * This http://www.aaps-journal.org/pdf/How+to+Mummify+a+Dinosaur.p~ says none were found frozen in ice, although I think Brown said some were found within rock ice, which is like sleet, not like a frozen pool or body of water. However, Brown also said some fish and oxen were found in frozen streams of water. Here's what the above PDF article says:
Tolmachoff noted that one of the best ways to find a mammoth is by a distinctive decay smell, even when no trace of the carcass appears at the surface. All specimens of mammoths found to date show some decay. None are flash-frozen as alleged by Velikovsky (1956) and by some Creationists (e.g., Brown 1995). The levels of decay show that there was some passage of time between death and burial by sediments; and none of the specimens occur frozen in ice, although ice wedges are occasionally found in the surrounding sediments. Studies of DNA from the various frozen mammal carcasses (e.g., Greenwood and others,1999) show some breakdown so that no complete DNA strands remain. However, by overlapping segments on paper [?], it is possible to reconstruct the DNA sequence for many of these extinct mammals. These results show that the mammoth is more closely related to the Asian elephant than to the African elephant (Greenwood and others, 1999).
* While this says decay set in before the mammoths were frozen, and that they were not flash-frozen, the animals that are found standing or sitting upright must have been buried while in those positions, so they must have been alive in order to maintain those positions, until they were at least partially buried, like up to the knees or hips. They must have been buried and frozen solid within hours, so not much decay could have occurred initially. But they remained entombed for thousands of years. I suspect that the decay likely occurred when the sediment around them eroded away enough that they were then near the surface. When they were first frozen, they were exposed to temperatures below -175 degrees F. The temperature of the sediments they were buried in probably remained that cold for a few hours, or up to a few months at most, since the surrounding air and ground were then at much warmer temperatures. After that the temperature likely averaged around 0 degrees F in permafrost. Those that eventually were near the eroded surface would have been partially above the permafrost, so they would have begun to thaw each summer probably for hundreds of years, enough to allow some decay.
Dave
Re: Saturn System Breakup 5,000 Years Ago
Apocalypse is a Greek word meaning "Unveiling" and was originally applied to the revelation of the new Earth, new Heaven, and a new World - i.e. the Saturn System (The Otherworld) break-up and the creation of the present Solar System, along with the unveiling of the present Sun, Moon and the stars.
IMO, what we see enacted at Chichén Itzá on the Northern side of the Temple of Kukulkan is the global flood - caused by the collapse of the Earth-Saturn coiled Birkeland currents (i.e. The Feathered Serpent) - cascading down the World Mountain. To most of our ancestors, this is when their "Universe" (or a different sun) was created or unveiled and when time began. Later on, when the orbits of the planets had settled down, solar and lunar calendars could be calculated and formulated. But they still commemorated this one event that occurred some 5000 years ago. Most of the World's megalithic structures commemorate the Saturnian System in one form or another, whether for Saturn-Venus-Mars worship, sacrifice, burial or celebration; for obsessive observation of the much-feared ex-comet planet Venus; or for present Solar System time-keeping.
Alternatively, it could be commemorating the Birth of Venus.
saul
Re: Saturn System Breakup 5,000 Years Ago
Dave wrote: Official timeline of ancient Egypt, that doesn't even take into account multiple parallel dynasties which, on that basis alone, makes it a monumental lie:
It's things like this that make some of these "historical observations" hard to believe. Where do all those romanizations come from? I don't read ancient Egyptian, but I know that even looking at documents in English from 100 years ago, history is not so clear.
Claiming that the Earth (our planet) was a moon of Saturn (the ringed planet) based on translations of translations of documents of unclear motivation? Not very convincing.
However for now I will just add flames to the fire and point out that in Chinese 土星 is Saturn which is literally "Earth star".
Lloyd
Re: Saturn System Breakup 5,000 Years Ago
Saul said: Claiming that the Earth (our planet) was a moon of Saturn (the ringed planet) based on translations of translations of documents of unclear motivation? Not very convincing.
* You're jumping to wrong conclusions. Talbott, Cardona, Cochrane et al do not engage in such shoddy research as what you imply. They are very thorough and careful. They take great pains to find the best translations and they use much evidence besides ancient writings.
saul
Re: Saturn System Breakup 5,000 Years Ago
Lloyd wrote:
Saul said: Claiming that the Earth (our planet) was a moon of Saturn (the ringed planet) based on translations of translations of documents of unclear motivation? Not very convincing.
* You're jumping to wrong conclusions. Talbott, Cardona, Cochrane et al do not engage in such shoddy research as what you imply. They are very thorough and careful. They take great pains to find the best translations and they use much evidence besides ancient writings.
Hi Lloyd, I'm not suggesting shoddy research was employed.. merely pointing out the quality of evidence that these researchers whom I respect (Hey, I'm here for a reason) have at their disposal. I would be interested to hear them comment on the twist and turns of linguistic meanings and how that could affect the interpretation of ancient texts. For example, when somebody was speaking of Kronos 2000 years ago, why should we assume they are referring to exactly that object which we call the 6th planet? Clearly there are other meanings as well. Note however that this problem doesn't really apply to such things as the "stick man" figures being seen around the world.
knomegnome
Re: Saturn System Breakup 5,000 Years Ago
Are people really saying here that DNA couldn't have been assembled by evolutionary processes? Really?
The divine watchmaker argument has been dispensed with as of the late 19th century, and there are serious and fatal scientific flaws with the idea that has been presented as "unlikely as a 747 being assembled by a hurricane from a junkyard" The fellow who said that didn't understand anything about Evolution or probability... it is precisely because evolution is the NON random selection of desirable traits by environmental pressure that it works. It is not a random process! To use his same example, if you assume that some selector was walking through a junkyard grabbing random pieces, and each time he put a piece together he received clues that it was the right or wrong piece to assemble a 747 jet, he would have a 100% chance of assembling one.. that is how evolution actually works.
Evolution happened.. it works. We even use evolution in PRODUCING code now (Genetic Algorithms) and it has produced code and structures of astonishing complexity. There is no debate about whether Evolution happened.. only HOW it happened. What causes inter-species jumps? etc.
EU in no way demolishes evolution. It certainly puts to the test our ideas of recent history, and I'm happy to admit that G might be flexible, and so dinosaurs roamed on an earth that had less gravity, but I'm not going to buy that we existed at the same time as dinosaurs without a hell of a lot of evidence. Going after Evolution is a dead end here, guys, and pursuing it this way will only serve to marginalize you. Feel free to cogitate, but if your goal is to advance our knowledge, I would look elsewhere.
Dave
Re: Saturn System Breakup 5,000 Years Ago
Get real, knomegnome. NON-INTELLIGENT natural processes cannot create, build and assemble a code and the means to read that code to produce coherent proteins of up to 20 different amino acids, regardless of the time available. That's like saying that a million monkeys with typewriters can type all the works of Shakespeare word for word IN CODE and then create and engineer a mechanism that transcribes that code into meaningful Elizabethan English. Now THAT requires INTELLIGENCE.
Give us another example of any other natural code. There might be small evolutions WITHIN a species caused by beneficial random mutations of the DNA that miraculously adapt it better to its environment but there is NO PROOF WHATSOEVER that one specie can evolve into a different specie by non-intelligent random DNA mutations. ZILCH. NADA. NONE.
nick c
Re: Saturn System Breakup 5,000 Years Ago
knomegnome wrote: There is no debate about whether Evolution happened.. only HOW it happened. What causes inter-species jumps? etc....... EU in no way demolishes evolution.
I agree. The problem is with conventional Darwinian evolution and the gradualist paradigm. Natural selection is a means by which a species adapts to changes in the environment. If that process cannot serve the species, because the environmental changes are too extreme and rapid, then the species becomes extinct. Natural selection does not seem to be able to create new species. The fossil/geological record shows that the Earth has been subjected to multiple globe altering catastrophes that resulted in mass extinctions and the subsequent appearance of new species. Within the catastrophic paradigm (which, like it or not, is the intellectual parent of the EU) it is reasonable to assume that a massive assault on the biosphere of planetary scale electrical discharges (with all sorts of accompanying radiations, vulcanisms, tectonic activities, floods, winds, and possible changes in the motions and orientation of the planet) is the mechanism of rapid cataclysmic evolution. This hypothesis of cataclysmic evolution and the effects of massive doses of EM radiations upon the genome is an area for future exploration and experimentation by researchers. The status quo's vested interest in the gradualist paradigm (Lyell/Darwin) has retarded the advancement of knowledge in this area.
