Rules * This Planetary Science board is for discussion of the following. - Historic planetary instability and catastrophe. - Evidence for electrical scarring on planets and moons. - Electrical events in today's solar system. - Electric Earth. * That's what I propose to discuss here. Saturn Theories * This theory, that Earth was a moon of Saturn, is accepted by most or all of the Thunderbolts team. Talbott wrote about it in his 1980 book, The Saturn Myth. Cardona has written 3 big books about it so far, called God Star, Flare Star and Primordial Star, and hopes to write a few more. Velikovsky also thought that Earth was a moon of Saturn and initially intended to discuss that in the first part of his 1950 book, Worlds in Collision. But the publisher suggested writing a second book about it later, which he never did. Talbott and Cardona got their initial ideas from Velikovsky. Stationary Saturn in Myths * Talbott found in studying ancient myths that Saturn occupied a stationary position in the sky in ancient times. It sounded preposterous, but he felt that the myths should lead the way in this science to see where they could take us, rather than letting astronomy or geology lead the way. Several interesting theories were developed by several researchers in the 80s and 90s, but Thornhill came up with the apparently most likely theory, that Saturn was a brown dwarf star that was initially outside the Solar System. At least I think that was all his idea. I'm not sure. Comet-like Saturn * Now Cardona has taken that a step further and describes ancient Saturn as a comet-like brown dwarf star. Comets have tails and travel on elongated orbits that bring them into constantly changing charge environments. Brown dwarfs travel independent paths in the galaxy and also are influenced by changing charge environments, which give them bipolar jets, like comet tails. * Before the comet, SL9 struck Jupiter in 1994, it was in many pieces all moving in single file, one behind another. That's how Earth followed Saturn before they arrived at the Solar System's asteroid belt, where the Saturn System broke up. * Brown dwarf jets are seen at the front and back of the stars, leading and following, according to Cardona. So Earth traveled in Saturn's trailing jet. Saturn's electric and magnetic fields apparently constrained the Earth to move with its north pole facing and aligned with Saturn's south pole. * So we finally have an answer to the question of how Saturn could have remained fixed in the sky above Earth's north pole, as the ancient myths say. Saturn Flares * Cardona also found that brown dwarfs periodically flare up like the Sun, only much brighter, for their distances. He seems to state that, when the flares occur, the bipolar jets are interrupted, and when the flares end, the jets resume. The brown dwarf flares seem to be huge electrical double layers explosions, described by Alfven, Thornhill, Stephen Smith et al. See some of the TPODs for Smith's descriptions. Rock Formation * Cardona says Saturn seems to have rained down detritus onto Earth from the flares, which formed much of the Earth's rocky mantle. Mars was likely also a moon of Saturn and the detritus formed rock layers there too. The detritus fell mostly on the northern hemisphere, forming a supercontinent, centered on the north pole. * I'll stop there for now and try to post a potentially new (for me) insight soon.
Lloyd
Re: Earth Was a Moon of Saturn
Continental Drift in Cardona's Saturn Theory * Cardona says there's evidence of former Earth expansion and contraction, as well as continental drift without subduction. And it wasn't really a drift, but a fast sliding movement. The Earth's crust slid over the Moho layer, during Saturn flares, because flares halted rotation of Earth's core. Continental sliding, instead of drift, without subduction, has very good evidence. The coasts of the east and west hemisphere continents fit together very well, suggesting that they were once joined together, then broke apart. The fit isn't conclusive by itself, but the fossils and rock types on the opposing shores also match very well, and that makes it highly probable that they were once joined. Supercontinent * As I said in the first post, the supercontinent was formed from Saturn detritus during flares. Think of the supercontinent at the north pole as being all the present continents joined together with Africa in the middle of the supercontinent and the others all around Africa, somewhat as in the upper left image below. (I think Cardona's idea is that Antarctica was in the center of the supercontinent and at the south pole, but I don't know what his evidence is for that.) Anyway, when Saturn's flare stopped the Earth's core rotation, the supercontinent slid over the plasma Moho layer, which is about 7 to 30 kilometers deep, and the continents broke apart and moved to the equator, as shown in the last 3 images below. The outer periphery of the supercontinent would have had the most momentum, like ice skaters playing crack the whip, and heating over the Moho layer would have melted rock strata enough to break apart. Impact * But I think one additional event occurred, that shocked the supercontinent, breaking it apart and causing mountain ranges to form, as almost explained at http://newgeology.us. That site says a large meteorite struck at what is now off of Somalia in east Africa, but I think it was megalightning from Saturn that struck there instead. Or it may have been both. As the website explains, the impact was like hitting a slab of ice with a sledge hammer, breaking the slab into pieces that slid off in different directions. The motions of the continents seem to all be away from the area near Somalia. (I don't think India was ever separated from Asia though.) Axis Shift * After the continents reached the equator, with Africa still at the north pole, Earth's axis shifted by 90 degrees, putting Africa on the new equator. Previous Supercontinent * During the prior Saturn flare a similar smaller supercontinent appears to have formed and broke up, which left the East Pacific Rise, whereas the last flare 10,000 BP left the Mid Atlantic Ridge. http://www.seafriends.org.nz/oceano/ocean20.gif
biknewb
Re: Earth Was a Moon of Saturn
Shifting of the Earth axis doesn't look very hard when written in words. But anyone contemplating these events should at least once hold a spinning bicycle wheel and try to shift the axis 90 degrees. Even a mildly spinning mass will strongly resist change.
jim1967
Re: Earth Was a Moon of Saturn
Excellent summarization Lloyd! I've been in the Saturnist camp since being introduced to it here on TB. Not sure if I agree with the continental drift theory though. I'm a big proponent of the expanding earth theory, but nothing about that theory precludes adhering to the Saturn Theory. Just my two cents. Keep up the good work! Jim
Lloyd
Re: Earth Was a Moon of Saturn
Africa not in Cardona's Theory * Cardona wants it clarified that the idea of Africa being in the center of the former supercontinent is not his idea. I stated that above in parentheses, but he doesn't seem to think that's clear enough. So is it clear now? I think his idea, as I said above, is that Antarctica was in the center. Axis Shifting Problem
Bik said: Shifting of the Earth axis doesn't look very hard when written in words. But anyone contemplating these events should at least once hold a spinning bicycle wheel and try to shift the axis 90 degrees. Even a mildly spinning mass will strongly resist change.
* Thanks for the reminder. It's helpful to look for weak points of any theory. I'm not sure how relevant that fact would be when a Saturn flare would put an electrical brake on Earth's core rotation. Once the continents start sliding after the core stops, when the core resumes spinning, the continents could continue to slide for some time somewhat independently of the core, it seems. But I don't know if there's anything that would cause the center of the supercontinent, Africa, to end up 90 degrees from where it started. Continental Sliding vs. Earth Expansion * Jim, the continental sliding idea seems to me to be a strong point of this theory, moreso than Earth expansion, although I mentioned that Cardona thinks Earth has both expanded and contracted. What form of expansion do you find most persuasive? Internal or external? And via what mechanism?
longcircuit
Re: Earth Was a Moon of Saturn
My only question: how will anyone be able to prove any of this?
longcircuit
MattEU
Re: Earth Was a Moon of Saturn
longcircuit wrote: My only question: how will anyone be able to prove any of this?
longcircuit
That is very easy to do.
Dont we propose the idea or theory, then as our scientific research shows that each part of it is not correct we modify it, then as the new modified theory is incorrect we modify that ... Then after 50 years we claim that as the theory predicted 5% of the latest very surprising results, therefore the whole theory is correct and has always been correct. Thats how our bigger and better scientific brothers do it and it works for them ... Black Holes, Big Bang Theory, Evolution Theory etc
So, if we can prove that Saturn exists and the Earth exists I think its case solved.
But on a more serious note, that may not put me in a good light with the higher beings of thunderbolts and i can not believe i am actually going to post this ... does it seem to any one else that perhaps the leading thunderbolts people seem to only accept their version of the Saturn Theory or how our solar system came into its recent order, that other theories are not given much of a chance and they seem a bit obsessive–compulsive disorder about the whole thing?
That reads very harsh in black and light blue!
dahlenaz
Re: Earth Was a Moon of Saturn
biknewb wrote: Shifting of the Earth axis doesn't look very hard when written in words. But anyone contemplating these events should at least once hold a spinning bicycle wheel and try to shift the axis 90 degrees. Even a mildly spinning mass will strongly resist change.
Does this analogy really apply to the circumstances of this planetary reconstruction? It seems that it is missing some important factors, such as forces involving multiple objects, break-away forces or rebound forces. I think the principle detail is that one or more bodies were torn away from their former orientation. I cannot imagine this would have any similarity to attempting to change tilt by forces applied at the axis of a spinning wheel. A better example might come from the interaction between a spinning ball and a swung bat, but this is still an inadequate analogy. There is another weakness that may also need attention. Do moons rotate on their axis in the same way as a planet? Did earth depart from the colinear arrangement proposed by D. Talbott from an axial position or as an orbiting moon? d...z
Sparky
Re: Earth Was a Moon of Saturn
longcircuit wrote: My only question: how will anyone be able to prove any of this?
longcircuit
Though i agree that what varied evidence we have strongly suggests that these theories are valid, there is still a great deal of imagination/speculation involved, which many believe is a form of proof.
The only proof that i can think of is documentation in video form, which ET's may have witnessed and, hopefully they will publish on the most scientific cited media, utube. Then the only question will be, how much can we trust lizards?
..
longcircuit
Re: Earth Was a Moon of Saturn
Sparky: (Groan) Okay, maybe I deserved that.
MattEU: I should have been clearer. Although I've read that some mainstream astronomers now think Jupiter and Saturn may be "failed" brown dwarves, won't Saturnian cosmology have to prove Saturn was a "successful" brown dwarf? Then, won't it have to show that Earth was a satellite of Saturn? How can anyone do this?
It's one thing to expound a theory of electric stars, galaxies, and planets. It's a wholly other thing to posit that: Earth was once a moon of a brown dwarf star we now call Saturn; that at some time in the not-very-distant past, the Saturnian system somehow was captured by the Sun (and its satellites, assuming it had any); that the capture somehow stripped Earth from its orbit around Saturn; and that the current result of the capture is the Solar System we know today. Never mind that, in an Electric Universe, such a series of events is possible—how will one show that it happened?
longcircuit
starbiter
Re: Earth Was a Moon of Saturn
Hello Longcircuit: I think myth and legend are the only way to understand the Saturnian System. If this is not convincing there will be a problem. I don't think You will find something physical.
Earth geology is a different matter.
The Velikovsky version of the Saturnian System is in the link below, which i have posted previously.
Good point about myth and legend. It's worth noting they accord better with a Saturnian cosmology than with the standard model of accretion from dust and gas. Interesting though this is, it's only suggestive of what might have been. I think it's a waste of time for the EU community to speculate whether or not Earth was a moon of Saturn. We should instead focus on the predictive power the theory gives (cf. Thornhill and Comet Tempel 1), and on showing to the wider world how well it explains terrestrial geology, as you note.
longcircuit
nick c
Re: Earth Was a Moon of Saturn
hi Longcircuit,
I think it's a waste of time for the EU community to speculate whether or not Earth was a moon of Saturn. We should instead focus on the predictive power the theory gives (cf. Thornhill and Comet Tempel 1), and on showing to the wider world how well it explains terrestrial geology, as you note.
I respect that opinion, but I will let you in on a little secret The Electric Universe originated when Wal Thornhill tried to figure out how the Earth could have gone from being a satellite of a brown dwarf to it's present situation. That trail led him into...the Electric Universe! So without the Saturn/brown dwarf hypothesis, no EU. Now that does not mean the hypothesis is correct, but history tells us that the road to discovery can take some strange twists and turns.
Nick
Lloyd
Re: Earth Was a Moon of Saturn
Long on Theories * LongC, and/or Matt, the TB team doesn't particularly suppress other theories, that I know of. They aren't really agreed among themselves on a single theory. That's why I started another thread on the NIAMI board, called 5 Versions of Catastrophism. There I mentioned Velikovsky's, Talbott and friends', Cardona's, Ackerman's and Gilligan's theories. I only mentioned Ackerman's theory there, because Gilligan gets much of his from Ackerman's, who got his largely from Velikovsky, as they all do partly. I mentioned Gilligan's, because he has contributed very interesting material to TPODs, which the TB team apparently finds very plausible. I think the team is attempting to amass their evidence etc, using the forum as an assist. Naturally, it's not their jobs to promote competing theories. That's our job, I mean to discuss and compare them. So I don't have a problem with anyone disagreeing with or criticizing much of anything. Comparative Mythology * I tried to explain a bit in the opening post how the Saturn Theory developed. The TB team uses comparative mythology as the best means to understand ancient myths (Gilligan is not part of the team, by the way, but is a member of this forum). Comparative mythology looks for common themes in all or most of the world's ancient myths. Talbott explained the process as similar to competent police investigations. If you have a dozen or a hundred witness reports, even though many are unreliable, you can still determine fairly well what probably happened in the event that was witnessed. If the common themes of myths were very few and rather dissimilar, it would be likely that the witnesses did not see the same event. But ancient myths have many aspects that are nearly identical worldwide, so that makes it likely that most of the witnesses saw the same events, though of course from different visual perspectives. Thoth Newsletter & TPODs * The Universal Monarch was the main common theme, which turned out to be identified with Saturn, though later generations switched to calling it the Sun, because Saturn eventually departed and the Sun became the dominant feature of the new order. This material was discussed in the Thoth email newsletter about ten years ago. That led to the TPODs, which then led to this forum. Thoth is available at http://thoth2.webs.com and may also be somewhere at http://saturniancosmology.org. Another common theme was the world mountain, tree, altar, axle etc, which apparently was based on the plasma polar column. The female comet dragon goddess was Venus. And the warrior hero was Mars. There was also the great deep in the sky, which was called an ocean, which Saturn seemed to occupy. The four rivers of fire and water, the wheel, the swastika, the stairway to heaven, or the bridge to heaven, animals on the stairway, etc. were some of the other common themes. Some of the TPODs discuss many of these. See http://thunderbolts.info/tpod/00subjectx.htm#Mythology. Also see the section on Rock Art etc. Earlier Work * Of course, Velikovsky was the pioneer of this whole field of Catastrophism. But it would have died out, if not for Talbott's Pensee' magazine in the early 70s, SIS Review in Britain, Kronos after Pensee', Aeon and several other periodicals, as well as several books, like The Velikovsky Affair in 1967, I think. There must have been close to a hundred or more scientists and scholars involved in writing articles for all of those publications. So this website is the culmination of a lot of good, scholarly research and debate. It's not an amateurish occurrence. It's just that most of us posting messages here are amateurs, so we tend to make it look a bit amateurish. But amateurs are important too in the EU phenomenon. And, as Nick said, the local version of EU was entirely dependent on Catastrophism, which involved and still involves comparative mythology. Proof
You said: won't Saturnian cosmology have to prove Saturn was a "successful" brown dwarf? Then, won't it have to show that Earth was a satellite of Saturn? How can anyone do this?
* Those are the kinds of things "we" are proving in many ways one little piece at a time. Cardona, Thornhill, Talbott, Cochrane, Gilligan, Scott, Peratt and others are contributing to such proof. This thread, like others, might help find some of the proof. Each planet, star, moon etc may have its own unique fingerprint, or DNA-like blueprint, so, as the constituents of each body are discovered, it's likely that this will tell us what came from where. I think Cardona found that Saturn has more similarities to stars of the Sagittarius Dwarf Galaxy, than to those of the Milky Way, so he thinks Saturn came from there. The Sun may also have come from there, but I think he said that's less certain. Velikovsky's Saturn Theory
I said initially: Velikovsky also thought that Earth was a moon of Saturn and initially intended to discuss that in the first part of his 1950 book, Worlds in Collision. But the publisher suggested writing a second book about it later, which he never did.
* Although he never wrote the book, he did apparently publish some articles about his Saturn Theory from his original Worlds in Collision manuscript. Michael S pointed out above that his version is available at http://www.varchive.org/itb/index.htm. I haven't read much of that yet, but some of that material looks familiar, possibly from Kronos magazine. The site doesn't seem to say where any of the material was ever published.
longcircuit
Re: Earth Was a Moon of Saturn
Nick, Thanks for the insight into Thornhill's path to the EU. I can certainly appreciate the twists and turns science takes to reach its hypotheses and theories; I bet Thornhill's trail isn't the oddest of them.
Lloyd, I too have no problem with disagreement among competing theories; I was glad when Nereid gave her two barrels' worth of the Standard Model in another board of this forum. (If the EU can't answer her it'll have a harder row to hoe in the larger world.)
An exception to my dislike of applying EU theory to the past is the "squatting man" phenomenon. Even the late Arthur C. Clarke, who was no Velikovskian, noted its worldwide presence. Here Talbott's work with Thornhill and Peratt will likely bear fruit. My hope is that TB's editors and the EU community in this forum will, as Michael suggested above, work to show how not merely how the Earth could have been shaped by catastrophic electrical interactions with other bodies in the Solar System, but more importantly, the hypothesis that it was so shaped explains the planet we know better than uniformitarianism and the Standard Model. This is key to a successful challenge to the scientific mainstream.
