Cardona Interview on Saturn Theory

[Lloyd]

LLOYD: These are my last notes and questions on God Star, so these may be the last interview questions, although there are comments from one reader at the end, that you may like to respond to.
* God Star Notes and Questions
Page 461—Wal considered the polar column to have been formed by a polar jet, i.e. a constant electric discharge.
CARDONA: Yes—and so do I. In effect, it is really a sustained Birkeland current.

LLOYD: Page 462—The so-called Snake found near the galactic center in 1991 is a vast lightning bolt.
CARDONA: That is what it has been called. In effect, once again, it is yet another form of a sustained Birkeland current.

LLOYD: Page 464—The magnetospheres of Solar System planets are dark current mode plasma.
CARDONA: According to Donald Scott—yes.
LLOYD: How's that different from plasmaspheres?
CARDONA: They aren't [different].

LLOYD: Page 465—Proto-Saturn's polar ray, or column, probably lost some of its potential by the time humans evolved.
CARDONA: Yes.
LLOYD: Do you mean electric potential?
CARDONA: Of course.

LLOYD: Page 466—The Arctic Ocean contains four depressions holding large volumes of sediment. If the sediment were deposited by tidal waves, other depressions, like Hudson's Bay and the Black, Caspian and Baltic Seas, should also have filled with sediment. The Eurasian Basin of the Arctic Ocean was caused by a tidal bulge of subcrustal magma and a collapse of the crust.
CARDONA: It is the entire Arctic area that was uplifted in a tidal bulge. The Eurasian Basin itself is a *REGUINAL* collapsed area that once occupied that bulge.
LLOYD: Why didn't the magma pile up on the ocean floor and fill the Arctic Ocean?
CARDONA: Because, as explained in the text on that same page, material was removed in that area from Earth's lower mantle.
LLOYD: A swirling vortex of magma was detected 3,000 km under the North Pole.
CARDONA: That's right.

LLOYD: Page 468—The disk of a 10,000 year old star is disappearing and will be gone in about 100 years. 30 young brown dwarf stars were found at Rho Ophiuchi.
CARDONA: Correct.
LLOYD: And the rapidly disappearing disk disproves the Nebular Hypothesis?
CARDONA: Yes, because according to mainstream astrophysics, the time required for planets to form from circumstellar disks is vastly longer than the life-time of most of these disks. See below.

LLOYD: Pages 469-471—90% of young stars in the Orion nebula have so-called accretion disks, which evaporate away in a few hundred thousand years, leaving little or no time for planets to coalesce. These planetary nebulae only exist for a thousand years. McCrea and Lyttleton separately calculated in 1960 that planets could not have coalesced between Jupiter and the Sun. Joshua Roth said planet formation by accretion would take many millions of years, but disks have much shorter lifetimes.
CARDONA: That's right.

LLOYD: Pages 471-476—Many [some] brown dwarfs appear to be loners, but some were found orbiting other stars. Many [some] brown dwarfs are too massive to have formed from circumstellar disks.
CARDONA: I did not say "many." What I did was report Michael Liu's opinion concerning the brown dwarf orbiting 15 Sagittae.
LLOYD: In 1993 Van Flandern suggested that planets and smaller stars are ejected from fast rotating parent stars and some gas giants. Arp, Alfven & Peratt considered small galaxies to be formed by ejection from large galaxies. In plasma, vortex filaments form and grow progressively larger by gathering matter. With increasing mass, they are shaped into galaxies by electric and magnetic fields and by gravity of the increasing mass. Thornhill explained that ejection will be polar or equatorial from the parent body, depending on which magnetic field is stronger.
CARDONA: That is correct.

LLOYD: Pages 476-477—Conventional astronomers have considered that brown dwarfs may be able to spawn planetary systems. Brown dwarfs have been found to emit intense flares, like the Sun.
CARDONA: You bet.
LLOYD: Wouldn't Saturn's flares have been much stronger than solar flares, if it ejected so much detritus periodically?
CARDONA: Yes—discussed further in Volumes Two and Three, with much more yet to come in Volume Four. However, not all the detritus was ejected by proto-Saturn. As will be shown in forthcoming sequels, and as others already know, there were other planets involved in the Saturnian configuration.

LLOYD: Page 478—Brown dwarfs were found to have disks in 2001. Matter falling onto circumstellar disks are considered to form jets.
CARDONA: Or so, at least, it has been conjectured. Do, however, keep in mind that we know very little about these procedures.
LLOYD: Alfven said the Sun, Jupiter, Saturn etc all have equatorial plasmoids, which, when the stored energy becomes excessive, switch to polar jets.
CARDONA: That's right.

LLOYD: Page 482—Comet tails are apparently scaled up astral jets.
CARDONA: You bet.
LLOYD: Didn't Wal say that proto-Saturn may have been a comet?
CARDONA: It's been said before—sometimes as an analogy, sometimes meant as fact. It all depends what one exactly understands by "comet."

LLOYD: Page 484—Jets are mainly electric currents.
CARDONA: Of course.

LLOYD: Page 485—Galaxies that were ejected axially have no angular momentum and remain along the original line of ejection.
CARDONA: That's right.
LLOYD: Is a galaxy's lack of angular momentum determined by its slow rotation?
CARDONA: No—it is determined by the direction of its ejection, with no angular momentum if the ejection is poleward. Rotation, slow or fast, has nothing to do with it.
LLOYD: Since the Sun has little angular momentum, was it ejected axially from something?
CARDONA: As of now, we have no way of knowing. There are some astrophysicists who have recently proclaimed the Sun to be the daughter of a vaster star that went supernova. Not all physicists agree.

LLOYD: Page 486—Wal's Theory is that proto-Saturn ejected planets equatorially.
CARDONA: Yes—and with which I do not agree.
LLOYD: And that's why some rocky planets have moderate angular momentum?
CARDONA: Under Wal's scheme, that *WOULD* be the case. In mine, this moderate angular momentum would have been achieved due to the planets' dispersal from their original axial binding—in other words, when the proto-Saturnian system fell apart.

LLOYD: Page 492—Stone tools similar to those in East Africa were found in 15 locations in Siberia in the Arctic Circle. Petroglyphs are found on Spitzbergen, also in the Arctic.
CARDONA: And more than that in GOD STAR's sequels.
LLOYD: Do you think civilization began in the Arctic?
CARDONA: No. Civilization, as long as one understands what is meant by the word, evolved much farther south around what became known as Mesopotamia. At least, that's what we can tell by what has been found.

LLOYD: A reader had these comments. Would you like to respond?
CARDONA: Yes.

QUESTION: There is also the component of the [Saturn] theory that says we were "lucky" to have survived the planetary instability and subsequent realignment. I know there isn't really an answer to this, but it does come across a little like "... and then a miracle happened". It just doesn't sit well with me right now.
CARDONA: No miracle. The planetary instability and the subsequent realignment that are here spoken of were actually one and the same event. Up until realignment, the planets were quite stable.

QUESTION: The human eye [is very highly tuned] to peak solar radiance at earth's surface in the visible spectrum. Chlorophyll is also equally tuned to the Sun's EM spectrum. Had we been originally in Saturn's environment this would not be possible since human eyes (cones/rods) would be adapted to a completely different spectrum under Saturn. - If we were around another star [instead of the Sun], the visible spectrum would be something else entirely. Under the Saturnian system, it would have likely been pushed toward infrared. Is it your position that entering the Solar system induced rapid evolution to achieve the response [in eyes & plants that] we currently see? I'll have to see if there is any data on this. I don't know if any ancient human genomes have been analyzed for something like this.
CARDONA: I do not believe that a different spectrum would have necessitated a major physical change in human eyes. But, yes, there would have to have been some adaptations and this, in fact, is taken up in detail in Volume Four of my slowly progressing series.

QUESTION: One last curiosity regarding symbol's and rock art. I have seen a few video's talking about the enclosing serpent, but there wasn't ever an interpretation of it's celestial reference. Do you know what that was?
CARDONA: Oh, definitely. That involved a major event—or series of events, I should say—in the transformation of the proto-Saturnian system. It also constitutes a major portion of Volume Four, which is slowly, but surely, being stitched together. As I keep saying, there is a lot more yet to come. In fact, to use an old cliche, I can safely say that the three volumes I have so far published hardly scratch the surface of what I still need to divulge. Let's hope I live long enough.

Thanks to all for your interest in my work.
Dwardu Cardona

[Orthogonal]

Lloyd, thanks for passing along my questions. It seems Cardona is working on addressing them but isn't yet ready to fully expand on the answers. Fair enough.

I may read his current works and next volume if it ever comes out, but I just browsed through the bookstore and was a bit shocked at the price for God Star/Flare Star. $69 I don't know if Cardona or Tbolts is working on it, but a cheaper ebook might be worth creating.

[Lloyd]

The Gods Were the Planets
* Here is some of Cardona's evidence in God Star that the gods in ancient myths were primarily the planets. This should answer Grey Cloud's and Anaconda's doubts on the matter. I don't have his later books, so I don't know of much of his more detailed evidence from the myths themselves. There's more that shows that Saturn was the chief planet. I'll try to post some of that later.
- 52. De Santillana and von Dechend said the ancients said "the gods are really stars, ... who are the planets."
- DC says "If we restrict ourselves to the world's major myths, [their] claims can be validated."
- 54. Aristotle said "A tradition has been handed down by the ancient thinkers of very early times ... to the effect that these heavenly bodies are gods...."
- Lucian of Samosata said "from both Homer the poet and the epics of Hesiod we should understand that the ancients were of one mind with the astrologers.... The conjunction of Venus and Mars creates the poetry of Homer."
- 56. The Polynesian god, Ta'urua, means star, as does the similar name, Tara, which is an epithet of the Indian god, Kali-Durga.
- G.A.Dorsey said "The greater part of the [Pawnee] heavenly gods were identified with stars."
- 59. Susan Milbrath said a "number of scholars agree that the fundamental nature of the ancient Mesoamerican pantheon is astronomical."
- 61. The Indian Linga Purana says "the worship of the planets should be pursued by good men."
- The Talmud defines idolatry as the "worship of stars and constellations."
- Egyptians called Saturn Heru-ka-pet, meaning Horus, the Bull of Heaven.
- The Pyramid Texts call Horus the Morning Star.
- Sba and netru both meant star as well as god.
- 62. R. Faulkner said Egypt had "a very ancient stratum of stellar religion, in which the stars were regarded as gods...."
- W. Budge said much of the Pyramid Texts "refer to primitive star-worship."
- The Syrian Eblaite tablets refer to a temple as both a "house of god" and a "house of the star".
- N.H. Snaith said "the Mesopotamian deities ... were associated with the heavenly bodies."
- 63. K. Szarzynska said "in the most archaic period ... dingir [god] was associated with astral deities only."
- The cuneiform word for both god and star was an 8-pointed asterisk*.
- 67. DC says the ancients had always considered the planets to be deities.
- And the planets were deified, "not because they consistently followed an ordained pattern, but precisely because they did not."
- 72. The Egyptian priest who talked to Solon also told him that the story of Phaethon, the inexperienced god who tried to drive the chariot of Helios, but who lost control and set the Earth on fire and then fell himself to his death, "has the fashion of a legend, but the truth of it lies in the occurrence of a shifting of bodies in the heavens which move around the Earth, and a destruction of things on Earth by fierce fire, which occurs at long intervals."

[Lloyd]

Historical Evidence that Saturn was Earth's Former Sun
* Here is some of Dwardu's evidence in God Star that Saturn was the former Sun for Earth, Mars and Venus.
- 120. In the first century BC, Siculus said "But above all in importance, [the Chaldeans] say, is the study of the influence of the five stars known as planets[; and] the one named Cronus [Saturn] by the Greeks ... is the most conspicuous ..., which they call the star of Helios."
- DC says, according to V.S. Apte, "one of the Sanskrit names of the planet Saturn [was] Grahanayakah" where grahah meant planet and nayakah meant chief or leader.
- 121. The Babylonians called Saturn En-Me Sar-ra, which meant "Lord of the Law of the Universe."
- According to R.C. Thompson, the Babylonians said "Mul Lu-Bat Sag-Us Mul il Samas su-u", which meant "Saturn is the star of the sun."
- DC says, in the second century BC, Eratosthenes, who calculated Earth's circumference, "identified the planet Saturn as the star of the Sun", as did also other Greeks, according to A. Bouche-Leclercq.
- 122. In the 6th century AD, Simplicius "also called Saturn the star of the Sun."
- The Romans, including Hyginus, librarian of Paletine, also called Saturn the star of Sol, Latin for Sun.
- V.S. Apte said, in Sanskrit Surya meant Sun and Suryaputrah meant "son of the Sun", which meant Saturn.
- Another Sanskrit word for Saturn is Saurah, which meant solar day or month.
- 123. The Babylonians often said what to expect "when Shamash stands in the halo of Sin", where Sin meant the Moon. The Sun cannot be seen in a halo of the Moon, but Saturn can.
- R.C. Thompson found by 1900 that Shamash meant Saturn, but other scholars often failed to acknowledge it and have continued to call it only the Sun instead.
- 124. The Babylonians distinguished between Shamash/Saturn and Shamash/Sun.
- 125. M. Jastrow said they called Saturn the 'sun' both in astrological notes and by notices in classical writings.
- S. Langdon spoke of the Sumerian sun-god Ninurta, as also the name of the war god planet Saturn.
- 127. Nimrod is Ninurta/Saturn, because the cuneiform letters nin-ur-ta are also read nim-ru-ud.
- 128. G. Rawlinson wondered "How is it possible that the dark and distant planet Saturn [was called] the luminary who irradiates the nations like the sun, the light of the gods?"
- 130. Ningirsu/Saturn was called "he [who] changes darkness into light".
- 131. In Sanskrit Arka meant the Sun, while Arki, Arka-putra and Arkatanayah meant Saturn.
- 132. Saturn was called Brahmanyah, which meant "belonging to Brahma"
- E. Moor says Brahma was called the true Sun, which meant Saturn, not the present Sun.
- Although in Sanskrit Surya meant the Sun, evidence suggests it originally meant Saturn.
- Saturn was called graha Surya, meaning planet Sun, and was said to occupy samanam dhama, meaning "the same place of rising and setting".
- Surya was also called Suraj, meaning Saturn.
- 133. James Frazer said "That Ra was both the physical sun and the sun-god is of course undisputed".
- 134. But the motions and characteristics of Ra do not match the Sun.
- A Ptolemaic Egyptian ostrakon identified Ra as Kronos, which was Saturn.
- Samuel Mercer noticed in the Pyramid Texts that the Egyptian star, shd.w, "might have been our Saturn", though he said it was identified with Ra.
- 135. The Greek poet Nonnus in Egypt said the Arabic Sun was Kronos, Saturn.
- Plato, or his pupil Philip of Opus, wrote in Epinomus that the slowest planet was Helios, the Sun, though Saturn was the slowest planet known.
- To Malchus Porphyry, Rhetorios and Claudius Ptolemy, Saturn was also known as Helios.
- Helios also originally was derived from the Canaanite-Phoenician god, El or Elos, which Philo Byblius said was Saturn.
- 137. Franz Boll concluded that Helios, Sol and Kronos, were the same god and planet, Saturn.
- Even early alchemists and astrologers passed down the ancient tradition that planet Saturn was "the best sun".
- 139. The Mayan book, the Popul Vuh, said the ancient sun was not the same sun we see now.
- DC says regarding ancient writings "in each case where Saturn and the Sun share the same name, the name originally belonged to Saturn".
- 140. He says "Mythology ... was never concerned with the [present] Sun, [but only] the Saturnian one."
- If in mythology "some of the names of Saturn were bestowed on the Sun, it could only have been because the Sun supplanted Saturn ... physically".
- 178. DC's first three hypotheses are:
1. According to ancient astronomical lore, Earth was once a moon of Saturn and Saturn appeared larger than the present full Moon.
2. According to the ancients, Saturn once shone like the Sun.
3. According to them, Saturn shone especially at night.

[Lloyd]

More Answers from Cardona
When Each Planet Was First Seen
LLOYD: Here are 8 points. Are these the order in which you think the planets were first seen?
1. Saturn: You've stated that Saturn was the first planet seen, not counting Earth, and it was generally at the celestial north pole from the beginning of the Saturn Age.
REPLY: Correct.

LLOYD: 2. Sun: I think you stated that the Sun was first seen about 10,000 years ago from a great distance. If the Sun was visible for a time, were other stars or planets likely visible then as well?
REPLY: Doubtful, since none of them would have been as close to us as the Sun was then getting to be.

LLOYD: Was the Sun seen before or after Saturn's flare?
REPLY: After.

LLOYD: How soon did it disappear? I think you said it did not re-appear until after the Saturn System break-up. Right? If so, did the ancients know the newly visible Sun after the break-up was the same as the small star they saw millennia earlier? If not, how would they have been able to say that the small star they first saw was the later Sun?
REPLY: I do not believe I ever said it disappeared again. In fact I do not believe it did.

LLOYD: 3. Venus: Was Venus likely ejected from Saturn during the flare 10,000 years ago?
REPLY: For the time being all I'm going to say is that Venus first APPEARED right after the light from proto-Saturn's flare-up ebbed enough for people to be able to see what was transpiring in the sky.

LLOYD: Did Venus appear first as a comet that circled Saturn, forming Saturn's circular enclosure? And did Venus move from the circle to the face of Saturn after a short or long time?
REPLY: No—Venus first appeared plumb in the middle of the proto-Saturnian orb. ...

LLOYD: 4. Mars: Was Mars likely visible before Venus first appeared?
REPLY: Definitely not. ...

LLOYD: 5. Jupiter: I think you agreed that the Saturn System broke up about 4,500 years ago. Was Jupiter visible before the break-up? If so, do you know about how early Jupiter was first seen?
REPLY: Good questions, but, for the time being, I cannot say. There would be no point in my pretending to have all the answers.

LLOYD: 6. Moon: Did the Moon first become visible in Earth orbit after the Saturn System break-up, or before?
REPLY: I would say DURING the break-up as part of it.

LLOYD: 7. Mercury: Was Mercury first seen before or after Jupiter and before or after the Moon?
REPLY: I'm not touching Mercury for the time being.

LLOYD: 8. Other: Which moons of Jupiter or Saturn were likely visible before and after the Saturn System break-up?
REPLY: The break-up was too complex for those who were watching—while running for cover—to remember all the fine details of what actually took place. I mean, good heavens, do you really think they would have taken out their note books (or clay tablets) to record it all for posterity while they were running for their lives?
(LLOYD: Apparently, Dwardu wasn't thinking about Dave T's Saturn Theory, which I think stated that 7 or 9 small stars were seen around Saturn during the Golden Age. I had thought that Dwardu's theory included that as well. I'll try to ask him that later. I had assumed that the 7 or 9 small stars were moons of Saturn, but may have included our Moon, Mercury and maybe Pluto or some of Jupiter's present moons.)

LLOYD: - In God Star on page 77, your second footnote is missing. Can you tell me what it should say?
REPLY: Yes—it should have read as follows: H. Newton, "The Worship of Meteorites," AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SCIENCE 3 (1897), pp. 1-14.

Doubts
LLOYD: * Do you have answers or comments for the following?
The first five seem to be from The Saturn Problem, Peter James, http://www.sis-group.org.uk/silver/james.htm .
How could the denizens of Earth have survived the separation from Saturn?
REPLY: There is nothing mysterious about this, but I'm not saying why. In fact I'm not saying anything about it right now because this involves an awful lot that I have yet to divulge in forthcoming volumes of my STAR series.

QUESTION: - How could people possibly have tracked and recognised a former sun [Saturn] on its journey to become a tiny star, during a time of MASSIVE upheavals when it left Earth's vicinity?
REPLY: See above.

QUESTION: - Apart from vague assertions that the break-up of a hypothetical polar configuration occurred in prehistoric times, what is one or more dated, geological, environmental, or archaeological items of evidence of such a catastrophe?
REPLY: Same as above. All in due time.

COMMENT:- The ancients only considered Saturn in an astrological manner.
REPLY: If that is what one believes, it's fine with me. I can only present the evidence at my disposal and offer my own reconstructions of past events on what I see as their strength. As I have often said, and will probably be forced to say again and again, I put a gun to no one's head.

COMMENT: - There is clear evidence from the very Golden Age traditions employed by the Saturnists to show that the Solar System was already in its present configuration.
REPLY: Maybe other Saturnists, but not I since I have not even touched upon the Golden Age traditions yet.

COMMENT: * One member says the gods were not the planets and one can read the original ancient texts themselves on the Interweb to see this.
REPLY: Whoever that is has not been keeping up. Judging by the EARLIEST written records at our disposal, the heavenly bodies were considered gods since Sumerian times. If this member knows of an earlier proclamation by the ancients to contest this, let him point me to it.

COMMENT: * One or more say that the polar plasma column is plausible, but the polar configuration of planets is untenable. They think the polar column and other plasma phenomena can account for the ancient myths and that the planets, or at least Saturn, were not largely involved.
REPLY: What can I say? Present me with a valid argument and adequate evidence.

COMMENT: * One supporter says there is an aboriginal myth that recounts the earth emerging from a "hollow log" that may be reference to the dynamic capture of the Saturnian system.
REPLY: As I will be showing in a forthcoming volume, the body that was seen emerging from a hollow log was the planet Mars.

COMMENT: The fact that traditions around the world speak of the creation of the earth (first dawn) tells me that humans were around to witness this capture.
REPLY: As I have already indicated in papers already published, and as I will be discussing in greater detail in future volumes, the EARTH that was seen to be CREATED by ancient man was a CELESTIAL EARTH. This will be shown when the UNDERSTANDABLE mistranslation from ambiguous dead languages is taken into consideration.

COMMENT: Also, making any claims on time periods is speculative in lieu of our current dating tech. http://saturniancosmology.org/files/holden/iant.txt - http://www.maverickscience.com .
REPLY: Quite right. And I've stressed that more than once in my works, as, in fact, I will be stressing it again in my very next one.

Dwardu Cardona

[Lloyd]

Ev Cochrane's Book Online
* In the Sunspots thread at http://thunderbolts.info/wp/forum/phpBB3/p ... =7&p=50705, Gary said:

Wiki has a basic page on the solar symbols, and it seems the Suns appearance changed over time, and that the change was noted in the depictions world wide. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_symbol
- It is my belief that these changes were the result of the Sun being subject to changes in the Birkeland current characteristics, though I suppose there could be other reasons, galactic magnetic fields, waves of x or gamma rays? The nature of the changes reinforces my belief that the Sun is an electromagnetic device though, I don't see how the fusion model could behave so.

* Above, at http://thunderbolts.info/wp/forum/phpBB3/v ... 226#p49930, I showed that Cardona found that the Sun initially referred to Saturn. He and Talbott et al have said elsewhere that Venus appeared on the face of Saturn during the Golden Age of Saturn between about 10,000 and 4,500 years ago. And Mars moved from the center of Venus to a distance away from both of them while growing large, getting nearer to Earth, and then returning back to the center of Venus, and repeating that process continuously. Talbott showed that at some point Venus developed 8 rays and the symbol of a Sun with an 8-rayed star in the center, with rays extending to the circumference of the Sun, was depicted by the Sumerians and others. This Sun was actually Saturn. I think Talbott said that, eventually, Venus too became unstable and moved toward Earth and 3 of the 8 rays became hidden as Venus rotated, so only 5 rays remained visible and they had the appearance of a Hand, as the rays became rounded, like fingers.
* At http://maverickscience.com/index.htm# Ev Cochrane shows the cover of his book, Starf**ker, showing Venus with 16 rays, which is very similar to the 8-rayed image of Venus.
http://maverickscience.com/starf--ker.jpg

* At http://maverickscience.com/saturn.htm he shows some of the evolution of the ancient depictions of the Saturn Configuration.
* Talbott's video about Venus at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqNflVRS3S4, which is number 5 of his series of 6 videos, called Symbols of an Alien Sky, shows all this in detail.

[The Great Dog]

Lloyd,

"You've done a man's job, sir!"

TGD

[Lloyd]

Thanks, Dog. How does a man's job compare to the Dog's job?

[Orthogonal]

Is there any particular reason why we would see 8 ion tails or streamers from the Venusian comet? Is this interpretation merely due to the fact that antiquity describes it this way, or is there something in EU cometary theory that would also predict or expect this phenomena. It just seems peculiar to me that we would have a symmetrical pattern like this for any significant length of time.

[Lloyd]

* I believe Dave T and co are supposing that Venus' 8-pointed star pattern was produced by plasma focus effects, like the following, and that the effects were semi-stable and long-lasting, like maybe for centuries.
http://www.plasma-universe.com/Dense_plasma_focus
http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9 ... J3DCD-Ion8

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9 ... -0UJQxXycA

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_OGfk5tiRcjQ/R ... _Focus.jpg

[Orthogonal]

* I believe Dave T and co are supposing that Venus' 8-pointed star pattern was produced by plasma focus effects, like the following, and that the effects were semi-stable and long-lasting, like maybe for centuries.

This is an interesting insight that I hadn't heard before. I was always under the impression that the only plasma focus discharges were visible directly above earth (between earth and mars) in what Anthony Peratt has shown in rock art as the squatter man and various other symbols and megoliths.

[Lloyd]

* Venus apparently looked like a four-pointed star on the face of Saturn originally and the four later became eight. The four points became associated with the cardinal directions. The points appeared to be streams or flows of water or plasma, which were seen as the four rivers of paradise. As a four-pointed star the plasma also took the form of a swastika. Cardona wrote an article and a book on the swastika. I read the article in the 1980s in Kronos magazine. Ev Cochrane has some info about the swastika at http://www.maverickscience.com/thundergods.htm. Here are a couple of paragraphs from the article.

- It is our opinion that the polar configuration alone provides the key for understanding ancient references to the lightning/thunderbolt as a swastika-like form. Thus, as Cardona has documented, there is a wealth of evidence that a swastika appeared during a particular phase of the polar configuration, the rotation of the four undulating streamers producing the appearance of a fiery swastika centered on the sun [Saturn]. Citing experiments by the physicist C.J. Ransom, Cardona suggested a possible physical basis for the memorable celestial forms. Ransom obtained his results when ionized gases created in a glass cylinder were subjected to a magnetic squeeze:
- "As the field frequency and intensity was increased the plasma began to rotate. At one point, if the field was held constant, a three-armed figure [swastika] appeared, seemingly radiating from the center of the plasma. Then, if the frequency were increased linearly this figure commenced to rotate at an exponential rate until it was a blur. Of a sudden, the plasma seemed to cease rotating and a four-armed figure appeared, with each arm curving away from the center like a stylized fylfot or swastika. This too began to rotate increasingly with greater field intensity until it also was a blur, and then a five-armed pattern would emerge. Curiously, two-armed and multiple-armed figures have been observed, but the most common were those with three or four branches."

[Corpuscles]

Lloyd

As no doubt will be obvious, I am a raw newbie to this subject . (Therefore congratulations on a very informative interesting thread!)

A question or two to you if I may? (I suspect that very likey , it has been asked before? .. so I apologise in advance)

Much of this hypothesis, has good answers to issues raised ,or implied, in ancient mythology and perhaps even same for the Earths "geological record".

However, I find it staggering to even contemplate human beings surviving such a galactic collison... or even if Saturn was just a rogue loose star system.


Apparently the Sun, whirling at approx 200-250km/sec around the milky way galacitic centre and by extension it's planets helically spiraling along with it.

1. How does a rogue star system (on a different course?) interact smoothly enough for our fragile planet and humanity to survive?

( Devistating Tsunamis and Earthquakes (we all can remember ), would be infinitismally small compared to what I imagine would be the chaos caused by such event?)

2. Given the extreme importance of liquid water , how through all this apparent conundrum did Earth maintain the balance of distance, temperature etc whilst ... err part of the Saturn system spinning trailing or otherwise ...and THEN sloting neatly enough to maintain the delicate balance between 0 -100 Centigrade?

[GaryN]

I think you ask good questions, Corpuscles, and I have wondered along those lines.
Firstly I wondered if we could calculate how long it would take for the solar
system to achieve its present stability, in a gravity only universe, after being
disrupted to the extent described in some scenarios. It seems the solar system
became stable again very quickly, which would indicate to me an EM influence, not
gravity. Charged spheres in EM fields.
The survival of those events is interesting, and if they really happened as
portrayed, you would doubt survivors. My only explanation is that the pyramids
were set in a worldwide system that somehow offered protection to a number of
predetermined locations, maybe just the 'Gods' and their chosen retinue.
The other option is as told by the ancient Greeks. Sometimes the destruction was
so bad, they basically had to start again. Re-invigorate the Earth, they said.
The levels of EDM and other electrical/plasma destruction I believe I see on the
Earth, of geologically recent appearance, leads me to lean towards the tales of
the Greeks, absurd as it may at first seem.
Maybe they needed to call on the Corp of Galactic Engineers once in a while?

[Lloyd]

Corpuscles asked: 1. How does a rogue star system (on a different course?) interact smoothly enough for our fragile planet and humanity to survive? ( Devistating Tsunamis and Earthquakes (we all can remember ), would be infinitismally small compared to what I imagine would be the chaos caused by such event?)

* The last Saturn flare was ~10,000 years ago. The flares were periodic before that, every few thousand years. Before each flare glaciation built up in the North temperate zone, which held most of the ocean water that wasn't held by the polar column. So the oceans were very shallow during glaciation. When the flares stopped Earth's rotation, which caused tsunamis, there wasn't enough water in the oceans to inundate the continents entirely. Populations of people and animals were greatly reduced, but not wiped out, obviously.

2. Given the extreme importance of liquid water , how through all this apparent conundrum did Earth maintain the balance of distance, temperature etc whilst ... err part of the Saturn system spinning trailing or otherwise ...and THEN sloting neatly enough to maintain the delicate balance between 0 -100 Centigrade?

* Earth kept warm by being close to Saturn, within its plasmasphere, all the way from the time it penetrated the Sun's heliosphere until Saturn reached the orbit of Jupiter or the inner asteroid belt. Jupiter's orbit may have been closer to the Sun initially. Jupiter apparently dislodged the rocky planets away from Saturn and set them all on their present orbits. So Earth was in the cold only from the time it left Saturn, probably at the inner asteroid belt, until it reached its present orbit. When the connection with Saturn was lost and the polar column was removed, water in the column caused the Great Flood, which was apparently followed by an ice age, which I think was when Earth was moving from the asteroid belt to its present orbit, which probably took a few years or decades. That's when Earth may have had close contacts with Venus and Mars, but Cardona hasn't researched all of that fully yet.
* I could ask Cardona for a response to these questions, but I don't think he'll have much to add to what he's already stated. He has said that Earth life had a 50-50 chance of surviving the catastrophe, and it survived. I think what are called aliens are more likely spirits, who have advanced technology, which may have been used to save Earth from ruin. At least I think that would be neat, if it were true.
* Gary, I think the pyramids weren't built until after the Saturn System breakup and after the Great Flood.