Evidence of Ancient Global Cataclysm

[Lloyd]

Dating the Main Cataclysm
Grey Cloud, since you've said you're interested in Bronze Age cataclysms, would you like to comment on the following material from a catastrophism conference? I suppose it occurred in the 1990s, but that's just a guess. I got this free from the same site I mentioned last time. If you copy 2 or 3 words toward the beginning or end of a paragraph from a prior search, you can often find more from the same source. It took me about 6 such searches to get the following. This intrigued me because it sounds very much like what Mike Fischer's Shock Dynamics theory of continental drift says, at least regarding the huge impact site, just north of Madagascar. Fischer is saying this occurred nearly 12,000 years ago, but this paper said 4,300 years ago, which is what I and Gordon conclude. If Gordon's reading this, I hope you may comment too.
- I'm also including in green type another of the conference topics on how cataclysms led to religions etc.

http://www.catastrophism.com/intro/sear ... oom_query=
The Cambridge Conference [SIS C&C Workshop]
[The conference covered] three papers dealing with the historical evidence for catastrophes. Steven Robinson ... suggested that fossil evidence actually indicates rapid events and that the vast geological time scale depends upon radiometric dating which is probably suspect in its assumptions. World wide accounts of a catastrophic flood, if considered as actual historical accounts, could explain much of the geological evidence. A catastrophic model of causation suggests a massive impact north of Madagascar. Accounts in the Bible would seem to indicate this and ancient maps confirm that continental movements have taken place within historical times. Considering the evidence of the ice-ages, climatic change and the evidence for violent earthquake activity in the Early Bronze Age, Steven concluded that the early Cambrian period should be considered to be only thousands, not millions, of years ago, at the time of the Flood, the Cretaceous/Tertiary event marked the division of continents and that the end of the ice-ages occurred around 2,300 BC, caused by an increased tilt of the Earth.
- John Bimson considered the biblical evidence for catastrophes. Velikovsky's scenario had been founded on the idea of the Exodus taking place at the time of a great catastrophe in the middle of the second millennium BC. Did biblical traditions support this? The implication of the astronomical use of megalithic monuments would indicate that these were built after any major Earth shifting catastrophe and radiocarbon dating led to the conclusion that any such catastrophe took place at the end of the Egyptian Old Kingdom, in line with Mandelkehr's 2,300 BC event. The destructions in the Middle Bronze Age were not so widespread as those of the Early period and could have been caused by man. All the events of the Exodus could be explained by normal, though exaggerated, happenings, except for the pillar of fire, which could be considered a metaphor for God's presence. The area is on the north end of the Great Rift Valley which cuts down through Africa, and all could be explained by this being in a state of seismic upheaval. Even the sun standing still could be a misunderstanding. In conclusion then, although the events described were catastrophic there was no evidence that they were other than terrestrial. Later references, however, in the time of Tuthmosis III and the Hittites, to showers of stones, suggested that destructive meteorite falls were common at that period and it is therefore possible that the terrestrial events of the Exodus were triggered by extraterrestrial causes.
- Bob Porter considered the archaeological evidence of the Near East. There appeared to be three widespread destruction events during the Bronze Age, the first coinciding with the end of the Egyptian Old Kingdom at around 2300 BC at a time of climatic change. Evidence of new peoples could be taken as invaders or simply people taking advantage of destroyed areas. Deforestation may have helped change the climate. However, it was admitted that no ordinary earthquake could destroy so large an area and therefore something larger needed to be considered. The hiati supposed to be at the end of the Middle Bronze Age, and the second intermediate period in Egypt are a result of a catastrophic mistake in chronology as a result of using Sothic dating. Sites such as Ugarit and Qadesh show little sign of such hiati although there is a destruction at the end of the MB, probably as the result of an earthquake. Although earthquakes today are usually localised, they appear to have been widespread throughout Palestine, Syria and Mesopotamia at this period. A final wave of destruction took place at the end of the Late Bronze Age, associated with famine, war, the Sea Peoples, the end of the Scottish Bronze Age and the rise and fall of the Shang dynasty in China. Twenty narrow tree rings found by Baillie in his samples for this period indicate a long drought, so there was no need to posit a cosmic catastrophe directly. Questions from the floor clearly indicated that many felt that the degree of the destructions could not be explained by natural seismic or climatic events.

How Cataclysms Led to Religions and Denialism
- [A]n afternoon session on cosmology, opened by Irving Wolfe with another of his thought provoking catastrophic interpretations. Those who had heard Irving at last year's Nottingham meeting, interpreting the development of the world's religions as a response to the trauma of cosmic catastrophe, recognised the formula as applied to the development of western cosmologies. Why were they successful? What did they sell? Again, the urge to believe in systems of stability and order tells us more about ourselves than the realities of the cosmos. Such belief systems can be seen as narcotics to assuage the triple terror induced by ancient catastrophes. We will never be free of the past until we realise that the history of ideas follows the same pattern repeatedly in attempts to never recognise the past. Victor Clube is also well known to the Society for his positive assertion that Earth has undergone catastrophes of cosmic origin. He is also convinced that catastrophism will eventually be accepted. The greater the magnitude of the event, the less frequently it will occur and scientists are reluctant to accept phenomena unless they can see them repeated. They will therefore eventually have to accept man's written history as evidence. Today's ideas of catastrophe are centred on asteroid impacts although, in fact, meteorite showers are more common. The reason for this is the desire to promote weapons development for something else, now the Cold War has ended. The sighting and destruction of possible objects which might hit the Earth gives scientists a new way of reassuring their fellows that everything is under control. A study of the AD historical record indicates that periods of increasing meteorite activity correspond to times of deep fear for the end of the world and these are linked to social upheaval and revolution, with the suppression of astronomers. It was noticeable by now that in the realms of cosmology there was a far more positive acceptance for ideas of catastrophe caused by extra-terrestrial agents. Nevertheless, as a source of data - e.g. geologists' explicit unwillingness to entertain catastrophic implications, as witnessed in the Apophoreta section - and of interesting if unexciting reading, the journal continues to be of value.

[Grey Cloud]

Lloyd,
Don't have any real problem with the blue passage. Interesting about the Great Rift, I hadn't really considered that as a factor.

The green passage is nonsense. In no particular order:
Religion pre-dates the MBA collapse.
No proof as to when religion actually began or its original form.
No definition of religion.
Assumption that the mindset of these peples was the same as a modern westerner.
Why didn't the MBA and LBA collapses traumatise all of mankind?
Why didn't mankind give up on religion after either the MBA or LBA collapses? Why continue worshipping gods who've just done this to you?
Based on evolutionary notion that things begin simple and become complex. I would argue that it is the other way around and that we have become dumbed-down.
Man: I've not been feeling well.
Dr: What are the symptoms?
Man: An American cartoon family.

[Lloyd]

Grey Cloud, have you previously read Mike Fischer's take on the Great Rift Valley? He considers it to be an effect of the Somali Basin impact. Robinson seems to have similar ideas as Fischer. Do you agree? He mentioned movement of continents. Do you agree with that? And the dating?
Regarding the quote in green, it makes abundant sense to me, esp. this part:

The urge to believe in systems of stability and order tells us more about ourselves than the realities of the cosmos. Such belief systems can be seen as narcotics to assuage the triple terror induced by ancient catastrophes. We will never be free of the past until we realise that the history of ideas follows the same pattern repeatedly in attempts to never recognise the past.

I think most humans have a need to feel like reality is safe and I think that's how religions have tried to make people feel, often by claiming that the home group is special and protected, while outsiders are enemies who will be damned. Most also do it by reassuring people they will come back to life after death, either physically on Earth, or spiritually in Heaven. I believe in spiritual life after death myself, but I think it's a sensible idea. I see some dumbing down in recent history, but I attribute it to the ruling class wanting to get away with as much taking advantage of other people as possible and the dumber people are, the easier it is to take advantage of them. So mass education has become a tool of the ruling class, as has pretend science and even religion. What do you attribute dumbing down to? And when do you think it started? I think some of it started with the Romans, then with Constantine & co. The Renaissance started a period of smarting up, while colonialism was a dumbing down. There have been progressive and regressive tendencies, with the decades after JFK's murder being mostly regression, except for the coming of the internet. What do you think?

[moses]

<Why didn't mankind give up on religion after either the MBA or LBA collapses? Why continue worshipping gods who've just done this to you? GC>

Boy, the gods have just got angry and now you want to make them angry again! Their destructive power is the main reason why they are gods.
Cheers,
Mo

[john666]

If the sun and the Zodiac were together rotating around the earth, why would the Zodiac move relative to the sun ?

The Zodiac constellations movements across the celestial sphere are defined as following the movement of the Sun on the celestial sphere.
But all the stars(at least in the Northern hemisphere), are revolving around Polaris.

[nick c]

Note:
This thread is about....see the thread title.
Posts should be concerned with the topic at hand.
Any comment about geocentrism can be made here:
http://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/forum/phpB ... 10&t=15330

[Lloyd]

John, do you see the title of this thread? You can start a new thread if you want to discuss if Earth is made of water etc. How about it?

[john666]

John, do you see the title of this thread? You can start a new thread if you want to discuss if Earth is made of water etc. How about it?

Evidence of Ancient Global Cataclysm is in many ways evidence of the Global Flood.
And the Global Flood has absolutely everything to do with water.
The reason why you pretend that it doesn't have to do anything with this thread, is because you have already decided that the Earth is a rock, and you do not want to hear anything that contradicts that DOGMA of yours.

What causes earthquakes Lloyd?
Can you answer that, or does that as well "have nothing to do with this thread"

[Grey Cloud]

John666,
What evidence do you have of a 'Global Flood'? [Emphasis on the 'global']

[john666]

Fossils found in high mountainshttps://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 144021.htm

Only if the water brought them there, could they be there.

[Grey Cloud]

Fossils found in high mountainshttps://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 144021.htm

Only if the water brought them there, could they be there.

That is not evidence of global flooding. In your OP you capitalised the G and the F and in my question I emphasised the global part.
Marine fossils in mountains may indicate flooding though not necessarily global, a tsunami or they may indicate mountain uplift. The presence of such fossils has been known since at least Aristotle.

[john666]

Fossils found in high mountainshttps://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 144021.htm

Only if the water brought them there, could they be there.

That is not evidence of global flooding. In your OP you capitalised the G and the F and in my question I emphasised the global part.
Marine fossils in mountains may indicate flooding though not necessarily global, a tsunami or they may indicate mountain uplift. The presence of such fossils has been known since at least Aristotle.

It can not be tsunami, because tsunami can not go more then few hundred meters inland.

It can not be "mountain uplift", because "mountain uplift" is a process that doesn't exist in reality.
Nobody has ever observed a "mountain uplift".

Mountain uplift is one of the biggest evidences that today's geology is filled with dishonest and incompetent people, because "mountain uplift" goes against GRAVITY!!!

How are you going to lift up billions of tons?
Do they have some sort of megaCrane down there in the "Underworld"

[Grey Cloud]

John666,
1. You didn't answer my question.

It can not be tsunami, because tsunami can not go more then few hundred meters inland.

2. How do you know this? I not saying they can, only asking how you know they can't. In any case, I didn't suggest that tsunamis were the sole cause.

It can not be "mountain uplift", because "mountain uplift" is a process that doesn't exist in reality.
Nobody has ever observed a "mountain uplift".

3. Quite sure about that are you? I didn't suggest this was the sole cause either. BTW as far as I know, no one has ever witnessed a global flood either.

Mountain uplift is one of the biggest evidences that today's geology is filled with dishonest and incompetent people, because "mountain uplift" goes against GRAVITY!!!

4. Do tsunamis not go against 'GRAVITY!!!'? What about magnets?

How are you going to lift up billions of tons?
Do they have some sort of megaCrane down there in the "Underworld"

5. I'm not lifting anything but the Earth is. You should read up some on seismology.
How do volcanoes eject all that magma and tephra? Do they have some sort of megapump down there in the Underworld?

[john666]

2. How do you know this? I not saying they can, only asking how you know they can't. In any case, I didn't suggest that tsunamis were the sole cause.

How do I know that tsunamis cannot travel dozens of km inland
This biggest problem with the tsunami is not even the fact that they would have to travel dozens of km inland, but the fact that they would have to be taller than 5 km.

Do tsunamis not go against 'GRAVITY!!!'? What about magnets?

No, tsunamis do not go against GRAVITY because they DO NOT TRAVEL UPWARDS
As for magnetic fields, they are made of very light materials(if you can call it that), much much lighter than even 1 ton.

I'm not lifting anything but the Earth is. You should read up some on seismology.
How do volcanoes eject all that magma and tephra? Do they have some sort of megapump down there in the Underworld?

Well of course "the Earth" is lifting it, but you have no idea how "the Earth" is doing it.
The Earth is not lifting anything because these billions of tons, are part of the Earth!!!

As for volcanoes, the ejected material weights less then 1% of the mass that allegedly gets "uplifted".
Some sort of natural "megapump" is definitely involved in the process of ejection.

[Lloyd]

John, why do you not want to start a new thread about Earth being made of water? Are you afraid no one will want to discuss it? If so, they'll want to discuss it even less in this thread. I know the likely cause of earthquakes and I know there is likely not much water below Earth's crust. That info is available at Charles Chandler's site at http://qdl.scs-inc.us/2ndParty/Pages/6199.html. By the way, mountain uplift was almost certainly caused by rapid continental drift, as explained at http://NewGeology.us and the drift was caused by a huge impact. Also, a number of aboriginal tribes and the Bible claim to have witnessed mountain uplift.